Archivos espanoles de urologia · 2025
Comparison of Single-Port and Multiple-Port Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Le Na, Zhuang Xiaping, Yan Yanan, Li Ke
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review was to collate and critically appraise the nascent body of evidence juxtaposing the da Vinci single-port (SP) system with its multiple-port (MP) antecedent, with the goal of ascertaining its surgical efficacy and postoperative outcomes.
METHODS: The databases searched included PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Two independent reviewers conducted the initial screening for potential inclusion, assessed the quality of the studies via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and extracted relevant data. A third reviewer was responsible for reconciling the data. Random effects models were utilized.
RESULTS: The final meta-analysis included eight studies, encompassing a cohort of 1389 patients, with 502 patients allocated to the SP group and 887 to the multiple-port group. We observed no significant differences in operative duration (WMD: 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI): -7.44-7.67), blood loss (weighted mean difference (WMD): -11.50, 95% CI: -28.89-5.90), positive surgical margins (odds ratio (OR): 0.80, 95% CI: 0.59-1.08), complications (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.77-2.16), urinary continence (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.86-1.62), or erectile function (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.58-1.24) between the two procedural types. The meta-analysis revealed a mean difference of -0.86 days (95% CI: -1.64 to -0.08), suggesting a tendency toward shorter hospitalization for the SP group.
CONCLUSIONS: The da Vinci SP system presents itself as a formidable contender when juxtaposed with its MP counterparts. Notwithstanding the encouraging preliminary data, a more substantial evidence base is needed to ascertain the definitive role of the SP system within the domain of urological surgery.
METHODS: The databases searched included PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Two independent reviewers conducted the initial screening for potential inclusion, assessed the quality of the studies via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and extracted relevant data. A third reviewer was responsible for reconciling the data. Random effects models were utilized.
RESULTS: The final meta-analysis included eight studies, encompassing a cohort of 1389 patients, with 502 patients allocated to the SP group and 887 to the multiple-port group. We observed no significant differences in operative duration (WMD: 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI): -7.44-7.67), blood loss (weighted mean difference (WMD): -11.50, 95% CI: -28.89-5.90), positive surgical margins (odds ratio (OR): 0.80, 95% CI: 0.59-1.08), complications (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.77-2.16), urinary continence (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.86-1.62), or erectile function (OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.58-1.24) between the two procedural types. The meta-analysis revealed a mean difference of -0.86 days (95% CI: -1.64 to -0.08), suggesting a tendency toward shorter hospitalization for the SP group.
CONCLUSIONS: The da Vinci SP system presents itself as a formidable contender when juxtaposed with its MP counterparts. Notwithstanding the encouraging preliminary data, a more substantial evidence base is needed to ascertain the definitive role of the SP system within the domain of urological surgery.