Robotic Living Donor Right Hepatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:20
|
作者
Naranjo, Eddy P. Lincango [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Garces-Delgado, Estefany [3 ,5 ]
Siepmann, Timo [4 ,6 ]
Mirow, Lutz [7 ]
Solis-Pazmino, Paola [8 ]
Alexander-Leon, Harold [3 ,9 ]
Restrepo-Rodas, Gabriela [3 ,5 ]
Mancero-Montalvo, Rafael [3 ,5 ]
Ponce, Cristina J. [3 ,5 ]
Cadena-Semanate, Ramiro [3 ,5 ]
Vargas-Cordova, Ronnal [3 ,10 ]
Herrera-Cevallos, Glenda [3 ,11 ]
Vallejo, Sebastian [1 ]
Liu-Sanchez, Carolina [12 ]
Prokop, Larry J. [13 ]
Ziogas, Ioannis A. [14 ]
Vailas, Michail G. [15 ]
Guerron, Alfredo D. [16 ]
Visser, Brendan C. [17 ]
Ponce, Oscar J. [1 ,18 ]
Barbas, Andrew S. [19 ]
Moris, Dimitrios [19 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Knowledge & Evaluat Res Unit, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[2] Hosp Vozandes Quito, Dept Teaching & Res, Quito 170521, Ecuador
[3] Equipo Invest Soc Ecuatoriana Cirugia Bariatr & M, Quito 170508, Ecuador
[4] Dresden Int Univ, Ctr Clin Res & Management Educ, Div Hlth Care Sci, D-01067 Dresden, Germany
[5] Univ Int Ecuador, Med Sch, Quito 170411, Ecuador
[6] Tech Univ Dresden, Univ Hosp Carl Gustav Carus, Dept Neurol, D-01307 Dresden, Germany
[7] Tech Univ Dresden, Dept Gen & Visceral Surg, Med Campus Chemnitz, D-01307 Dresden, Germany
[8] Stanford Univ, Sch Med, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[9] Univ Americas, Med Sch, Quito 170503, Ecuador
[10] Hosp Gen San Francisco IESS, Div Metab & Weight Loss Surg, Quito 170111, Ecuador
[11] Hosp Metropolitano, Div Metab & Weight Loss Surg, Quito 170521, Ecuador
[12] Univ Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Inst Med Trop Alexander Humboldt, Lima 15102, Peru
[13] Mayo Clin, Mayo Clin Lib, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[14] Vanderbilt Univ, Dept Surg, Div Hepatobiliary Surg & Liver Transplantat, Med Ctr, Nashville, TN 37232 USA
[15] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Laikon Gen Hosp, Dept Surg 1, Athens 11528, Greece
[16] Duke Univ, Dept Surg, Div Metab & Weight Loss Surg, Durham, NC 27705 USA
[17] Stanford Univ, Dept Surg, Div Hepatobiliary & Pancreat Surg, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[18] Frimley Hlth NHS Fdn Trust, Frimley Pk Hosp, Surrey GU16 7UJ, England
[19] Duke Univ, Dept Surg, Durham, NC 27705 USA
关键词
liver transplantation; robot; systematic review; meta-analysis; HEPATOCELLULAR-CARCINOMA; LAPAROSCOPIC HEPATECTOMY; LIVER-TRANSPLANTATION; ONCOLOGIC OUTCOMES; PURE; SAFETY; COMPLICATIONS; RESECTIONS; DONATION; SURGERY;
D O I
10.3390/jcm11092603
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Simple Summary Liver transplantation is the mainstay of treatment for patients with end-stage liver disease or certain types of liver cancer. However, the current organ supply cannot meet the continuously increased number of patients added to the liver transplant waitlist, and thus living donation has been proposed as an alternative to expand the donor pool. Robotic living donor right hepatectomy for adult liver transplantation has shown potential for lower morbidity and better donor outcomes, which can help increase donation and the organ supply. The current systematic review summarizes the available evidence comparing the outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic, and open living donor right hepatectomy. The introduction of robotics in living donor liver transplantation has been revolutionary. We aimed to examine the safety of robotic living donor right hepatectomy (RLDRH) compared to open (ODRH) and laparoscopic (LADRH) approaches. A systematic review was carried out in Medline and six additional databases following PRISMA guidelines. Data on morbidity, postoperative liver function, and pain in donors and recipients were extracted from studies comparing RLDRH, ODRH, and LADRH published up to September 2020; PROSPERO (CRD42020214313). Dichotomous variables were pooled as risk ratios and continuous variables as weighted mean differences. Four studies with a total of 517 patients were included. In living donors, the postoperative total bilirubin level (MD: -0.7 95%CI -1.0, -0.4), length of hospital stay (MD: -0.8 95%CI -1.4, -0.3), Clavien-Dindo complications I-II (RR: 0.5 95%CI 0.2, 0.9), and pain score at day > 3 (MD: -0.6 95%CI -1.6, 0.4) were lower following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Furthermore, the pain score at day > 3 (MD: -0.4 95%CI -0.8, -0.09) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In recipients, the postoperative AST level was lower (MD: -0.5 95%CI -0.9, -0.1) following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Moreover, the length of stay (MD: -6.4 95%CI -11.3, -1.5) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In summary, we identified low- to unclear-quality evidence that RLDRH seems to be safe and feasible for adult living donor liver transplantation compared to the conventional approaches. No postoperative deaths were reported.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Pure Laparoscopic Versus Open Approach for Living Donor Right Hepatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Peng, Yufu
    Li, Bo
    Xu, Hongwei
    Chen, Kang
    Wei, Yonggang
    Liu, Fei
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2022, 32 (08): : 832 - 841
  • [2] A systematic review and network meta-analysis of outcomes after open, mini-laparotomy, hybrid, totally laparoscopic, and robotic living donor right hepatectomy
    Yeow, Marcus
    Soh, Shauna
    Starkey, Graham
    Perini, Marcos, V
    Koh, Ye-Xin
    Tan, Ek-Khoon
    Chan, Chung-Yip
    Raj, Prema
    Goh, Brian K. P.
    Kabir, Tousif
    SURGERY, 2022, 172 (02) : 741 - 750
  • [3] Comparison between minimally invasive and open living donor hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Berardi, Giammauro
    Tomassini, Federico
    Troisi, Roberto Ivan
    LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2015, 21 (06) : 738 - 752
  • [4] Laparoscopic versus Robotic Hepatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Aboudou, Taslim
    Li, Meixuan
    Zhang, Zeliang
    Wang, Zhengfeng
    Li, Yanfei
    Feng, Lufang
    Chu, Xiajing
    Chen, Nan
    Zhou, Wence
    Yang, Kehu
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2022, 11 (19)
  • [5] Systematic review and meta-analysis of open versus laparoscopy-assisted versus pure laparoscopic versus robotic living donor hepatectomy
    Ziogas, Ioannis A.
    Kakos, Christos D.
    Moris, Dimitrios P.
    Kaltenmeier, Christof
    Tsoulfas, Georgios
    Montenovo, Martin I.
    Alexopoulos, Sophoclis P.
    Geller, David A.
    Pomfret, Elizabeth A.
    LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, 2023, 29 (10) : 1063 - 1078
  • [6] Comparison of laparoscopic and open living donor hepatectomy A meta-analysis
    Gao, Yuye
    Wu, Wu
    Liu, Chunyu
    Liu, Tao
    Xiao, Heng
    MEDICINE, 2021, 100 (32) : E26708
  • [7] Laparoscopic versus robotic major hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ziogas, Ioannis A.
    Giannis, Dimitrios
    Esagian, Stepan M.
    Economopoulos, Konstantinos P.
    Tohme, Samer
    Geller, David A.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2021, 35 (02): : 524 - 535
  • [8] Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for malignancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Hu, Yingnan
    Guo, Kaibo
    Xu, Jingming
    Xia, Taotao
    Wang, Tingting
    Liu, Nan
    Fu, Yongqing
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 44 (04) : 615 - 628
  • [9] Outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Montalti, Roberto
    Berardi, Giammauro
    Patriti, Alberto
    Vivarelli, Marco
    Troisi, Roberto Ivan
    WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2015, 21 (27) : 8441 - 8451
  • [10] Pure Laparoscopic Right Hepatectomy in a Living Donor
    Soubrane, O.
    Cotta, F. Perdigao
    Scatton, O.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, 2013, 13 (09) : 2467 - 2471