Cargando…

Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis

Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy and open simple prostatectomy for large benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods: We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Science databases for studies published through December 2020. Cont...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xia, Zhongyou, Li, Jinze, Yang, Xiaoying, Jing, Hao, Niu, Chao, Li, Xianhui, Li, Yunxiang, Zhang, Zongping, Wu, Ji
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8330838/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34355017
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.695318
_version_ 1783732803704193024
author Xia, Zhongyou
Li, Jinze
Yang, Xiaoying
Jing, Hao
Niu, Chao
Li, Xianhui
Li, Yunxiang
Zhang, Zongping
Wu, Ji
author_facet Xia, Zhongyou
Li, Jinze
Yang, Xiaoying
Jing, Hao
Niu, Chao
Li, Xianhui
Li, Yunxiang
Zhang, Zongping
Wu, Ji
author_sort Xia, Zhongyou
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy and open simple prostatectomy for large benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods: We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Science databases for studies published through December 2020. Controlled trials on RASP and OSP for large prostates were included. The meta-analysis was conducted with the Review Manager 5.4 software. Results: A total of seven studies with 3,777 patients were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in IPSS (WMD, 0.72; 95%CI: −0.31, 1.76; P = 0.17), QoL (WMD, 0.00; 95%CI: −0.39, 0.39; P > 0.99), Qmax (WMD, 1.88; 95% CI: −1.15, 4.91; P = 0.22), or PVR (WMD, −10.48; 95%CI: −25.13, 4.17; P = 0.16) among patients undergoing RASP and OSP. However, compared with patients who underwent OSP, patients who underwent RASP had a shorter LOS (WMD, −2.83; 95%CI: −3.68, −1.98; P < 0.001), less EBL (WMD, −304.68; 95% CI: −432.91, −176.44; P < 0.001), a shorter CT (WMD, −2.61; 95%CI: −3.94, −1.29; P < 0.001), and fewer overall complications (OR, 0.30; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.57; P < 0.001). Nevertheless, RASP was associated with a longer OT (WMD, 59.69, 95% CI: 49.40, 69.98; P < 0.001). Conclusion: The results of the current study demonstrated that RASP provided similar efficacy to those of OSP in the treatment of large prostate, while maintaining better security. Our findings indicate that RASP is a feasible and effective alternative to OSP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8330838
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83308382021-08-04 Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis Xia, Zhongyou Li, Jinze Yang, Xiaoying Jing, Hao Niu, Chao Li, Xianhui Li, Yunxiang Zhang, Zongping Wu, Ji Front Surg Surgery Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy and open simple prostatectomy for large benign prostatic hyperplasia. Methods: We systematically searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Science databases for studies published through December 2020. Controlled trials on RASP and OSP for large prostates were included. The meta-analysis was conducted with the Review Manager 5.4 software. Results: A total of seven studies with 3,777 patients were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences in IPSS (WMD, 0.72; 95%CI: −0.31, 1.76; P = 0.17), QoL (WMD, 0.00; 95%CI: −0.39, 0.39; P > 0.99), Qmax (WMD, 1.88; 95% CI: −1.15, 4.91; P = 0.22), or PVR (WMD, −10.48; 95%CI: −25.13, 4.17; P = 0.16) among patients undergoing RASP and OSP. However, compared with patients who underwent OSP, patients who underwent RASP had a shorter LOS (WMD, −2.83; 95%CI: −3.68, −1.98; P < 0.001), less EBL (WMD, −304.68; 95% CI: −432.91, −176.44; P < 0.001), a shorter CT (WMD, −2.61; 95%CI: −3.94, −1.29; P < 0.001), and fewer overall complications (OR, 0.30; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.57; P < 0.001). Nevertheless, RASP was associated with a longer OT (WMD, 59.69, 95% CI: 49.40, 69.98; P < 0.001). Conclusion: The results of the current study demonstrated that RASP provided similar efficacy to those of OSP in the treatment of large prostate, while maintaining better security. Our findings indicate that RASP is a feasible and effective alternative to OSP. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-07-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8330838/ /pubmed/34355017 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.695318 Text en Copyright © 2021 Xia, Li, Yang, Jing, Niu, Li, Li, Zhang and Wu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Xia, Zhongyou
Li, Jinze
Yang, Xiaoying
Jing, Hao
Niu, Chao
Li, Xianhui
Li, Yunxiang
Zhang, Zongping
Wu, Ji
Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis
title Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis
title_full Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis
title_short Robotic-Assisted vs. Open Simple Prostatectomy for Large Prostates: A Meta-Analysis
title_sort robotic-assisted vs. open simple prostatectomy for large prostates: a meta-analysis
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8330838/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34355017
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.695318
work_keys_str_mv AT xiazhongyou roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT lijinze roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT yangxiaoying roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT jinghao roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT niuchao roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT lixianhui roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT liyunxiang roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT zhangzongping roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis
AT wuji roboticassistedvsopensimpleprostatectomyforlargeprostatesametaanalysis