Literature DB >> 33892794

Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review.

Rivfka Shenoy1,2,3, Michael A Mederos4, Linda Ye4, Selene S Mak5, Meron M Begashaw5, Marika S Booth6, Paul G Shekelle5,6, Mark Wilson7,8, William Gunnar9,10, Melinda Maggard-Gibbons4,5,6,11, Mark D Girgis4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Rapid adoption of robotic-assisted general surgery procedures, particularly for cholecystectomy, continues while questions remain about its benefits and utility. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical effectiveness of robot-assisted cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease as compared with the laparoscopic approach.
METHODS: A literature search was performed from January 2010 to March 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous.
RESULTS: Of 887 articles screened, 44 met the inclusion criteria (range 20-735,537 patients). Four were randomized controlled trials, and four used propensity-matching. There were variable comparisons between operative techniques with only 19 out of 44 studies comparing techniques using the same number of ports. Operating room time was longer for the robot-assisted technique in the majority of studies (range 11-55 min for 22 studies, p < 0.05; 15 studies showed no difference; two studies showed shorter laparoscopic times), while conversion rates and intraoperative complications were not different. No differences were detected for the length of stay, surgical site infection, or readmissions. Across studies comparing single-port robot-assisted to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there was a higher rate of incisional hernia; however, no differences were noted when comparing single-port robot-assisted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes were similar for benign, elective gallbladder disease for robot-assisted compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Overall, the rates of complications were low. More high-quality studies are needed as the robot-assisted technique expands to more complex gallbladder disease, where its utility may prove increasingly beneficial. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020156945.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cholecystectomy; Gallbladder; Laparoscopic; Review; Robot-assisted

Year:  2021        PMID: 33892794     DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01673-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Syst Rev        ISSN: 2046-4053


  31 in total

1.  Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Caiwen Han; Xinyi Shan; Liang Yao; Peijing Yan; Meixuan Li; Lidong Hu; Hongwei Tian; Wutang Jing; Binbin Du; Lixia Wang; Kehu Yang; Tiankang Guo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Robotic approaches may offer benefit in colorectal procedures, more controversial in other areas: a review of 168,248 cases.

Authors:  Maria S Altieri; Jie Yang; Dana A Telem; Jiawen Zhu; Caitlin Halbert; Mark Talamini; Aurora D Pryor
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Robotic Single-Port Platform in General, Urologic, and Gynecologic Surgeries: A Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  S Cianci; A Rosati; V Rumolo; S Gueli Alletti; V Gallotta; L C Turco; G Corrado; G Vizzielli; A Fagotti; F Fanfani; G Scambia; S Uccella
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 4.  Robotic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yeqian Huang; Terence C Chua; Guy J Maddern; Jaswinder S Samra
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 3.982

5.  Single-site robotic cholecystectomy versus multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ning Sun; Jialin Zhang; Chengshuo Zhang; Yue Shi
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  Effects of physical activity on risk factors for coronary heart disease in previously sedentary women: a five-year longitudinal study.

Authors:  A W Sedgwick; A H Davidson; R E Taplin; D W Thomas
Journal:  Aust N Z J Med       Date:  1988-06

Review 7.  Review of emerging surgical robotic technology.

Authors:  Brian S Peters; Priscila R Armijo; Crystal Krause; Songita A Choudhury; Dmitry Oleynikov
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Minimally invasive surgery: national trends in adoption and future directions for hospital strategy.

Authors:  Charlotte Tsui; Rachel Klein; Matthew Garabrant
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-05-10       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Adverse Events in Robotic Surgery: A Retrospective Study of 14 Years of FDA Data.

Authors:  Homa Alemzadeh; Jaishankar Raman; Nancy Leveson; Zbigniew Kalbarczyk; Ravishankar K Iyer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Single-incision robotic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ning Sun; Jia Lin Zhang; Cheng Shuo Zhang; Xiao Hang Li; Yue Shi
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.817

View more
  2 in total

1.  EGFR-targeted fluorescent imaging using the da Vinci® Firefly™ camera for gallbladder cancer.

Authors:  Jung Ha Choi; Chang Moo Kang; Jeong Youp Park
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-06-15       Impact factor: 3.253

2.  Clinical outcomes and cost of robotic ventral hernia repair: systematic review.

Authors:  Linda Ye; Christopher P Childers; Michael de Virgilio; Rivfka Shenoy; Michael A Mederos; Selene S Mak; Meron M Begashaw; Marika S Booth; Paul G Shekelle; Mark Wilson; William Gunnar; Mark D Girgis; Melinda Maggard-Gibbons
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2021-11-09
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.