Comparison of harmonic scalpel and conventional technique in the surgery for breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Harmonic scalpel is considered as a promising surgical tool for breast cancer, while its advantage over conventional approach is still controversial. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of harmonic scalpel and conventional tools in the surgery for breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Studies reporting the outcomes of harmonic scalpel and conventional technologies were systematically searched from online databases, PubMed and EMBASE up to April 30, 2018. Data were presented as odds ratio, risk ratio (RR), and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss (I-2 = 96%, P < 0.05, MD = 68.78, 95% CI 93.31 to 44.24), seroma (I-2 = 3%, P = 0.41, RR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.46u0.86) and hematoma formation (I-2 = 0%, P = 0.64, RR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.23u0.73), drainage volume (I-2 = 89%, P < 0.05, MD = 105.33, 95% CI 161.33 to 49.33) and time (I-2 = 93%, P < 0.05, MD = 2.18, 95% CI 3.75 to 0.61), necrosis (I-2 = 35%, P = 0.20, RR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.16u0.86), surgical duration (I-2 = 79%, P < 0.05, MD = 8.49, 95% CI 16.56 to 0.43), and hospital stay (I-2 = 97%, P < 0.05, MD = 0.94, 95% CI 1.74 to 0.14) are significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Harmonic scalpel is superior to conventional tools in terms of decreasing intraoperative blood loss, seroma and hematoma formation, drainage volume and time, necrosis prevalence, surgical duration, and hospital stay, which should be strongly recommended in the surgery for breast cancer.