Minimally invasive preservation versus splenectomy during distal pancreatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Nakata Kohei, Shikata Satoru, Ohtsuka Takao, Ukai Tomohiko, Miyasaka Yoshihiro, Mori Yasuhisa, Velasquez Vittoria Vanessa D M, Gotoh Yoshitaka, Ban Daisuke, Nakamura Yoshiharu, Nagakawa Yuichi, Tanabe Minoru, Sahara Yatsuka, Takaori Kyoichi, Honda Goro, Misawa Takeyuki, Kawai Manabu, Yamaue Hiroki, Morikawa Takanori, Kuroki Tamotsu, Mou Yiping, Lee Woo-Jung, Shrikhande Shailesh V, Tang Chung Ngai, Conrad Claudius, Han Ho-Seong, Chinnusamy Palanivelu, Asbun Horacio J, Kooby David A, Wakabayashi Go, Takada Tadahiro, Yamamoto Masakazu, Nakamura Masafumi
Аннотация
METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed (MEDLINE) and Cochrane Library was conducted and the reference lists of review articles were hand-searched.
RESULTS: Fifteen relevant studies with 769 patients were selected for meta-analyses of DPS and SPDP, while another 15 studies with 841 patients were used for the analysis between SVP and WT. Compared with the DPS group, SPDP patients had significantly lower incidences of infectious complications (P = 0.006) and pancreatic fistula (P = 0.002), shorter operative time (P < 0.001), and less blood loss (P = 0.01). Compared with WT, SVP patients had significantly lower incidences of splenic infarction (P < 0.001) and secondary splenectomy (P = 0.003). Subanalysis for laparoscopic surgery alone had similar results.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study, SPDP has significantly superior outcomes compared to DPS. When a spleen is preserved, SVP has better outcomes over WT for reducing splenic complications.