Minimally invasive versus open living donors right hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Although minimally invasive technology has been widely used in hepatectomy, it remains controversial with regards to liver transplantation, especially in donors right hepatectomy. Herein, we compared the short-term safety and efficacy of minimally invasive donors right hepatectomy (MIDRH) with open...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of surgery (London, England) England), 2021-11, Vol.95, p.106152-106152, Article 106152 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 106152 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 106152 |
| container_title | International journal of surgery (London, England) |
| container_volume | 95 |
| creator | Zhao, Xin Lei, Zehua Gao, Fengwei Yang, Jie Xie, Qingyun Jiang, Kangyi Jie, Gong |
| description | Although minimally invasive technology has been widely used in hepatectomy, it remains controversial with regards to liver transplantation, especially in donors right hepatectomy. Herein, we compared the short-term safety and efficacy of minimally invasive donors right hepatectomy (MIDRH) with open donors right hepatectomy (ODRH).
A systematic literature search was carried out using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library database in order to identify comparison studies of MIDRH and ODRH. Next, we obtained the relevant data, and carried out the meta-analysis.
This meta-analysis included 12 studies, which included 1755 cases that underwent donors right hepatectomy. Compared to ODRH, patients that underwent MIDRH had less bleeding (SWD = −0.52, p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106152 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2585918001</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1743919121002879</els_id><sourcerecordid>2585918001</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-25a3b31851d776b795abc2e3d603b555a93bbc556654bfa02315d88742ef919e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1P3DAQhq0KVBbaP9BD5SOXLP6IE6fighBf0iIu9Gw5zix4lThbTxKUf49Xu90jpxmNnveV5iHkF2dLznhxtVn6DY5LwQRPh4Ir8Y0seJnLrOKqOjnuFT8j54gbxnKmuf5OzmReaF1JtiDw7IPvbNvO1IfJop-AThBxRNpvIdDWTz680aYPfUQa_dv7QN9hawdwQ9_Nf-gNxRkH6OzgHY0wefigNjS0g8FmNth2Ro8_yOnatgg_D_OC_L2_e719zFYvD0-3N6vM5YwNmVBW1pJrxZuyLOqyUrZ2AmRTMFkrpWwl69opVRQqr9eWCclVo3WZC1inN0FekMt97zb2_0bAwXQeHbStDdCPaITSquKaMZ5QsUdd7BEjrM02JhFxNpyZnV6zMTu9ZqfX7PWm0O9D_1h30Bwj_30m4HoPQPoyuYgGnYfgoPExGTNN77_q_wRsk4yr</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2585918001</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Minimally invasive versus open living donors right hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Zhao, Xin ; Lei, Zehua ; Gao, Fengwei ; Yang, Jie ; Xie, Qingyun ; Jiang, Kangyi ; Jie, Gong</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Xin ; Lei, Zehua ; Gao, Fengwei ; Yang, Jie ; Xie, Qingyun ; Jiang, Kangyi ; Jie, Gong</creatorcontrib><description>Although minimally invasive technology has been widely used in hepatectomy, it remains controversial with regards to liver transplantation, especially in donors right hepatectomy. Herein, we compared the short-term safety and efficacy of minimally invasive donors right hepatectomy (MIDRH) with open donors right hepatectomy (ODRH).
A systematic literature search was carried out using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library database in order to identify comparison studies of MIDRH and ODRH. Next, we obtained the relevant data, and carried out the meta-analysis.
This meta-analysis included 12 studies, which included 1755 cases that underwent donors right hepatectomy. Compared to ODRH, patients that underwent MIDRH had less bleeding (SWD = −0.52, p<0.001), shorter hospital stays (SWD = −0.58, p < 0.001) and lower overall postoperative complications of donors (RR = 0.74, p = 0.008). However, MIDRH was found to be associated with prolonged operative times (SWD = 0.74, p < 0.001), as well as a higher rate of biliary complications in donors (RR = 2.26, p = 0.007) and recipients (RR = 1.69, p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between MIDRH and ODRH in postoperative liver function, rate of major complications and vascular complications of both donors and recipients and overall postoperative complications.
MIDRH is superior to ODRH with regards to intraoperative bleeding, postoperative hospital stay and overall donor complications. Although biliary-related complications are higher, it is feasible to develop MIDRH in experienced liver transplant centers. However, higher-quality research is still needed for corroboration.
•The first meta-analysis evaluated the clinical outcomes of MIDRH comparing with ODRH.•MIDRH reduced intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay and overall complications.•The biliary complications of donors and recipients were higher in MIDRH than ODRH.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1743-9191</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1743-9159</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106152</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34688930</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Hepatectomy ; Hepatectomy - adverse effects ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Length of Stay ; Liver Transplantation - adverse effects ; Living donor ; Living Donors ; Minimally invasive ; Operative Time ; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology ; Postoperative Complications - etiology ; Tissue and Organ Harvesting</subject><ispartof>International journal of surgery (London, England), 2021-11, Vol.95, p.106152-106152, Article 106152</ispartof><rights>2021 IJS Publishing Group Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-25a3b31851d776b795abc2e3d603b555a93bbc556654bfa02315d88742ef919e3</citedby><orcidid>0000-0002-3935-5998</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106152$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34688930$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Xin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lei, Zehua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gao, Fengwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xie, Qingyun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Kangyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jie, Gong</creatorcontrib><title>Minimally invasive versus open living donors right hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>International journal of surgery (London, England)</title><addtitle>Int J Surg</addtitle><description>Although minimally invasive technology has been widely used in hepatectomy, it remains controversial with regards to liver transplantation, especially in donors right hepatectomy. Herein, we compared the short-term safety and efficacy of minimally invasive donors right hepatectomy (MIDRH) with open donors right hepatectomy (ODRH).
A systematic literature search was carried out using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library database in order to identify comparison studies of MIDRH and ODRH. Next, we obtained the relevant data, and carried out the meta-analysis.
This meta-analysis included 12 studies, which included 1755 cases that underwent donors right hepatectomy. Compared to ODRH, patients that underwent MIDRH had less bleeding (SWD = −0.52, p<0.001), shorter hospital stays (SWD = −0.58, p < 0.001) and lower overall postoperative complications of donors (RR = 0.74, p = 0.008). However, MIDRH was found to be associated with prolonged operative times (SWD = 0.74, p < 0.001), as well as a higher rate of biliary complications in donors (RR = 2.26, p = 0.007) and recipients (RR = 1.69, p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between MIDRH and ODRH in postoperative liver function, rate of major complications and vascular complications of both donors and recipients and overall postoperative complications.
MIDRH is superior to ODRH with regards to intraoperative bleeding, postoperative hospital stay and overall donor complications. Although biliary-related complications are higher, it is feasible to develop MIDRH in experienced liver transplant centers. However, higher-quality research is still needed for corroboration.
•The first meta-analysis evaluated the clinical outcomes of MIDRH comparing with ODRH.•MIDRH reduced intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay and overall complications.•The biliary complications of donors and recipients were higher in MIDRH than ODRH.</description><subject>Hepatectomy</subject><subject>Hepatectomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Liver Transplantation - adverse effects</subject><subject>Living donor</subject><subject>Living Donors</subject><subject>Minimally invasive</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - etiology</subject><subject>Tissue and Organ Harvesting</subject><issn>1743-9191</issn><issn>1743-9159</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1P3DAQhq0KVBbaP9BD5SOXLP6IE6fighBf0iIu9Gw5zix4lThbTxKUf49Xu90jpxmNnveV5iHkF2dLznhxtVn6DY5LwQRPh4Ir8Y0seJnLrOKqOjnuFT8j54gbxnKmuf5OzmReaF1JtiDw7IPvbNvO1IfJop-AThBxRNpvIdDWTz680aYPfUQa_dv7QN9hawdwQ9_Nf-gNxRkH6OzgHY0wefigNjS0g8FmNth2Ro8_yOnatgg_D_OC_L2_e719zFYvD0-3N6vM5YwNmVBW1pJrxZuyLOqyUrZ2AmRTMFkrpWwl69opVRQqr9eWCclVo3WZC1inN0FekMt97zb2_0bAwXQeHbStDdCPaITSquKaMZ5QsUdd7BEjrM02JhFxNpyZnV6zMTu9ZqfX7PWm0O9D_1h30Bwj_30m4HoPQPoyuYgGnYfgoPExGTNN77_q_wRsk4yr</recordid><startdate>202111</startdate><enddate>202111</enddate><creator>Zhao, Xin</creator><creator>Lei, Zehua</creator><creator>Gao, Fengwei</creator><creator>Yang, Jie</creator><creator>Xie, Qingyun</creator><creator>Jiang, Kangyi</creator><creator>Jie, Gong</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3935-5998</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202111</creationdate><title>Minimally invasive versus open living donors right hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Zhao, Xin ; Lei, Zehua ; Gao, Fengwei ; Yang, Jie ; Xie, Qingyun ; Jiang, Kangyi ; Jie, Gong</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-25a3b31851d776b795abc2e3d603b555a93bbc556654bfa02315d88742ef919e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Hepatectomy</topic><topic>Hepatectomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Liver Transplantation - adverse effects</topic><topic>Living donor</topic><topic>Living Donors</topic><topic>Minimally invasive</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - etiology</topic><topic>Tissue and Organ Harvesting</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhao, Xin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lei, Zehua</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gao, Fengwei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Jie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xie, Qingyun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Kangyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jie, Gong</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of surgery (London, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhao, Xin</au><au>Lei, Zehua</au><au>Gao, Fengwei</au><au>Yang, Jie</au><au>Xie, Qingyun</au><au>Jiang, Kangyi</au><au>Jie, Gong</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Minimally invasive versus open living donors right hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>International journal of surgery (London, England)</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Surg</addtitle><date>2021-11</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>95</volume><spage>106152</spage><epage>106152</epage><pages>106152-106152</pages><artnum>106152</artnum><issn>1743-9191</issn><eissn>1743-9159</eissn><abstract>Although minimally invasive technology has been widely used in hepatectomy, it remains controversial with regards to liver transplantation, especially in donors right hepatectomy. Herein, we compared the short-term safety and efficacy of minimally invasive donors right hepatectomy (MIDRH) with open donors right hepatectomy (ODRH).
A systematic literature search was carried out using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library database in order to identify comparison studies of MIDRH and ODRH. Next, we obtained the relevant data, and carried out the meta-analysis.
This meta-analysis included 12 studies, which included 1755 cases that underwent donors right hepatectomy. Compared to ODRH, patients that underwent MIDRH had less bleeding (SWD = −0.52, p<0.001), shorter hospital stays (SWD = −0.58, p < 0.001) and lower overall postoperative complications of donors (RR = 0.74, p = 0.008). However, MIDRH was found to be associated with prolonged operative times (SWD = 0.74, p < 0.001), as well as a higher rate of biliary complications in donors (RR = 2.26, p = 0.007) and recipients (RR = 1.69, p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between MIDRH and ODRH in postoperative liver function, rate of major complications and vascular complications of both donors and recipients and overall postoperative complications.
MIDRH is superior to ODRH with regards to intraoperative bleeding, postoperative hospital stay and overall donor complications. Although biliary-related complications are higher, it is feasible to develop MIDRH in experienced liver transplant centers. However, higher-quality research is still needed for corroboration.
•The first meta-analysis evaluated the clinical outcomes of MIDRH comparing with ODRH.•MIDRH reduced intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay and overall complications.•The biliary complications of donors and recipients were higher in MIDRH than ODRH.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>34688930</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106152</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3935-5998</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1743-9191 |
| ispartof | International journal of surgery (London, England), 2021-11, Vol.95, p.106152-106152, Article 106152 |
| issn | 1743-9191 1743-9159 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2585918001 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
| subjects | Hepatectomy Hepatectomy - adverse effects Humans Laparoscopy Length of Stay Liver Transplantation - adverse effects Living donor Living Donors Minimally invasive Operative Time Postoperative Complications - epidemiology Postoperative Complications - etiology Tissue and Organ Harvesting |
| title | Minimally invasive versus open living donors right hepatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T22%3A03%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Minimally%20invasive%20versus%20open%20living%20donors%20right%20hepatectomy:%20A%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20surgery%20(London,%20England)&rft.au=Zhao,%20Xin&rft.date=2021-11&rft.volume=95&rft.spage=106152&rft.epage=106152&rft.pages=106152-106152&rft.artnum=106152&rft.issn=1743-9191&rft.eissn=1743-9159&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106152&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2585918001%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2585918001&rft_id=info:pmid/34688930&rft_els_id=S1743919121002879&rfr_iscdi=true |