Cargando…

Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the perioperative and survival outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery, traditional laparoscopy, and laparotomy approaches in ovarian cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched usin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tang, Qin, Liu, Weichu, Jiang, Dan, Tang, Junying, Zhou, Qin, Zhang, Jing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9078848/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35535312
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/2084774
_version_ 1784702428481847296
author Tang, Qin
Liu, Weichu
Jiang, Dan
Tang, Junying
Zhou, Qin
Zhang, Jing
author_facet Tang, Qin
Liu, Weichu
Jiang, Dan
Tang, Junying
Zhou, Qin
Zhang, Jing
author_sort Tang, Qin
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the perioperative and survival outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery, traditional laparoscopy, and laparotomy approaches in ovarian cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched using multiple terms for ovarian cancer surgeries, including comparative studies in Chinese and English. Literatures are published before August 31, 2021. The outcomes include operating time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative/intraoperative/total complications, pelvic/para-aortic/total lymph nodes, transfusion, and five-year overall survival rate. The dichotomous data, continuous data, and OS data were pooled and reported as relative risk, standardized mean differences, and hazard ratio HRs with 95% confidence intervals, respectively. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the risk of bias of included studies. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies, including 8,367 patients and three different surgical approaches (robotic-assisted laparoscopy surgery, traditional laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches), were included in this network meta-analysis. Our analysis shows that the operating time of laparotomy was shorter than laparoscopy. The robotic-assisted laparoscopy has the least estimated blood loss during the surgery, followed by laparoscopy, and finally laparotomy. Compared with laparotomy, the incidence of blood transfusion was lower in the robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy groups, and the length of hospital stay is shorter. Laparotomy had a significantly higher incidence of total complications than robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy and higher postoperative complications than laparoscopy. For the number of pelvic/para-aortic/total lymph nodes removed by different surgical approaches, our analysis revealed no statistical difference. Our analysis also revealed no significant differences in intraoperative complications and 5-year OS among the three surgical approaches. CONCLUSION: Compared with laparotomy, robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy had a shorter hospital stay, decreased blood loss, fewer complications, and transfusion happened. The 5-year OS of ovarian cancer patients has no difference between robotic-assisted laparoscopy, laparoscopy, and laparotomy groups.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9078848
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90788482022-05-08 Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis Tang, Qin Liu, Weichu Jiang, Dan Tang, Junying Zhou, Qin Zhang, Jing J Oncol Research Article OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the perioperative and survival outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery, traditional laparoscopy, and laparotomy approaches in ovarian cancer. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched using multiple terms for ovarian cancer surgeries, including comparative studies in Chinese and English. Literatures are published before August 31, 2021. The outcomes include operating time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative/intraoperative/total complications, pelvic/para-aortic/total lymph nodes, transfusion, and five-year overall survival rate. The dichotomous data, continuous data, and OS data were pooled and reported as relative risk, standardized mean differences, and hazard ratio HRs with 95% confidence intervals, respectively. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the risk of bias of included studies. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies, including 8,367 patients and three different surgical approaches (robotic-assisted laparoscopy surgery, traditional laparoscopy, or laparotomy approaches), were included in this network meta-analysis. Our analysis shows that the operating time of laparotomy was shorter than laparoscopy. The robotic-assisted laparoscopy has the least estimated blood loss during the surgery, followed by laparoscopy, and finally laparotomy. Compared with laparotomy, the incidence of blood transfusion was lower in the robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy groups, and the length of hospital stay is shorter. Laparotomy had a significantly higher incidence of total complications than robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy and higher postoperative complications than laparoscopy. For the number of pelvic/para-aortic/total lymph nodes removed by different surgical approaches, our analysis revealed no statistical difference. Our analysis also revealed no significant differences in intraoperative complications and 5-year OS among the three surgical approaches. CONCLUSION: Compared with laparotomy, robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy had a shorter hospital stay, decreased blood loss, fewer complications, and transfusion happened. The 5-year OS of ovarian cancer patients has no difference between robotic-assisted laparoscopy, laparoscopy, and laparotomy groups. Hindawi 2022-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9078848/ /pubmed/35535312 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/2084774 Text en Copyright © 2022 Qin Tang et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Tang, Qin
Liu, Weichu
Jiang, Dan
Tang, Junying
Zhou, Qin
Zhang, Jing
Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis
title Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_full Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_short Perioperative and Survival Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery, Comparison with Laparoscopy and Laparotomy, for Ovarian Cancer: A Network Meta-Analysis
title_sort perioperative and survival outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery, comparison with laparoscopy and laparotomy, for ovarian cancer: a network meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9078848/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35535312
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/2084774
work_keys_str_mv AT tangqin perioperativeandsurvivaloutcomesofroboticassistedsurgerycomparisonwithlaparoscopyandlaparotomyforovariancanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT liuweichu perioperativeandsurvivaloutcomesofroboticassistedsurgerycomparisonwithlaparoscopyandlaparotomyforovariancanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT jiangdan perioperativeandsurvivaloutcomesofroboticassistedsurgerycomparisonwithlaparoscopyandlaparotomyforovariancanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT tangjunying perioperativeandsurvivaloutcomesofroboticassistedsurgerycomparisonwithlaparoscopyandlaparotomyforovariancanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT zhouqin perioperativeandsurvivaloutcomesofroboticassistedsurgerycomparisonwithlaparoscopyandlaparotomyforovariancanceranetworkmetaanalysis
AT zhangjing perioperativeandsurvivaloutcomesofroboticassistedsurgerycomparisonwithlaparoscopyandlaparotomyforovariancanceranetworkmetaanalysis