Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy

机器人辅助经鼻内镜手术与传统经鼻内镜手术在结直肠癌手术中的Meta分析:术后结果和疗效

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I(2) = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I(2) = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I(2) = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD =  - 0.35 days; 95% CI =  - 0.60 to - 0.10; P = 0.007, I(2) = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I(2) = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD =  - 0.56; 95% CI =  - 1.00 to - 0.11; P = 0.01, I(2) = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD =  - 1.23; 95% CI =  - 1.63 to - 0.83; P < 0.001, I(2) = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD =  - 5.78 ml; 95% CI =  - 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I(2) = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI =  - 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I(2) = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD =  - 0.47 day; 95% CI =  - 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I(2) = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I(2) = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I(2) = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I(2) = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。