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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Lian, Li, Bo, Zeng, Lianli, Zhao, Jiani, Lei, Jun, Luo, Hongliang, Yi, Fengming, Zhang, Wenxiong
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