A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic and open liver resection.
Journal
HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association
ISSN: 1477-2574
Titre abrégé: HPB (Oxford)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100900921
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2021
10 2021
Historique:
received:
12
02
2021
revised:
04
03
2021
accepted:
05
03
2021
pubmed:
7
4
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
6
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The dissemination of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been based on non-randomized studies and reviews of these. Aim of this study was to evaluate if the randomized evidence comparing LLR to open liver resection (OLR) supports these findings. A prospectively registered (reviewregistry866) systematic review and meta-analysis following Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines comparing LLR to OLR for benign and malignant diseases was performed via Medline, Web of Science, CENTRAL up to 31.12.2020. The main outcome was postoperative complications. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0, certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. The search yielded 2080 results. 13 RCTs assessing mostly minor liver resections with 1457 patients were included. There were reduced odds of experiencing any complication (Odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0·42 [0·30, 0·58]) and severe complications (OR[CI]: 0·51 [0·31, 0·84]) for patients undergoing LLR. LOS was shorter (Mean difference (MD) [CI]: -2·90 [-3·88, -1·92] days), blood loss was lower (MD: [CI]: -115·41 [-146·08, -84·75] ml), and functional recovery was better for LLR. All other outcomes showed no significant differences. LLR shows significant postoperative benefits. RCTs assessing long-term outcomes and major resections are needed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
The dissemination of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has been based on non-randomized studies and reviews of these. Aim of this study was to evaluate if the randomized evidence comparing LLR to open liver resection (OLR) supports these findings.
METHODS
A prospectively registered (reviewregistry866) systematic review and meta-analysis following Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines comparing LLR to OLR for benign and malignant diseases was performed via Medline, Web of Science, CENTRAL up to 31.12.2020. The main outcome was postoperative complications. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0, certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
The search yielded 2080 results. 13 RCTs assessing mostly minor liver resections with 1457 patients were included. There were reduced odds of experiencing any complication (Odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0·42 [0·30, 0·58]) and severe complications (OR[CI]: 0·51 [0·31, 0·84]) for patients undergoing LLR. LOS was shorter (Mean difference (MD) [CI]: -2·90 [-3·88, -1·92] days), blood loss was lower (MD: [CI]: -115·41 [-146·08, -84·75] ml), and functional recovery was better for LLR. All other outcomes showed no significant differences.
CONCLUSIONS
LLR shows significant postoperative benefits. RCTs assessing long-term outcomes and major resections are needed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33820689
pii: S1365-182X(21)00073-3
doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.03.006
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1467-1481Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.