Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy for renal transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Academic Article in Scopus
Overview
Identity
Additional document info
View All
Overview
abstract
Introduction Renal transplantation remains the definitive treatment for end-stage renal disease. Currently employed minimally invasive techniques include robotic-assisted laparoscopy and laparoscopy. This study aims to determine whether either method provides an advantage. Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted. Data were analysed using Review Manager 5.3. Results A total of 12 studies were included. Operative time and operative bleeding were similar between both approaches, with a mean difference (MD) of 16min (95% confidence interval (CI) ¿4.06, 37.38; p = 0.11) and 10.44ml (95% CI ¿43.89, 64.78; p = 0.71), respectively. Robotics had longer warm ischemia time (MD 1.14min; 95% CI 0.65, 1.63; p = 0.00001) but reduced length of stay (LOS) (MD ¿0.23days; 95% CI ¿0.45, ¿0.01; p = 0.04) and pain (MD ¿1.26 VAS; 95% CI ¿1.77, 0.75). Similar complication and conversion rates were seen among groups. Conclusions Robotic approaches provide a viable alternative to laparoscopic surgery. Operative time, bleeding volumes, complications and conversion rates are similar between both techniques; apparent robotic advantages on LOS and Pain need to be better analysed by future studies. © 2023 Royal College of Surgeons of England. All rights reserved.
status
publication date
published in
Identity
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
PubMed ID
Additional document info
has global citation frequency
start page
end page
volume