The severity of postoperative complications after robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review, meta analysis and meta-regression

被引:21
作者
Wang, Yanlei [1 ]
Liu, Yanfei [2 ]
Han, Gaoyang [3 ]
Yi, Bo [1 ]
Zhu, Shaihong [1 ]
机构
[1] Cent South Univ, Xiangya Hosp 3, Dept Gen Surg, Changsha, Hunan, Peoples R China
[2] Capital Med Univ, Sch Nursing, Beijing, Peoples R China
[3] Zhengzhou Univ, Zhengzhou Cent Hosp, Dept Thorac Surg, Zhengzhou, Henan, Peoples R China
来源
PLOS ONE | 2020年 / 15卷 / 10期
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
TOTAL MESORECTAL EXCISION; SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES; INTERSPHINCTERIC RESECTION; ANASTOMOTIC LEAKAGE; ONCOLOGIC OUTCOMES; HARTMANN PROCEDURE; ASSISTED SURGERY; METAANALYSIS; MULTICENTER; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0239909
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Objective Robotic surgery (RS) has been increasingly used for the resection of rectal cancer, and its advantages over laparoscopic surgery (LS) have been demonstrated. However, few studies focused on the severity of postoperative complications. This study aimed to compared the postoperative complications within 30 days after RS over LS according to the Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification. Methods A literature research of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were systematically performed. The studies comparing the complications of RS and LS for rectal cancer based on the C-D classification were enrolled. Primary outcomes were C-D grade III, IV, V, III-V (severe complications). Results Seventeen studies (3193 patients) were included in the final analysis: 1554 underwent RS and 1639 underwent LS. The RS group was associated with significantly lower rates of severe complications (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.90, P = 0.005), C-D grade IV (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.90, P= 0.005), and anastomotic leak (OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.48-0.91, P= 0.01). There was no significant difference in C-D grade III, C-D grade I, II, I-II (minor complications), overall complications, bleeding, wound complications, postoperative ileus, urinary retention, readmission, reoperation between two groups. Conclusions Robotic surgery is safe for rectal cancer and may be an effective alternative to laparoscopic surgery, with lower rates of severe complications, C-D grade IV, and anastomotic leak. Further large randomized controlled trials are necessary to confirm this conclusion.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [1] Robotic-Assisted Surgery Improves the Quality of Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer Compared to Laparoscopy: Results of a Case-Controlled Analysis
    Allemann, Pierre
    Duvoisin, Celine
    Di Mare, Luca
    Huebner, Martin
    Demartines, Nicolas
    Hahnloser, Dieter
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 40 (04) : 1010 - 1016
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2009, BMJ
  • [3] Robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer results in a significantly higher quality of TME specimen compared to the laparoscopic approachreport of a single-center experience
    Aselmann, Heiko
    Kersebaum, Jan-Niclas
    Bernsmeier, Alexander
    Beckmann, Jan Henrik
    Moeller, Thorben
    Egberts, Jan Hendrik
    Schafmayer, Clemens
    Roecken, Christoph
    Becker, Thomas
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2018, 33 (11) : 1575 - 1581
  • [4] Robotic versus laparoscopic coloanal anastomosis with or without intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer
    Baek, Se Jin
    AL-Asari, Sami
    Jeong, Duck Hyoun
    Hur, Hyuk
    Min, Byung Soh
    Baik, Seung Hyuk
    Kim, Nam Kyu
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2013, 27 (11): : 4157 - 4163
  • [5] Robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excison of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized trial
    Baik, S. H.
    Ko, Y. T.
    Kang, C. M.
    Lee, W. J.
    Kim, N. K.
    Sohn, S. K.
    Chi, H. S.
    Cho, C. H.
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2008, 22 (07): : 1601 - 1608
  • [6] A Randomized Trial of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer
    Bonjer, H. Jaap
    Deijen, Charlotte L.
    Abis, Gabor A.
    Cuesta, Miguel A.
    van der Pas, Martijn H. G. M.
    de lange-de Klerk, Elly S. M.
    Lacy, Antonio M.
    Bemelman, Willem A.
    Andersson, John
    Angenete, Eva
    Rosenberg, Jacob
    Fuerst, Alois
    Haglind, Eva
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2015, 372 (14) : 1324 - 1332
  • [7] Open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery for rectal cancer: medium-term comparative outcomes from a multicenter study
    Corbellini, Carlo
    Biffi, Roberto
    Luca, Fabrizio
    Chiappa, Antonio
    Costa, Stefano
    Bertani, Emilio
    Bona, Stefano
    Lombardi, Davide
    Tamayo, Darina
    Botteri, Edoardo
    Andreoni, Bruno
    [J]. TUMORI JOURNAL, 2016, 102 (04): : 414 - 421
  • [8] Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic operation in anus-preserving rectal cancer: a meta-analysis
    Cui, Yongzhen
    Li, Cheng
    Xu, Zhongfa
    Wang, Yingming
    Sun, Yamei
    Xu, Huirong
    Li, Zengjun
    Sun, Yanlai
    [J]. THERAPEUTICS AND CLINICAL RISK MANAGEMENT, 2017, 13 : 1247 - 1257
  • [9] Assessment of tissue damage due to mechanical stresses
    De, Smita
    Rosen, Jacob
    Dagan, Aylon
    Hannaford, Blake
    Swanson, Paul
    Sinanan, Mika
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ROBOTICS RESEARCH, 2007, 26 (11--12) : 1159 - 1171
  • [10] Classification of surgical complications - A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey
    Dindo, D
    Demartines, N
    Clavien, PA
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2004, 240 (02) : 205 - 213