Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 review

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Anatomic Liver Resection: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes—A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

0Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : jp. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Aim: Minimally invasive anatomic liver resection (AR) is technically demanding, and the efficacy of robotic surgery in AR remains unestablished. This systematic review aims through a meta-analysis to compare surgical outcomes between robotic (RAR) and conventional laparoscopic (LAR) AR. Methods: A systematic literature search of relevant studies published between 2001 and 2024 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Library was carried out, and 15 studies were selected. Meta-analysis was performed to compare perioperative outcomes between RAR and LAR. Results: A total of 4171 patients comprising 2042 RAR and 2129 LAR patients who underwent major hepatectomy or liver parenchyma-sparing AR (PSAR) were included. All included studies were retrospective comparative studies, including eight using propensity score-matched analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated that as primary outcomes, the 30-day and 90-day mortalities and postoperative overall morbidity were comparable between RAR and LAR, while RAR had significantly less morbidity≥Clavien-Dindo grade II and a lower rate of open conversion. As secondary outcomes, compared to LAR, RAR showed significantly less blood loss and shorter postoperative hospital stay, while RAR had a higher rate of postoperative 30-day readmission. Operative time, blood transfusion, Pringle maneuver, R0 resection, and reoperation were comparable. Subgroup meta-analyses showed a lower rate of blood transfusion in robotic PSAR and a lower rate of open conversion in RAR in the right cranial regions. Conclusion: This large-scale meta-analysis of minimally invasive AR suggests that RAR can confer comparable or partly better perioperative outcomes as compared to LAR, indicating potential advantages of the robotic approach to AR.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Anatomic Liver Resection: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes—A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Date Crossref
28/01/2026
Éditeur
Wiley
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Où se fait cette recherche

  • Fujita Health University Hospital pays non établi dans la notice
    Établissement de santé
  • Department of Gastroenterological Surgery Fujita Health University Bantane Hospital Nagoya Japan pays non établi dans la notice
    Université ou école supérieure

Fujita Health University Hospital et Department of Gastroenterological Surgery Fujita Health University Bantane Hospital Nagoya Japan.

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesSoft Robotics and Applications

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.