Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Limited Evidence for Robot-assisted Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Laparoscopic Versus Robotic-assisted Suturing Performance Among Novice Surgeons: A Blinded, Cross-Over Study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Evaluation of Sexual and Urinary Function After Implementation of Robot-assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Study

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Outcomes From an Enhanced Recovery Program for Laparoscopic Gastric Surgery

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. Surgical Residents are Excluded From Robot-assisted Surgery

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  1. Mesenteric Lymphadenitis and Terminal Ileitis is Associated With Yersinia Infection: A Meta-analysis

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  2. Flying fattens and swimming slims - the secret of the mermaid

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Melatonin for Pre- and Postoperative Pain and Anxiety: A Cancelled Clinical Trial

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  4. The historical group of withdrawn Cochrane reviews should be distinguished from retracted papers

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  5. Collaboration in colorectal surgical research

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Vis graf over relationer

PURPOSE: To evaluate available evidence on robot-assisted surgery compared with open and laparoscopic surgery.

METHOD: The databases Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials comparing robot-assisted surgery with open and laparoscopic surgery regardless of surgical procedure. Meta-analyses were performed on each outcome with appropriate data material available. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used to evaluate risk of bias on a study level. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence of the meta-analyses.

RESULTS: This review included 20 studies comprising 981 patients. The meta-analyses found no significant differences between robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery regarding blood loss, complication rates, and hospital stay. A significantly longer operative time was found for robot-assisted surgery. Open versus robot-assisted surgery was investigated in 3 studies. A lower blood loss and a longer operative time were found after robot-assisted surgery. No other difference was detected.

CONCLUSIONS: At this point there is not enough evidence to support the significantly higher costs with the implementation of robot-assisted surgery.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftSurgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques
Vol/bind26
Udgave nummer2
Sider (fra-til)117-23
Antal sider7
ISSN1530-4515
DOI
StatusUdgivet - apr. 2016

ID: 46493510