Safety and feasibility for laparoscopic versus open caudate lobe resection: a meta-analysis
- 6 January 2021
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Langenbecks Archiv für Chirurgie
- Vol. 406 (5), 1307-1316
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-020-02055-y
Abstract
Background Laparoscopic hepatectomy has been used widely due to its advantages as a minimally invasive surgery. However, multicenter, large-scale, population-based laparoscopic caudate lobe resection (LCLR) versus open caudate lobe resection (OCLR) has rarely been reported. We assessed the feasibility and safety of LCLR compared with OCLR using meta-analysis. Methods Relevant literature was retrieved using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, Web of Science, CNKI, and WanFang Med databases up to July 30th, 2020. Multiple parameters of feasibility and safety were compared between the treatment groups. Quality of studies was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3. Results are expressed as odds ratio (OD) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for fixed- and random-effects models. Results Seven studies with 237 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with OCLR, the LCLR group had a lower intraoperative blood loss (MD − 180.84; 95% CI − 225.61 to − 136.07; P < 0.0001), shorter postoperative hospital stays (MD − 4.38; 95% CI − 7.07 to − 1.7; P = 0.001), shorter operative time (MD − 50.24; 95% CI − 78.57 to − 21.92; P = 0.0005), and lower rates in intraoperative blood transfusion (OR 0.12; P = 0.01). However, there were no statistically significant differences between LCLR and OCLR regarding hospital expenses (MD 0.92; P = 0.12), pedicle clamping (OR 1.57; P = 0.32), postoperative complications (OR 0.58; P = 0.15), bile leak (P = 0.88), ascites (P = 0.34), and incisional infection (P = 0.36). Conclusions LCLR has multiple advantages over OCLR, especially intraoperative blood loss and hospital stays. LCLR is a very useful technology and feasible choice in patients with caudate lobe lesions.Funding Information
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (81760514)
- Science and Technology Plan Project of Jiangxi Provincial Health Commission (20175203)
This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- Efficacy of Anti-Leishmania Therapy in Visceral Leishmaniasis among HIV Infected Patients: A Systematic Review with Indirect ComparisonPLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 2013
- Laparoscopic Caudate Hepatectomy for Cancer—An Innovative Approach to the No-Man’s LandJournal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2013
- Pure laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma with chronic liver diseaseWorld Journal of Hepatology, 2013
- Laparoscopic versus open right hepatectomy: a comparative studyThe American Journal of Surgery, 2009
- Laparoscopic liver sectionectomy 2 and 3 (LLS 2 and 3): towards the “gold standard”Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery, 2009
- Application of devices for safe laparoscopic hepatectomyHPB, 2008
- The Use of Endo-GIA Vascular Staplers in Liver Surgery and Their Potential Benefit:A ReviewDigestive Surgery, 2007
- Outcome of patients with huge hepatocellular carcinoma after primary resection and treatment of recurrent lesionsBritish Journal of Surgery, 2007
- Isolated Laparoscopic Resection of the Hepatic Caudate Lobe: Surgical Technique and a Report of 2 CasesSurgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 2006
- Laparoscopic vs open hepatic resection: a comparative studySurgical Endoscopy, 2003