Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional video-assisted hepatectomy for liver disease: a meta-analysis of clinical data

INTRODUCTION: The benefit of three-dimensional (3D) visualization for liver disease is uncertain. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of 3D versus two-dimensional (2D) video-assisted hepatectomy for LD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science for studies addressing 3D versus 2D for 2D until 30 February 2020. Study-specific effect sizes and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined to calculate the pooled value using a fixed-effects or random-effects model. RESULTS: Nine studies with 808 patients were included. The 3D group had shorter operative time (mean difference (MD) = 34.39; 95% CI = 59.50, 9.28), experienced less intraoperative blood loss (MD = 106.55; 95% CI = 183.76, 29.34), and a smaller blood transfusion volume (MD = 88.25; 95% CI = 141.26, 35.24). The 3D group had a smaller difference between the predicted volume and the actual resected volume (MD = 103.25; 95% CI = 173.24, 33.26) and a lower rate of postoperative complications (odds ratio (OR) = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: During surgery, 3D video-assisted hepatectomy could effectively reduce operative time, intraoperative bleeding, and blood transfusion volume, and had a smaller difference between the predicted volume and the actual resected volume and a lower rate of postoperative complications. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to verify the reliability and validity of our conclusion.