Perioperative safety of minimally invasive and open pancreaticoduodenectomy: a Meta analysis
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1673-9752.2014.09.007
- VernacularTitle:微创与开腹胰十二指肠切除术围手术期安全性的Meta分析
- Author:
Purun LEI
;
Jiafeng FANG
;
Bo WEI
;
Hongbo WEI
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Pancreaticoduodenectomy;
Laparoscopy;
Robotic surgical system;
Meta analysis
- From:
Chinese Journal of Digestive Surgery
2014;13(9):694-701
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the perioperative safety of minimally invasive and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).Methods The China National Knowledge Infrastructure,VIP,PubMed,The Cochrane Library and EMBASE were searched with the key words of laparoscopic,laparoscopy,robotic,da Vinci,minimally invasive,pancreaticoduodenectomy,微创,腹腔境,机器人,胰十二指肠切除术 to retrieve literatures on minimally invasive and open pancreaticoduodenectomy.All the patients were divided into the minimally invasive PD group and the open PD group,and the patients in the minimally invasive PD group were further divided into the robotic PD group and the laparoscopic PD group.A meta analysis was carried out using the RevMan 5.2 software.The count data were represented by the odds ratio (OR) and 95％ confidence interval (95％ CI),and the measurement data were represented by the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95 ％ CI.Heterogeneity of the publication was analyzed using chi-square test,and the publication bias was analyzed using the funnel plots.The stability of results was analyzed using the sensitivity analysis.Results Ten literatures including 690 patients were selected.There were 235 patients in the minimally invasive PD group,and 455 in the open PD group; 107 patients were in the robotic PD group and 128 in the laparoscopic PD group.There were no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications,pancreatic fistula,delayed gastric emptying,postoperative hemorrhage,bile leakage,reoperation,mortality and number of lymph nodes dissected between the minimally invasive PD group and the open PD group (OR =0.75,1.01,0.98,1.50,0.94,0.56,1.06,WMD =2.29,95％ CI:0.40-1.41,0.67-1.53,0.55-1.77,0.76-2.94,0.37-2.38,0.26-1.20,0.48-2.32,-0.55-5.13,P ＞ 0.05).Although the operation time of the minimally invasive PD group was significantly longer than the open PD group,lesser volume of blood loss,shorter duration of postoperative hospital stay and higher R0 resection rate was detected in the minimally invasive PD group (WMD =99.57,-355.70,-3.30,OR =0.49,95％ CI:36.99-162.15,-608.38--103.01,-6.58-0.03,0.26-0.92,P ＜ 0.05).The operation time of the laparoscopic PD group was significantly longer than that of the open PD group (WMD =93.17,95％ CI:55.98-130.37,P ＜ 0.05).The operation time of the robotic PD group was comparable to that of the open PD group (WMD =122.96,95％ CI:-48.48-294.40,P ＞ 0.05).There was no significant difference in the duration of postoperative hospital stay between the laparoscopic PD group and the open PD group (WMD =-0.81,95％ CI:-5.08-3.45,P ＞ 0.05).The operation time of the robotic PD group was significantly shorter than that of the open PD group (WMD=-6.82,95％CI:-13.21--0.44,P＜0.05).Conclusions The perioperative safety of minimally invasive PD was comparable to open PD.Minimally invasive PD has the advantages of lesser blood loss and quick recovery of patients.Robotic PD could significantly decrease the operation time.Minimally invasive PD could be a reasonable alternative when the requirement of indications is fulfilled.
