Laparoscopic

腹腔镜
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    腹腔镜肝切除术(LLR)已被认为是一种安全有效的肝细胞癌(HCC)治疗方法。然而,其对老年患者的影响仍不确定。本研究旨在比较LLR与开放式肝切除术(OLR)在老年HCC患者中的疗效和安全性。
    我们在Ovid-Medline进行了搜索,Ovid-EMBASE,和Cochrane图书馆,以确定涉及老年患者(≥65岁)原发性肝癌的比较研究。疗效相关结果包括总生存期(OS)和无病生存期(DFS),而与安全相关的结果包括术后死亡率,并发症,和停留时间(LOS)。
    我们确定了9项符合条件的队列研究,包括1,599名患者。与OLR相比,LLR显示出具有可比性的3年和5年DFS[风险比(HR)=1.00,95%置信区间(CI):0.98-1.02;HR=1.02,95%CI:0.99-1.05]和3年和5年OS(HR=1.01,95%CI:0.99-1.02;HR=1.02,95%CI:0.99-1.06)。在安全方面,住院死亡率LLR和OLR之间没有显着差异[比值比(OR)=0.19;95%CI:0.02-1.69],30天死亡率(OR=0.33;95%CI:0.03-3.20),和90天死亡率(OR=0.70;95%CI:0.32-1.53)。此外,LLR总体并发症较少(OR=0.53;95%CI:0.41-0.67),主要并发症的发生率较低(OR=0.51;95%CI:0.35-0.74),肝功能衰竭的发生率降低(OR=0.56;95%CI:0.33-0.94),与OLR相比,LOS较短(平均差:-14.47天)。
    LLR在需要手术的老年HCC患者中与OLR相比,表现出相当的临床疗效和优越的安全性以及更少的并发症。
    UNASSIGNED: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been accepted as a safe and effective treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, its impact on elderly patients remains uncertain. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of LLR with open liver resection (OLR) in elderly HCC patients.
    UNASSIGNED: We conducted a search across the Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies involving primary HCC in elderly patients (≥65 years). Efficacy-related outcomes encompassed overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), while safety-related outcomes included post-operative mortality, complications, and length of stay (LOS).
    UNASSIGNED: We identified nine eligible cohort studies comprising 1,599 patients. LLR demonstrated comparable 3- and 5-year DFS [hazard ratio (HR) =1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98-1.02; HR =1.02, 95% CI: 0.99-1.05] and 3- and 5-year OS (HR =1.01, 95% CI: 0.99-1.02; HR =1.02, 95% CI: 0.99-1.06, respectively) compared to OLR. In terms of safety, there was no significant difference between LLR and OLR in in-hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR) =0.19; 95% CI: 0.02-1.69], 30-day mortality (OR =0.33; 95% CI: 0.03-3.20), and 90-day mortality (OR =0.70; 95% CI: 0.32-1.53). Additionally, LLR presented fewer overall complications (OR =0.53; 95% CI: 0.41-0.67), a lower rate of major complications (OR =0.51; 95% CI: 0.35-0.74), a reduced incidence of liver failure (OR =0.56; 95% CI: 0.33-0.94), and a shorter LOS compared to OLR (mean difference: -14.47 days).
    UNASSIGNED: LLR exhibited comparable clinical efficacy and superior safety and fewer complications when compared to OLR in elderly patients with HCC requiring surgery.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    全球,胆囊疾病的发病率和死亡率呈上升趋势。治疗有症状的胆囊疾病的金标准是腹腔镜胆囊切除术。尽管与传统的开腹胆囊切除术相比,腹腔镜胆囊切除术的实践在尼日利亚等低收入和中等收入国家仍处于起步阶段。本系统综述旨在评估在尼日利亚进行腹腔镜胆囊切除术以治疗胆囊疾病的程度。
    评论以PRISMA模型为指导。我们搜索了MEDLINE,Embase,CINAHL,Scopus,全球健康数据库。所有搜索均在2023年8月进行。所有研究设计报告尼日利亚的腹腔镜胆囊切除术,包括过去10年。三位作者使用数据提取表进行数据提取,两位作者独立评估数据的准确性和完整性。JoannaBriggs研究所的关键评估工具用于评估数据质量。这篇综述包括22篇1569例患者。
    女性占69.5%,男性占30.5%。12项(54.5%)的研究来自该国西南部,东南和中北部各3人(13.6%),2(9.1%)南南,东北和西北各1人(4.5%)。研究设计主要是横截面,样本量从1到400。据报道,腹腔镜胆囊切除术的最高和最低数量分别为300和1。腹腔镜胆囊切除术的大多数(95.2%)是由于结石性胆囊炎,报道的方法是4孔和3孔技术。随访时间为3周至2年,报告有54例(3.4%)并发症。
    尼日利亚的腹腔镜胆囊切除术相对安全,并发症最少。它的需求和吸收都在上升,尽管由于其相对较高的成本而缓慢。
    UNASSIGNED: Globally, the incidence and mortality from gallbladder diseases is on the rise. The gold standard for the management of symptomatic gallbladder disease is laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The practice of laparoscopic cholecystectomy is at a nascent stage in Low and middle-income countries like Nigeria despite its obvious advantages over traditional open cholecystectomy. This systematic review aims to assess the extent to which laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed for the management of gallbladder diseases in Nigeria.
    UNASSIGNED: The review was guided by the PRISMA model. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Global health databases. All searches were conducted in August 2023. All study designs reporting laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Nigeria, in the past 10 years were included. Three authors conducted the data extraction using data extraction tables and two authors independently assessed the data for accuracy and completeness. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was used to assess the data quality. Twenty-two articles with 1569 patients were included in this review.
    UNASSIGNED: Females accounted for 69.5% of the patients and 30.5% were males. Twelve (54.5%) of the studies were from the Southwest of the country, 3 (13.6%) each from the South East and North Central regions, 2 (9.1%) South-South, and 1 (4.5%) each from the North East and North West. Study designs were mostly cross-sectional with sample sizes from 1 to 400. The highest and lowest number of laparoscopic cholecystectomies reported were 300 and 1 respectively. The majority (95.2%) of laparoscopic cholecystectomies were on account of calculous cholecystitis and the methods reported were the 4-port and 3-port techniques. The follow-up period ranged from 3 weeks to 2 years with 54 (3.4%) complications reported.
    UNASSIGNED: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Nigeria is relatively safe with minimal complications. Its demand and uptake are on the rise, though slowly owing to its relatively high cost.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)是儿科人群中越来越常见的手术,尽管数字仍然明显低于成年人。目前,该手术由成人和儿科外科医生进行,对于应由专科小容量还是成人大容量外科医生进行该手术尚无共识.进行了文献检索,以比较由成人或小儿外科医生进行小儿LC后的结果。该分析包括19,993名患者。总的来说,由大量成人外科医生进行LC时,术后并发症减少,同时减少了停留时间和相关成本。儿童LC后的总发病率与成人相当。当由更大量的成人外科医生执行时,术后并发症和再入院率均有统计学显著降低.单纯性胆石症患者的发病率也降低。初步结果显示,在小儿胆石症患者中,由大量成人普通外科医生进行LC更安全。对于有其他儿科医生需求的更复杂的儿童,建议由小儿外科医生进行手术。仍然需要进行直接比较的进一步研究。
    Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is an increasingly common operation in the pediatric population, although numbers remain significantly lower than in adults. Currently, this operation is performed by both adult and pediatric surgeons and there is no consensus as to whether specialist low-volume or adult high-volume surgeons should be performing this operation. A literature search was performed to compare the outcomes following pediatric LC when performed by adult or pediatric surgeons. 19,993 patients were included in this analysis. Overall, post-operative complications were reduced when LC was performed by high-volume adult surgeons, along with reduced length of stay and associated cost. Overall morbidity following LC in children is comparable to adults. When performed by higher volume adult surgeons, there was a statically significant reduction in post-operative complications and re-admission rates. Morbidity was also reduced in patients with simple cholelithiasis. Initial results show that in pediatric patients presenting with cholelithiasis, LC performed by a high-volume adult general surgeon is safer. In more complex children with needs from other specialist pediatricians, surgery performed by a pediatric surgeon is recommended. Further research with direct comparisons is still required.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:截至2022年,患者遵守术后指南可以将腹腔镜腹部手术后的并发症风险降低高达52.4%。随着各种术前教育干预措施(POEI)的可用性,了解哪些POEI可以改善整个程序的患者预后。
    目的:本研究旨在通过系统回顾文献中报道的所有POEI来确定哪种POEI对患者预后最有效。
    方法:总共,4753篇调查各种POEI的文章(例如,视频,介绍,移动应用程序,和一对一的教育或辅导)是从PubMed收集的,Embase,和Scopus数据库。纳入标准为接受腹部腹腔镜手术的成年患者,随机对照试验,以及提供术后结果的研究。排除标准包括未以英文发表且无结果报告的研究。标题和摘要及全文文章与POEI随机对照研究是基于上述标准通过盲法筛选,使用Covidence(Veritas健康创新)进行双重审查。通过Cochrane偏差风险工具评估研究质量。对收录的文章进行了教育内容分析,干预时机,干预类型,和适合特定手术的术后结果。
    结果:只有17项研究符合我们的标准,1831例患者接受腹腔镜胆囊切除术,减肥手术(胃旁路和胃袖),还有结肠切除术.总的来说,15项研究报告了至少1名患者术后结果的统计学显着改善。根据Cochrane标准,这些研究均未发现总体偏倚风险较高。总的来说,41%(7/17)的纳入研究使用直接个人教育改善了几乎所有手术类型的结果,虽然教育视频对焦虑的影响最大,恶心,术后疼痛(P<0.01)。直接团体教育显示体重显着改善,BMI,锻炼,33%(2/6)的腹腔镜胃旁路术研究中出现抑郁症状。
    结论:直接教育(以个人或团体为基础)对术后腹腔镜手术结局有积极影响。
    背景:PROSPEROCRD42023438698;https://www.crd.约克。AC.uk/prospro/display_record.php?RecordID=438698。
    BACKGROUND: As of 2022, patient adherence to postoperative guidelines can reduce the risk of complications by up to 52.4% following laparoscopic abdominal surgery. With the availability of various preoperative education interventions (POEIs), understanding which POEI results in improvement in patient outcomes across the procedures is imperative.
    OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine which POEI could be the most effective on patient outcomes by systematically reviewing all the POEIs reported in the literature.
    METHODS: In total, 4753 articles investigating various POEIs (eg, videos, presentations, mobile apps, and one-on-one education or coaching) were collected from the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases. Inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing abdominal laparoscopic surgery, randomized controlled trials, and studies that provided postoperative outcomes. Exclusion criteria included studies not published in English and with no outcomes reported. Title and abstract and full-text articles with POEI randomized controlled studies were screened based on the above criteria through a blinded, dual review using Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation). Study quality was assessed through the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The included articles were analyzed for educational content, intervention timing, intervention type, and postoperative outcomes appropriate for a particular surgery.
    RESULTS: Only 17 studies matched our criteria, with 1831 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, bariatric surgery (gastric bypass and gastric sleeve), and colectomy. In total, 15 studies reported a statistically significant improvement in at least 1 patient postoperative outcome. None of these studies were found to have an overall high risk of bias according to Cochrane standards. In total, 41% (7/17) of the included studies using direct individual education improved outcomes in almost all surgery types, while educational videos had the greatest statistically significant impact for anxiety, nausea, and pain postoperatively (P<.01). Direct group education demonstrated significant improvement in weight, BMI, exercise, and depressive symptoms in 33% (2/6) of the laparoscopic gastric bypass studies.
    CONCLUSIONS: Direct education (individual or group based) positively impacts postoperative laparoscopic surgery outcomes.
    BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42023438698; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=438698.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:盆腔器官脱垂(POP)是一个影响全球数百万女性的公共卫生问题,对生活质量有重大影响。从FDA关于在POP手术中使用网状植入物的并发症的声明到已经显示出益处和副作用的研究,我们进行了一项系统评价,调查了与POP修复手术网状物植入相关的并发症.
    方法:通过对科学数据库的全面搜索确定了相关研究。包括评估网片在POP手术中的使用和相关并发症报告的研究。
    结果:在2816项研究中,28项研究符合研究标准,共有8958名患者,揭示了在腹腔镜网状手术中,与阴道网状手术相比,网状物暴露率更低,在其他并发症中。
    结论:腹腔镜网状手术作为POP修复的长期方法优于阴道网状手术,提供更低的并发症发生率和潜在更好的解剖学成功率。然而,对于因特定因素而不适合进行腹腔镜检查的患者,阴道网片手术仍是一种有价值的选择.未来的研究应该探索替代技术,比如有或没有网眼的胸膜,进一步改善手术效果和患者体验。
    BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a public health problem that influences millions of women around the globe, and it has a significant impact on the quality of life. From the FDA statement regarding the complications of using mesh implants in POP surgery to studies that have shown the benefits and side effects, we conducted a systematic review investigating the complications associated with surgical mesh implantation for POP repair.
    METHODS: Relevant studies were identified through a comprehensive search of scientific databases. Studies evaluating the use of mesh in POP surgery and reporting on associated complications were included.
    RESULTS: Among 2816 studies, 28 studies met the research criteria, with a total number of 8958 patients, revealing that in laparoscopic mesh surgery, the rate of mesh exposure was lower compared to vaginal mesh surgery, among other complications.
    CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic mesh surgery is superior as a long-term approach for POP repair compared to vaginal mesh surgery, offering lower complication rates and potentially better anatomical success. However, vaginal mesh surgery remains a valuable option for patients who are unsuitable for laparoscopy due to specific factors. Future research should explore alternative techniques, like pectopexy with or without mesh, to further improve surgical outcomes and patient experience.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究的目的是比较手术时间,术中并发症,逗留时间,再入院率,整体并发症,死亡率,与机器人手术(RS)和腹腔镜手术(LS)在抗反流和食管裂孔疝手术相关的费用。
    方法:使用MEDLINE(通过PubMed)进行了全面的文献检索,WebofScience和Scopus数据库。纳入了比较RS和LS在抗反流和食管裂孔疝患者中的短期结局和成本的研究。操作时间数据;并发症,逗留时间,再入院率,整体并发症,死亡率,并提取了成本。使用MINORS量表对纳入研究进行质量评估。
    结果:在荟萃分析中纳入了14项回顾性观察研究,共涉及555,368名参与者。结果显示手术时间差异无统计学意义,术中并发症,逗留时间,再入院率,整体并发症,和死亡率介于RS和LS之间。然而,与RS相比,LS的成本较低。
    结论:本系统综述和荟萃分析表明,RS在抗反流和食管裂孔疝手术中的短期预后不差,与LS相比。LS更具成本效益,但RS提供了潜在的好处,如改善的可视化和增强的手术技术.进一步研究,包括随机对照试验和长期结局研究,需要验证和完善这些发现。
    OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to compare the operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost associated with Robotic Surgery (RS) and Laparascopic Surgery (LS) in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery.
    METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (via PubMed), Web of Science and Scopus databases. Studies comparing short-term outcomes and cost between RS and LS in patients with anti-reflux and hiatal hernia were included. Data on operative time, complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, mortality, and cost were extracted. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the MINORS scale.
    RESULTS: Fourteen retrospective observational studies involving a total of 555,368 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed no statistically significant difference in operative time, intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission rates, overall complications, and mortality between RS and LS. However, LS was associated with lower costs compared to RS.
    CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that RS has non-inferior short-term outcomes in anti-reflux and hiatal hernia surgery, compared to LS. LS is more cost-effective, but RS offers potential benefits such as improved visualization and enhanced surgical techniques. Further research, including randomized controlled trials and long-term outcome studies, is needed to validate and refine these findings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项荟萃分析的目的是评估机器人辅助和腹腔镜手术在高内脏脂肪面积(VFA)患者中治疗胃癌的比较疗效。2024年4月,我们利用主要的国际数据库进行了全面的文献综述,比如PubMed,Embase,谷歌学者。我们的选择仅限于用英语写的文章,不包括评论,没有公布数据的协议,会议摘要,和不相关的内容。我们的分析集中在使用95%置信区间(CI)和标准平均差(SMD)的连续数据上,而二分法数据用比值比(OR)和95%CI进行评估。我们将统计学意义的阈值设置为P<0.05。数据提取包括基线特征,主要结果(如手术时间,主要并发症,淋巴结产量,和吻合口漏),和次要结果。荟萃分析包括三项队列研究,共970例患者。与腹腔镜组相比,机器人辅助组的手术时间明显更长,加权平均差(WMD)为-55.76min(95%CI-74.03至-37.50;P<0.00001)。该组还显示主要并发症的减少,比值比(OR)为2.48(95%CI1.09-5.66;P=0.03),腹部感染发生率较低(OR3.17,95%CI1.41-7.14;P=0.005),腹部脓肿(OR3.83,95%CI1.53-9.57;P=0.004),吻合口瘘(OR4.09,95%CI1.73-9.65;P=0.001),和胰漏(OR8.93,95%CI2.33-34.13;P=0.001)。然而,两组在住院时间方面没有观察到显著差异,整体并发症,估计失血量,或淋巴结产量。根据我们的发现,与腹腔镜手术相比,机器人辅助的胃癌手术治疗肥胖患者内脏脂肪似乎与较少的主要并发症相关,在其他手术方面保持相似的结果。然而,重要的是要注意,机器人辅助程序往往有更长的手术时间。
    The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the comparative efficacy of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery in treating gastric cancer among patients characterized by a high visceral fat area (VFA). In April 2024, we conducted a comprehensive literature review using major international databases, such as PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. We restricted our selection to articles written in English, excluding reviews, protocols without published data, conference abstracts, and irrelevant content. Our analysis focused on continuous data using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and standard mean differences (SMDs), while dichotomous data were assessed with odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. We set the threshold for statistical significance at P < 0.05. Data extraction included baseline characteristics, primary outcomes (such as operative time, major complications, lymph node yield, and anastomotic leakage), and secondary outcomes. The meta-analysis included three cohort studies totaling 970 patients. The robotic-assisted group demonstrated a significantly longer operative time compared to the laparoscopic group, with a weighted mean difference (WMD) of - 55.76 min (95% CI - 74.03 to - 37.50; P < 0.00001). This group also showed a reduction in major complications, with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.48 (95% CI 1.09-5.66; P = 0.03) and fewer occurrences of abdominal infections (OR 3.17, 95% CI 1.41-7.14; P = 0.005), abdominal abscesses (OR 3.83, 95% CI 1.53-9.57; P = 0.004), anastomotic leaks (OR 4.09, 95% CI 1.73-9.65; P = 0.001), and pancreatic leaks (OR 8.93, 95% CI 2.33-34.13; P = 0.001). However, no significant differences were observed between the groups regarding length of hospital stay, overall complications, estimated blood loss, or lymph node yield. Based on our findings, robot-assisted gastric cancer surgery in obese patients with visceral fat appears to be correlated with fewer major complications compared to laparoscopic surgery, while maintaining similar outcomes in other surgical aspects. However, it is important to note that robot-assisted procedures do tend to have longer operative times.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:很少有可用的研究比较可行性,功效,与腹腔镜盆腔外侧淋巴结清扫术(LPLND)相比,机器人盆腔外侧淋巴结清扫术在晚期直肠癌中的安全性。这项荟萃分析旨在比较机器人和LPLND的围手术期结果。
    方法:我们对PubMed,Embase,和WebofScience数据库。提取围手术期参数并汇集用于分析。这项荟萃分析提供了异质性和预测间隔的分析。
    结果:纳入了5项研究:567名患者分为266名机器人和301名LPLND。机器人组的总体手术时间长于腹腔镜组(均值差异=67.11,95%CI[30.80,103.42],p<0.001),但盆腔外侧淋巴清扫时间的差异无统计学意义(均值差异=-1.212,95%CI[-11.594,9.171],p=0.819)。机器人的总体并发症少于腹腔镜组(OR=1.589,95%CI[1.009,2.503],p=0.046),尤其是关于尿潴留(OR=2.23,95%CI[1.277,3.894],p=0.005)。机器人手术获取的盆腔外侧淋巴结多于腹腔镜手术(均值差异=-1.992,95%CI[-2.421,1.563],p<0.001)。
    结论:在本荟萃分析中,机器人盆腔外侧淋巴结清扫术与获取更多的盆腔外侧淋巴结和更低的整体并发症相关,与LPLND相比,尤其是尿潴留。需要进一步的研究来加强这些发现。
    BACKGROUND: There are few available studies that compare the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of robotic pelvic lateral lymph node dissection compared to laparoscopic pelvic lateral lymph node dissection (LPLND) in advanced rectal cancer. This meta-analysis aims to compare perioperative outcomes between robotic and LPLND.
    METHODS: We performed a systemic literature review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Perioperative parameters were extracted and pooled for analysis. This meta-analysis provided an analysis of heterogeneity and prediction intervals.
    RESULTS: Five studies were included: 567 patients divided between 266 robotic and 301 LPLND. Overall operation time was longer in the robotic group than laparoscopic group (difference in means = 67.11, 95% CI [30.80, 103.42], p < 0.001) but the difference in the pelvic lateral lymph dissection time was not statistically significant (difference in means =  - 1.212, 95% CI [ - 11.594, 9.171], p = 0.819). There were fewer overall complications in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (OR = 1.589, 95% CI [1.009, 2.503], p = 0.046), especially with respect to urinary retention (OR = 2.23, 95% CI [1.277, 3.894], p = 0.005). More pelvic lateral lymph nodes were harvested by robotic surgery than by laparoscopy (differences in means =  - 1.992, 95% CI [ - 2.421, 1.563], p < 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, robotic pelvic lateral lymph node dissection was associated with more pelvic lateral lymph nodes harvested and lower overall complications, especially urinary retention when compared to LPLND. Further studies are needed to reinforce these findings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:中央胰腺切除术是一种良性和低度恶性肿瘤的手术方法,位于胰腺的颈部和近端,有利于保存胰腺内分泌和外分泌功能,但发病率高,尤其是术后胰瘘(POPF)。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是根据围手术期结果评估微创中央胰腺切除术(MICP)和开放式中央胰腺切除术(OCP)之间的安全性和有效性。
    方法:2003年10月至2023年10月在PubMed上进行了广泛的文献检索,以比较MICP和OCP,Medline,Embase,WebofScience,还有Cochrane图书馆.基于异质性选择固定效应模型或随机效应,并计算了具有95%置信区间(CI)的合并比值比(OR)或平均差(MD)。
    结果:共纳入10项研究,共510名患者。MICP和OCP的POPF差异无统计学意义(OR=0.95;95%CI[0.64,1.43];P=0.82),术中失血量(MD=-125.13;95%CI[-194.77,-55.49];P<0.001)和住院时间(MD=-2.86;95%CI[-5.00,-0.72];P=0.009)与OCP相比,MICP是有利的,MICP的术中输血率明显低于OCP(MD=0.34;95%CI[0.11,1.00];P=0.05)。两组之间的其他结局没有显着差异。
    结论:MICP与OCP一样安全有效,术中出血量少,住院时间短。然而,需要进一步的研究来确认结果。
    BACKGROUND: Central pancreatectomy is a surgical procedure for benign and low-grade malignant tumors which located in the neck and proximal body of the pancreas that facilitates the preservation of pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions but has a high morbidity rate, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness between minimally invasive central pancreatectomy (MICP) and open central pancreatectomy (OCP) basing on perioperative outcomes.
    METHODS: An extensive literature search to compare MICP and OCP was conducted from October 2003 to October 2023 on PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Fixed-effect models or random effects were selected based on heterogeneity, and pooled odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.
    RESULTS: A total of 10 studies with a total of 510 patients were included. There was no significant difference in POPF between MICP and OCP (OR = 0.95; 95% CI [0.64, 1.43]; P = 0.82), whereas intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 125.13; 95% CI [- 194.77, -55.49]; P < 0.001) and length of hospital stay (MD = - 2.86; 95% CI [- 5.00, - 0.72]; P = 0.009) were in favor of MICP compared to OCP, and there was a strong trend toward a lower intraoperative transfusion rate in MICP than in OCP (MD = 0.34; 95% CI [0.11, 1.00]; P = 0.05). There was no significant difference in other outcomes between the two groups.
    CONCLUSIONS: MICP was as safe and effective as OCP and had less intraoperative blood loss and a shorter length of hospital stay. However, further studies are needed to confirm the results.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:微创手术,包括腹腔镜和机器人,在全球范围内显着改善了普通外科(GS)实践。虽然非洲大部分地区尚未采用机器人辅助的GS实践,腹腔镜检查已被用于改善手术效果。本研究旨在回顾腹腔镜GS手术(LGSP)进行和评估结果,如转换为开放手术,发病率,和非洲的死亡率。
    方法:四个数据库(PubMed,谷歌学者,WOS,和AJOL)被搜索,识别8022种出版物。筛选后,在非洲进行了40项报告LGSP(n≥2)的研究,结果符合纳入标准。使用R统计软件进行的荟萃分析以95%的转换CI估计了合并的患病率,发病率,和死亡率。
    结果:本研究共分析了在15个非洲国家进行的6381例手术。多数,72.89%,这些程序在塞内加尔进行,南非,和尼日利亚。主要手术为胆囊切除术(37.09%),阑尾切除术(33.36%),和诊断性腹腔镜检查(9.98%)。荟萃分析显示转化率为5%[95%CI:4,7]。附着力(28.13%),出血(16.67%),技术难度(12.50%),设备故障(11.46%)是转换的主要指征。手术部位感染(42.75%)是发病的主要原因。发病率和死亡率分别为7%[95%CI:5,10]和0.12%[95%CI:0,0.29],分别。
    结论:进行了广泛的基础和高级LGSP。获得的结果表明腹腔镜方法的成功实施。重要的是,本研究为非洲微创手术的进一步研究奠定了基础.
    BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery, including laparoscopy and robotics, has significantly improved general surgical (GS) practice globally. While robot-assisted GS practice is yet to be adopted in the majority of Africa, laparoscopy has been utilized to improve surgical outcomes. This study aims to review the laparoscopic GS procedures (LGSPs) performed and evaluate outcomes such as conversion to open surgery, morbidity, and mortality in Africa.
    METHODS: Four databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, WoS, and AJOL) were searched, identifying 8022 publications. Following screening, 40 studies across Africa that reported LGSPs (n ≥ 2) performed and outcomes met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis conducted using R statistical software estimated the pooled prevalences with the 95% CI of conversion, morbidity, and mortality.
    RESULTS: A total of 6381 procedures performed in 15 African countries were analyzed in this study. Majority, 72.89%, of the procedures were performed in Senegal, South Africa, and Nigeria. The major procedures performed were cholecystectomy (37.09%), appendicectomy (33.36%), and diagnostic laparoscopy (9.98%). The meta-analysis revealed a conversion rate of 5% [95% CI: 4, 7]. Adhesion (28.13%), hemorrhage (16.67%), technical difficultly (12.50%), and equipment failure (11.46%) were the predominant indications for conversion. Surgical site infection (42.75%) was the major cause of morbidity. The prevalences of morbidity and mortality were 7% [95% CI: 5, 10] and 0.12% [95% CI: 0, 0.29], respectively.
    CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of basic and advanced LGSPs were performed. The outcomes obtained indicate successful implementation of the laparoscopic approach. Importantly, this study serves as a foundational work for further research on minimally invasive surgery in Africa.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号