当前位置: X-MOL 学术Ann. Surg. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The COMPARE Study: Comparing Perioperative Outcomes of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic, Da Vinci Robotic, and Open Procedures: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis of The Evidence.
Annals of Surgery ( IF 7.5 ) Pub Date : 2024-10-22 , DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006572
Rocco Ricciardi,Usha Seshadri-Kreaden,Ana Yankovsky,Douglas Dahl,Hugh Auchincloss,Neera M Patel,April E Hebert,Valena Wright

OBJECTIVE To assess 30-day outcomes of da Vinci robotic-assisted (dV-RAS) versus laparoscopic/thoracoscopic (lap/VATS) or open oncologic surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Complex procedures in deep/narrow spaces especially benefit from dV-RAS. Prior procedure-specific comparisons are not generalizable. METHODS PubMed, Scopus and EMBASE were systematically searched (latest: 11/17/2023) following PRISMA and PROSPERO (Reg#CRD42023466759). Randomized, prospective, and database studies were pooled as odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) in R using fixed-effect or random-effects (heterogeneity significant). ROBINS-I/RoB 2 were used to assess bias. RESULTS Of 56,314 unique references over 12 years from 22 countries, 230 studies (34 randomized, 74 prospective, 122 database) comparing dV-RAS to lap/VATS or open surgery across 7 procedures, 4 specialties, representing 1,194,559 dV-RAS; 1,095,936 lap/VATS and 1,625,320 open cases were included. Operative time for dV-RAS was longer than lap/VATS (MD:17.73min [9.80,25.67], P <0.01) and open surgery (MD:40.92min [28.83,53.00], P <0.01), whereas hospital stay was shorter (lap/VATS MD:-0.51d [-0.64,-0.38], P <0.01; open MD:-1.85d [-2.09,-1.62], P <0.01) and blood loss was less versus open (MD:-293.44ml [-359.53,-227.35]). There were fewer dV-RAS conversions (OR:0.44 [0.40,0.49], P <0.01), transfusions (OR:0.79 [0.72,0.88], P <0.01), postoperative complications (OR:0.90 [0.84,0.96], P <0.01), readmissions (OR:0.91 [0.83,0.99], P =0.04), and deaths (OR:0.86 [0.81,0.92], P <0.01) versus lap/VATS, and fewer transfusions (OR:0.25 [0.21,0.30], P <0.01), postoperative complications (OR:0.56 [0.52,0.61], P <0.01), readmissions (OR:0.71 [0.63,0.81], P <0.01), reoperations (OR:0.89 [0.81,0.97], P <0.01), and deaths (OR:0.54 [0.47,0.63], P <0.01) versus open surgery. Blood loss (MD:-12.26mL [-29.44,4.91], P =0.16) and reoperations (OR:1.03 [0.95,1.11], P =0.48) were similar for dV-RAS and lap/VATS. There was significant heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS Da Vinci -RAS confers benefits across oncological procedures and study designs. These results provide clinical evidence to multi-specialty-care decision-makers considering dV-RAS.

中文翻译:


COMPARE 研究:比较肿瘤微创腹腔镜、达芬奇机器人和开放手术的围手术期结果:证据的系统评价和荟萃分析。



目的 评估达芬奇机器人辅助 (dV-RAS) 与腹腔镜/胸腔镜 (lap/VATS) 或开放肿瘤手术的 30 天结局。总结 背景数据 深/窄空间中的复杂程序尤其受益于 dV-RAS。先前特定于程序的比较是不可推广的。方法 按照 PRISMA 和 PROSPERO (Reg#CRD42023466759) 系统检索 PubMed、Scopus 和 EMBASE (最新:2023 年 11 月 17 日)。使用固定效应或随机效应 (异质性显著) 将随机、前瞻性和数据库研究合并为比值比 (OR) 或平均差 (MD) 的 R 值。使用 ROBINS-I/RoB 2 评估偏倚。结果 在 22 个国家的 12 年内 56,314 份独特参考文献中,230 项研究(34 项随机,74 项前瞻性,122 项数据库)在 7 个程序、4 个专业中将 dV-RAS 与 lap/VATS 或开放手术进行比较,代表 1,194,559 dV-RAS;包括 1,095,936 圈/VATS 和 1,625,320 个未结案例。dV-RAS 的手术时间长于膝上/VATS (MD:17.73min [9.80,25.67],P <0.01) 和开放手术 (MD:40.92min [28.83,53.00],P <0.01),而住院时间短 (lap/VATS MD:-0.51d [-0.64,-0.38],P <0.01;开放 MD:-1.85d [-2.09,-1.62],P <0.01),失血量少于开放手术 (MD:-293.44ml [-359.53,-227.35])。dV-RAS 转换较少 (OR: 0.44 [0.40,0.49],P <0.01),输血(OR:0.79 [0.72,0.88],P <0.01),术后并发症(OR:0.90 [0.84,0.96],P <0.01),再入院(OR:0.91 [0.83,0.99],P =0.04)和死亡(OR:0.86 [0.81,0.92],P <0.01)与lap/VATS相比,输血较少(OR:0.25 [0.21,0.30],P <0.01),术后并发症(OR:0.56 [0.52,0.61],P <0.01),再入院(OR:0.71 [0.63,0.81], P <0.01),再次手术 (OR:0.89 [0.81,0.97],P <0.01) 和死亡 (OR: 0.54 [0.47,0.63],P <0.01) 与开放手术相比。dV-RAS 和搭接/VATS 的失血量 (MD:-12.26mL [-29.44,4.91],P =0.16)和再次手术 (OR:1.03 [0.95,1.11],P =0.48) 相似。存在显著的异质性。结论 Da Vinci -RAS 在肿瘤学手术和研究设计中都有益处。这些结果为考虑 dV-RAS 的多专科护理决策者提供了临床证据。
更新日期:2024-10-22
down
wechat
bug