Cargando…
Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Both 3-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and 2-dimensional (2D) LG are commonly used for gastric cancer (GC). To investigate their safety and efficacy, we performed this meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6919538/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31804348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018222 |
_version_ | 1783480772870537216 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Lian Li, Bo Zeng, Lianli Zhao, Jiani Lei, Jun Luo, Hongliang Yi, Fengming Zhang, Wenxiong |
author_facet | Chen, Lian Li, Bo Zeng, Lianli Zhao, Jiani Lei, Jun Luo, Hongliang Yi, Fengming Zhang, Wenxiong |
author_sort | Chen, Lian |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Both 3-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and 2-dimensional (2D) LG are commonly used for gastric cancer (GC). To investigate their safety and efficacy, we performed this meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The total number of lymph node dissections (LNDs), operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and hospitalization cost were extracted as major endpoints. RESULTS: Among 904 articles that were enrolled, 9 studies were included for analysis. The 3D group was observed to have shorter operation times [95% confidence interval (CI): −0.54 to −0.06; P = .01] and less blood loss (95% CI: −0.41 to −0.19; P < .00001) than the 2D group. Compared with the 2D group, slightly higher hospitalization cost was found in the 3D group (95% CI: 0.06–0.37; P = .008). However, the outcomes among the total LNDs, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were similar. Subgroup analysis suggested that the 3D LG group had more 11p (2.22 ± 1.80 vs 1.47 ± 1.99, P = .019) and 8a (2.52 ± 1.88 vs 1.48 ± 1.43, P = .001) LNDs compared to the 2D LG group. CONCLUSIONS: 3D LG has advantages for GC, with shorter operation times, less blood loss, and possibly more LNDs. However, the cost was slightly higher than that of 2D LG. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6919538 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69195382020-01-23 Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis Chen, Lian Li, Bo Zeng, Lianli Zhao, Jiani Lei, Jun Luo, Hongliang Yi, Fengming Zhang, Wenxiong Medicine (Baltimore) 5700 BACKGROUND: Both 3-dimensional (3D) laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and 2-dimensional (2D) LG are commonly used for gastric cancer (GC). To investigate their safety and efficacy, we performed this meta-analysis. METHODS: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The total number of lymph node dissections (LNDs), operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and hospitalization cost were extracted as major endpoints. RESULTS: Among 904 articles that were enrolled, 9 studies were included for analysis. The 3D group was observed to have shorter operation times [95% confidence interval (CI): −0.54 to −0.06; P = .01] and less blood loss (95% CI: −0.41 to −0.19; P < .00001) than the 2D group. Compared with the 2D group, slightly higher hospitalization cost was found in the 3D group (95% CI: 0.06–0.37; P = .008). However, the outcomes among the total LNDs, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications were similar. Subgroup analysis suggested that the 3D LG group had more 11p (2.22 ± 1.80 vs 1.47 ± 1.99, P = .019) and 8a (2.52 ± 1.88 vs 1.48 ± 1.43, P = .001) LNDs compared to the 2D LG group. CONCLUSIONS: 3D LG has advantages for GC, with shorter operation times, less blood loss, and possibly more LNDs. However, the cost was slightly higher than that of 2D LG. Wolters Kluwer Health 2019-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6919538/ /pubmed/31804348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018222 Text en Copyright © 2019 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 |
spellingShingle | 5700 Chen, Lian Li, Bo Zeng, Lianli Zhao, Jiani Lei, Jun Luo, Hongliang Yi, Fengming Zhang, Wenxiong Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | three-dimensional vs 2-dimensional laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | 5700 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6919538/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31804348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000018222 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenlian threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT libo threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zenglianli threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhaojiani threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT leijun threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT luohongliang threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yifengming threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhangwenxiong threedimensionalvs2dimensionallaparoscopicgastrectomyforgastriccancerasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |