Comparative clinical outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection versus laparoscopic liver resection: A meta-analysis

PLoS One. 2020 Oct 13;15(10):e0240593. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240593. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

Background: As an emerging technology, robot-assisted surgical system has some potential merits in many complicated endoscopic procedures compared with laparoscopic surgery. But robot-assisted liver resection is still a controversial problem on its advantages compared with laparoscopic liver resection. We aimed to perform the meta-analysis to assess and compare the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase databases, Clinicaltrials, and Opengrey through March 24, 2020, including references of qualifying articles. English-language, original investigations in humans about robot-assisted and laparoscopic hepatectomy were included. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed by at least 2 independent readers. Continuous and dichotomous variables were compared by the weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR), respectively.

Results: Of 936 titles identified in our original search, 28 articles met our criteria, involving 3544 patients. Compared with laparoscopy, the robot-assisted groups had longer operative time (WMD: 36.93; 95% CI, 19.74-54.12; P < 0.001), lower conversion rate (OR: 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46-0.87; P = 0.005), higher transfusion rate (WMD: 2.39; 95% CI, 1.51-3.76; P < 0.001) and higher total cost (WMD:0.49; 95% CI, 0.42-0.55; P < 0.001). In addition, the baseline characteristics of patients about largest tumor size was larger (WMD: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.56; P < 0.001) and malignant lesions rate was higher (WMD: 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21-1.86; P < 0.001) in the robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy. The subgroup analysis of minor hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time (WMD: 36.00; 95% CI, 12.59-59.41; P = 0.003), longer length of stay (WMD: 0.51; 95% CI, 0.02-1.01; p = 0.04) and higher total cost (WMD: 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25-0.72; P < 0.001) (Table 3); while the subgroup analysis of major hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with lower estimated blood loss (WMD: -122.43; 95% CI, -151.78--93.08; P < 0.001).

Conclusions: Our meta-analysis revealed that robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time, lower conversion rate, higher transfusion rate and total cost, and robot-assisted has certain advantages in major hepatectomy compared with laparoscopic hepatectomy.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Meta-Analysis

MeSH terms

  • Blood Loss, Surgical / statistics & numerical data
  • Blood Transfusion / statistics & numerical data
  • Conversion to Open Surgery / statistics & numerical data
  • Hepatectomy / adverse effects*
  • Hepatectomy / economics
  • Hepatectomy / methods
  • Hepatectomy / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Laparoscopy / adverse effects*
  • Laparoscopy / economics
  • Laparoscopy / methods
  • Laparoscopy / statistics & numerical data
  • Length of Stay / statistics & numerical data
  • Liver Neoplasms / economics
  • Liver Neoplasms / surgery*
  • Operative Time
  • Postoperative Complications / epidemiology*
  • Postoperative Complications / etiology
  • Robotic Surgical Procedures / adverse effects*
  • Robotic Surgical Procedures / economics
  • Robotic Surgical Procedures / methods
  • Robotic Surgical Procedures / statistics & numerical data
  • Treatment Outcome

Grants and funding

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.