Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery · 2021
Does robotic-assisted thymectomy have advantages over video-assisted thymectomy in short-term outcomes? A systematic view and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wu Wen-Jie, Zhang Fu-Yu, Xiao Qin, Li Xiao-Kun
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: A thymic epithelial tumour is the most common primary tumour in the anterior mediastinum of adults. A few retrospective studies compared the short-term outcomes between robotic-assisted thymectomy (RAT) and video-assisted thymectomy (VAT). So, it is necessary to conduct a meta-analysis to further compare these 2 surgical techniques.
METHODS: EMBASE, Medline and Web of Science were used. Thesaurus terms and medical subject headings were used in Medline and EMBASE, respectively. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for grading because the included studies were all case-control studies.
RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 723 patients, including 315 patients in the RAT group and 408 patients in the VAT group. The meta-analysis [odds ratio (OR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.94; P = 0.041], indicating that RAT yielded a significantly lower rate of conversion compared with VAT. Duration of drainage with RAT was significantly less than that with VAT (weighted mean difference = -1.10; 95% CI -1.98 to -0.22; P = 0.014). The pooled analysis (weighted mean difference = -103.6; 95% CI -199.21 to -7.98; P = 0.034) suggested that patients in the RAT group had less drainage than those in the VAT group. The recurrence rates in both groups were comparable (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.03-1.20; P = 0.078).
CONCLUSIONS: RAT has advantages over VAT in terms of short-term outcomes such as shorter duration of drainage, less total drainage and a lower rate of conversion. The recurrence rate was comparable between the 2 techniques. Therefore, RAT could be considered as an alternative treatment for diseases of the thymus.
METHODS: EMBASE, Medline and Web of Science were used. Thesaurus terms and medical subject headings were used in Medline and EMBASE, respectively. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for grading because the included studies were all case-control studies.
RESULTS: Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis with a total of 723 patients, including 315 patients in the RAT group and 408 patients in the VAT group. The meta-analysis [odds ratio (OR) 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.94; P = 0.041], indicating that RAT yielded a significantly lower rate of conversion compared with VAT. Duration of drainage with RAT was significantly less than that with VAT (weighted mean difference = -1.10; 95% CI -1.98 to -0.22; P = 0.014). The pooled analysis (weighted mean difference = -103.6; 95% CI -199.21 to -7.98; P = 0.034) suggested that patients in the RAT group had less drainage than those in the VAT group. The recurrence rates in both groups were comparable (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.03-1.20; P = 0.078).
CONCLUSIONS: RAT has advantages over VAT in terms of short-term outcomes such as shorter duration of drainage, less total drainage and a lower rate of conversion. The recurrence rate was comparable between the 2 techniques. Therefore, RAT could be considered as an alternative treatment for diseases of the thymus.