Literature DB >> 33536032

Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Bo Tang1,2, Xiong Lei2, Junhua Ai2, Zhixiang Huang1,2, Jun Shi3, Taiyuan Li4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been applied in the clinic for decades; nevertheless, which surgical approach has a lower rate of postoperative complications is still inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative complications within 30 days between robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery based on randomized controlled trials.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (until May 2020) that compared robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery were searched through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc). Data regarding sample size, clinical and demographic characteristics, and postoperative complications within 30 days, including overall postoperative complications, severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III), anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, bleeding, ileus, urinary complications, respiratory complications, conversion to open surgery, unscheduled reoperation, perioperative mortality, and pathological outcomes, were extracted. The results were analyzed using RevMan v5.3.
RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials that included 507 robotic and 516 laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery cases were included. Meta-analysis showed that the overall postoperative complications within 30 days [Z = 1.1, OR = 1.18, 95% CI (0.88-1.57), P = 0.27], severe postoperative complications [Z = 0.22, OR = 1.12, 95% CI (0.41-3.07), P = 0.83], anastomotic leakage [Z = 0.96, OR = 1.27, 95% CI (0.78-2.08), P = 0.34], surgical site infection [Z = 0.18, OR = 1.05, 95% CI (0.61-1.79), P = 0.86], bleeding [Z = 0.19, OR = 0.89, 95% CI (0.27-2.97), P = 0.85], ileus [Z = 1.47, OR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.38-1.15), P = 0.14], urinary complications [Z = 0.66, OR = 1.22, 95% CI (0.67-2.22), P = 0.51], respiratory complications [Z = 0.84, OR = 0.64, 95% CI (0.22-1.82), P = 0.40], conversion to open surgery [Z = 1.73, OR = 0.61, 95% CI (0.35-1.07), P = 0.08], unscheduled reoperation [Z = 0.14, OR = 0.91, 95% CI (0.26-3.20), P = 0.89], perioperative mortality [Z = 0.28, OR = 0.79, 95% CI (0.15-4.12), P = 0.78], and pathological outcomes were similar between robotic and laparoscopic rectal surgery.
CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery for rectal cancer was comparable to laparoscopic surgery with respect to postoperative complications within 30 days.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Laparoscopic surgery; Postoperative complications; Rectal cancer; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33536032      PMCID: PMC7860622          DOI: 10.1186/s12957-021-02128-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1477-7819            Impact factor:   2.754


  35 in total

1.  Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utility in cholecystectomy.

Authors:  P A Clavien; J R Sanabria; S M Strasberg
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 3.982

2.  [Risk factor analysis on anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer patient with neoadjuvant therapy and establishment of a nomogram prediction model].

Authors:  W Jiang; M Y Feng; X Y Dong; S M Dong; J X Zheng; X M Liu; W J Liu; J Yan
Journal:  Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2019-08-25

3.  Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?

Authors:  A R Jadad; R A Moore; D Carroll; C Jenkinson; D J Reynolds; D J Gavaghan; H J McQuay
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1996-02

4.  Retrospective Risk Analysis for Anastomotic Leakage Following Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery in a Single Institute.

Authors:  Masatsugu Hiraki; Toshiya Tanaka; Osamu Ikeda; Eiji Sadashima; Naoya Kimura; Satomi Nakamura; Hiroaki Nakamura; Kohei Yamada; Keiichiro Okuyama; Koutaro Yamaji; Tatsuya Manabe; Atsushi Miyoshi; Kenji Kitahara; Seiji Sato; Hirokazu Noshiro
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2019-11-11

5.  [Definition and diagnostic criteria of anastomotic leakage after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer].

Authors:  Yingjiang Ye; Fan Liu
Journal:  Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2018 Apirl 25

6.  Robot-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Phase II Open Label Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Min Jung Kim; Sung Chan Park; Ji Won Park; Hee Jin Chang; Dae Yong Kim; Byung-Ho Nam; Dae Kyung Sohn; Jae Hwan Oh
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Completeness of total mesorectum excision of laparoscopic versus robotic surgery: a review with a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Marco Milone; Michele Manigrasso; Nunzio Velotti; Stefania Torino; Antonietta Vozza; Giovanni Sarnelli; Giovanni Aprea; Francesco Maione; Nicola Gennarelli; Mario Musella; Giovanni Domenico De Palma
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2019-05-06       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Male urinary and sexual function after robotic pelvic autonomic nerve-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Gang Wang; Zhiming Wang; Zhiwei Jiang; Jiang Liu; Jian Zhao; Jieshou Li
Journal:  Int J Med Robot       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 2.547

9.  Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Zhong Lin; Zheng-Li Jiang; Dan-Yang Chen; Min-Fang Chen; Li-Hua Chen; Peng Zhou; Ai-Xiao Xia; Yan-Wu Zhu; Hui Jin; Qiang-Qiang Ge
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  Robotic-Assisted versus Conventional Laparoscopic Approach for Rectal Cancer Surgery, First Egyptian Academic Center Experience, RCT.

Authors:  Yasser Debakey; Ashraf Zaghloul; Ahmed Farag; Ahmed Mahmoud; Inas Elattar
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2018-09-02
View more
  3 in total

1.  Mesenteric Vascular Evaluation with Pre-operative Multidetector Computed Tomographic Angiography and Intraoperative Indocyanine Green Angiography to Reduce Anastomotic Leaks after Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Tsanko Yotsov; Martin Karamanliev; Svilen Maslyankov; Sergey Iliev; Nikolai Ramadanov; Dobromir Dimitrov
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2022 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.789

2.  A clinical study of inferior mesenteric artery typing in laparoscopic radical resections with left colonic artery preservation of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Jinghao Chen; Meirong Wang; Yuhao Chen; Suying Chen; Jing Xiao; Xiaole Fan; Jushun Yang; Bosheng He
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 3.253

3.  Nomogram to predict postoperative infectious complications after surgery for colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study in China.

Authors:  Jing Wen; Tao Pan; Yun-Chuan Yuan; Qiu-Shi Huang; Jian Shen
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 2.754

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.