Cargando…

Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: Malignancy of the liver has historically meant a poor prognosis and remains the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Traditionally, hepatectomy has utilized the clamp-crush technique; however, this is associated with high incidence of postoperative complications. M...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: El-Koubani, Osman, McCann, Mark, Christmas, Daniel, Khanna, Aakash, von Maydell, Alexander
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6719484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31432783
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13437
_version_ 1783447945135259648
author El-Koubani, Osman
McCann, Mark
Christmas, Daniel
Khanna, Aakash
von Maydell, Alexander
author_facet El-Koubani, Osman
McCann, Mark
Christmas, Daniel
Khanna, Aakash
von Maydell, Alexander
author_sort El-Koubani, Osman
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Malignancy of the liver has historically meant a poor prognosis and remains the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Traditionally, hepatectomy has utilized the clamp-crush technique; however, this is associated with high incidence of postoperative complications. Many novel techniques have been developed—radiofrequency ablation and transarterial chemoembolization; however, these are not applicable to numerous cases. Clamp-crush liver resection (CCLR) remains the gold standard. Radiofrequency-assisted liver resection (RFLR) is a technique that aims to reduce mortality through bloodless liver resection. A systematic review was previously performed on RFLR but the results neither recommended nor refuted the use of RFLR owing to the lack of sufficient evidence from well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the time. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is the meta-analysis and systematic review of recent studies comparing RFLR against CCLR. METHODS: Articles comparing RFLR and CCLR that were published from 2014 until 2019 will be reviewed and relevant data will be extracted and statistically analyzed through Review Manager 5 (by the Cochrane Collaboration) together with the results of the previous meta-analysis. RESULTS: Data collection is currently underway, with papers being screened. We hope to publish the results by the end of 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high mortality rates currently associated with liver resection, it is imperative that novel surgical techniques are undertaken and investigated so we can improve best practice guidance and outcomes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13437
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6719484
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67194842019-09-19 Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review El-Koubani, Osman McCann, Mark Christmas, Daniel Khanna, Aakash von Maydell, Alexander JMIR Res Protoc Protocol BACKGROUND: Malignancy of the liver has historically meant a poor prognosis and remains the second most common cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Traditionally, hepatectomy has utilized the clamp-crush technique; however, this is associated with high incidence of postoperative complications. Many novel techniques have been developed—radiofrequency ablation and transarterial chemoembolization; however, these are not applicable to numerous cases. Clamp-crush liver resection (CCLR) remains the gold standard. Radiofrequency-assisted liver resection (RFLR) is a technique that aims to reduce mortality through bloodless liver resection. A systematic review was previously performed on RFLR but the results neither recommended nor refuted the use of RFLR owing to the lack of sufficient evidence from well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the time. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is the meta-analysis and systematic review of recent studies comparing RFLR against CCLR. METHODS: Articles comparing RFLR and CCLR that were published from 2014 until 2019 will be reviewed and relevant data will be extracted and statistically analyzed through Review Manager 5 (by the Cochrane Collaboration) together with the results of the previous meta-analysis. RESULTS: Data collection is currently underway, with papers being screened. We hope to publish the results by the end of 2019. CONCLUSIONS: Given the high mortality rates currently associated with liver resection, it is imperative that novel surgical techniques are undertaken and investigated so we can improve best practice guidance and outcomes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13437 JMIR Publications 2019-08-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6719484/ /pubmed/31432783 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13437 Text en ©Osman El-Koubani, Mark McCann, Daniel Christmas, Aakash Khanna, Alexander von Maydell. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 20.08.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Protocol
El-Koubani, Osman
McCann, Mark
Christmas, Daniel
Khanna, Aakash
von Maydell, Alexander
Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
title Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
title_full Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
title_fullStr Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
title_full_unstemmed Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
title_short Radiofrequency-Assisted Liver Resection Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: Protocol for an Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
title_sort radiofrequency-assisted liver resection versus clamp-crush liver resection: protocol for an updated meta-analysis and systematic review
topic Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6719484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31432783
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13437
work_keys_str_mv AT elkoubaniosman radiofrequencyassistedliverresectionversusclampcrushliverresectionprotocolforanupdatedmetaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT mccannmark radiofrequencyassistedliverresectionversusclampcrushliverresectionprotocolforanupdatedmetaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT christmasdaniel radiofrequencyassistedliverresectionversusclampcrushliverresectionprotocolforanupdatedmetaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT khannaaakash radiofrequencyassistedliverresectionversusclampcrushliverresectionprotocolforanupdatedmetaanalysisandsystematicreview
AT vonmaydellalexander radiofrequencyassistedliverresectionversusclampcrushliverresectionprotocolforanupdatedmetaanalysisandsystematicreview