Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A
-
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A · Oct 2020
Meta Analysis Comparative StudyLaparoscopic Liver Surgery: What Are the Advantages in Patients with Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Personal Experience.
Background: Laparoscopic surgery is a choice of treatment for liver diseases; it can decrease postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay (LOS). Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension may benefit from minimally invasive liver resections (MILRs) instead of open liver resections (OLRs). Whether minimally invasive approaches are superior to conventional ones is still a matter of debate. ⋯ Accordingly, patients who had undergone MILRs had significantly shorter postoperative hospitalization than patients who underwent conventional open surgery (2.4-36 days versus 4.2-19 days P < .00001). Both groups did not differ in terms of mortality rate and radicality of resection (OLR 93.8% versus 96.1% laparoscopic liver resection, P = .12). Conclusions: Based on the available evidence in the literature, laparoscopic resections rather than open liver ones for HCC surgery in cirrhotic patients seem to reduce postoperative overall morbidity, liver-specific complications, and LOS. The lack of randomized studies on this topic precludes the possibility of achieving defining statements.
-
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A · Apr 2020
Meta Analysis Comparative StudyIntracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Laparoscopic Right Colectomy: An Updated Systematic Review and Cumulative Meta-Analysis.
Purpose: The effect of intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) versus extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and functional outcomes of IA compared with EA and to explore the timely tendency variations favoring one treatment over another. Materials and Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were consulted. ⋯ The time to first flatus, time to defecation, time to liquid diet, and hospital length of stay were estimated to be lower. A statistically significant timely trend favoring IA was noticed for postoperative infectious complications, overall complications, and recovery parameters. Further studies are warranted to confirm these results and to deeply investigate the supposed timely tendency convergence in favor of IA.
-
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A · Sep 2019
Meta AnalysisLightweight Versus Heavyweight Mesh in Laparoscopic Inguinal Hernia Repair: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.
Background: There is no consensus on whether lightweight mesh (LWM) is better than heavyweight mesh (HWM) in laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR). This study aims to update the previous reviews and to analyze present randomized controlled studies comparing LWM versus HWM in LIHR systematically. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which compared LWM with HWM in adults with LIHR. All eligible data of outcomes were quantitatively analyzed using Revman 5.3 software or qualitatively described. ⋯ Compared with HWM group, patients in LWM group had a similar risk of postoperative moderate-severe chronic pain at 3 and 12 months follow-up, a slightly increased risk of developing moderate-severe chronic pain at >12 months follow-up (risk ratio [RR] = 3.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-9.75, P = .04), and a higher risk of recurrence rate (RR = 2.28, 95% CI 1.17-4.44, P = .02). At long-term follow-up, the influences of LWM and HWM on sexual life and male fertility were comparable. Conclusion: LWMs do not show advantages in chronic pain, foreign body sensation as well as the influence on sexual life and male fertility, and may increase hernia recurrence rates for LIHR. In addition, a higher incremental cost and lower incremental effect of LWMs make conventional HWMs preferred choice for LIHR.
-
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A · May 2019
Meta AnalysisA Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis: Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Three Surgery Procedures Following Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer.
Aim: Our aim was to perform a Bayesian network meta-analysis of short-term and long-term outcomes of open surgery (OS), laparoscopic surgery (LS), and robotic surgery (RS) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for rectal cancer. Methods: We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs published up to October 2018 from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. We selected studies referencing the comparison between at least two of OS, LS, and RS. Short-term and long-term outcomes of different surgery procedures were evaluated. ⋯ Our meta-analysis illustrated that RS had the longest operative time. However, LS had a significantly shorter operative time than RS, shorter incision than OS, shorter time to pass first flatus than OS, and less blood loss than OS. Conclusions: RS was regarded as the inferior surgery procedure after nCRT for rectal cancer. Meanwhile, LS might possibly be the most safe and feasible surgery procedure after nCRT for rectal cancer.
-
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A · Apr 2019
Review Meta AnalysisMinimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis of Comparative Cohort Studies.
This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to summarize available evidence comparing totally minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (TMIPD) versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) Materials and Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for comparative cohort studies published from January 1990 through April 2018 comparing TMIPD versus OPD. Outcomes evaluated were postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), postoperative hemorrhage, wound infection, estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, retrieved lymph nodes (RLNs), R0 rate, reoperation rate, length of hospital stay, and mortality. Statistical analysis was performed with Review Manager, version 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration). ⋯ TMIPD appears to be as safe and effective as OPD for periampullary disease. These findings need confirmation with large volume well-designed randomized controlled trials.