ObjectiveTo understand the current progress of diagnosis and treatment of accidental gallbladder cancer.MethodThe relevant literatures about diagnosis and treatment of accidental gallbladder cancer and gallbladder cancer were analyzed and summarized.ResultsDue to the lack of specific symptoms and signs in most patients with accidental gallbladder cancer at the early stage, appropriate imaging examinations and tumor marker examinations could improve the preoperative diagnosis rate. The radical resection was the most effective method for accidental gallbladder cancer, but there were still some controversies about the scope of resection according to different tumor stages, the choice of laparoscopic cholecystectomy or open cholecystectomy, and the timing of reoperation. The postoperative adjuvant therapy could improve the prognosis of patients, but most patients didn’t receive adjuvant therapy after surgery.ConclusionsMost patients with accidental gallbladder cancer are in the early stage, and most of them could obtain radical resection. If the first operation fails to achieve radical resection or postoperative pathological examination to confirm the diagnosis, comprehensive evaluation of the tumor stage and the patient’s general condition should be performed, and remedial treatment should be taken as soon as possible.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of da Vinci robotic surgery for elderly patients with radical surgery of lung cancer.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 59 patients aged over 70 years who underwent radical surgery of lung cancer in our hospital between 2016 and 2019. These patients were divided into two groups including a da Vinci robot group and a single-utility port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) group according to the patients’ selection of the treatments. There were 32 patients with 20 males and 12 females aged 73.1±2.3 years in the da Vinci robot group and 27 patients with 16 males and 11 females aged 71.2±1.3 years in the VATS group. The clinical data of the two groups were compared.ResultsThere was no statistical difference in surgery time between the two groups (t=–0.341, P=0.484). Compared with the VATS group, the da Vinci robot group had more number of lymph nodes dissected (t=1.635, P=0.015), less intraoperative blood loss (t=–2.569, P <0.001), less postoperative drainage amount within 3 days after surgery (t=–6.325, P=0.045), lower visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at postoperative 3rd day (t=–7.214, P=0.021).ConclusionThe da Vinci robot system is safe and efficient in the treatment for elderly patients with radical surgery of lung cancer with less trauma.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted hepatectomy (RAH) versus traditional laparoscopic hepatectomy (TLH) for hepatic neoplasms.MethodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data and CBM databases were electronically searched to collect cohort studies about the RAH vs. the TLH for liver neoplasms from inception to December 10th, 2016. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. And finally, a meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 17 studies involving 1 389 patients were included. The meta-analysis results showed that: compared to TLH group, RAH group was associated with more estimated blood loss (WMD=39.56, 95%CI 4.65 to 74.47, P=0.013), longer operative time SMD=0.55, 95%CI 0.29 to 0.80, P<0.001), and later in the first nutritional intake time (SMD=1.06, 95%CI 0.66 to 1.45,P<0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the length of hospital stay, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative blood transfusion, resection rate of tumor margin, complications and 90-day mortality between the two groups.ConclusionCurrent evidence indicates that TLH is superior to RAH in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss and the first nutritional intake time, but there are no statistically significant differences in the primary outcomes, suggesting that RAH and TLH have similar efficacy and safety for hepatic neoplasms. Due to the limitation of quality and quantity of the included studies, the above conclusions need to be verified by more high-quality research.
ObjectiveTo systematically review safety and effectiveness of robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and laparoscopic RYGB for morbid obesity.MethodsThe systematic literatures were conducted by a comprehensive search in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, WanFang data, CNKI, and CBM, etc. Two reviewers independently selected the literatures and extracted the data. The meta-analysis was performed using the R statistical program version 3.4.2.ResultsA total of 19 studies involving 177 766 patients with morbid obesity were included, of which 172 234 underwent the laparoscopic RYGB (laparoscopic group) and 5 532 underwent the robotic RYGB (robotic group). The operative time was longer [MD=27.84, 95% CI (12.85, 42.83)] and the rate of death was higher [OR=2.05, 95% CI (1.03, 4.08)] in the robotic group as compared with the laparoscopic group. The hospitalization time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate, rates of reoperation and readmission of 30 d after the operation, and postoperative complications had no significant differences between these two groups.ConclusionRobotic RYGB is a safe and effective surgical procedure, but it is not found to be superior to laparoscopic RYGB.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effects of two commonly used organ preservation solutions University of Wisconsin (UW) solution and histidine-tryptophan-ketoglutarate (HTK) solution in liver transplantation.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, CBM, VIP, and Wanfang Data were searched to collect the comparative studies of the UW solution and HTK solution in the liver transplantation. The data were extracted and evaluated by the RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsFinally, 16 articles with a total of 35 024 patients were included. The meta-analysis results showed that the HTK solution group had a lower incidence of postoperative biliary complications [RR=1.30, 95%CI (1.07 1.58), P=0.008] and lower aspartate aminotransferase peak level within 7 d after operation [MD=112.45, 95%CI (93.34, 131.56), P<0.01] as compared with the UW solution group. No significant differences were found in terms of the incidence of primary non-function [RR=1.07, 95%CI (0.52, 2.18), P=0.86], survival rates of patient and graft in different time points (P>0.05), incidence of retransplantation [RR=0.83, 95%CI (0.48, 1.45), P=0.51], incidence of acute rejection [RR=1.27, 95%CI (0.96, 1.68), P=0.33], alanine aminotransferase peak level within 7 d [MD=31.79, 95%CI (–161.84, 225.42), P=0.75] after operation, total bilirubin [MD=19.42, 95%CI (–10.83, 49.67), P=0.21], and prothrombin time [MD=1.75, 95%CI (0.01, 3.49), P=0.84] between these two groups.ConclusionsHTK solution is safe and effective for liver transplantation, and has similar effects as UW solution. Regarding effect of both on long-term survival rates of patient and graft, large-sample and high-quality RCT is still needed for systematic evaluation.
ObjectiveTo summarize the application status and related progress of robot-assisted technology in general surgery.MethodThe related researches about robot-assisted technology in general surgery in recent year were searched and reviewed.ResultsRobot-assisted techniques had similar safety and effectiveness to endoscopic surgery in general surgery. In addition, in rectal cancer, thyroid and pancreatic surgery, due to the narrow operation space, the advantages of robot-assisted surgery was more obvious.ConclusionsThe application of robot-assisted techniques in general surgery is safe and effective. With the decrease of the cost of robotic surgery, which has wide application value in general surgery.
ObjectivesTo investigate sources of evidence of the clinical pathways approved by the Chinese government.MethodsThe approved clinical pathways were obtained from the website of the National Health and Family Planning Commission. Two reviewers independently extracted the basic information, approval date, types of evidence of the clinical pathways and time of evidence. The variance analysis was performed for the diagnosis and treatment parts of clinical pathways and the LSD method was further used for comparison.ResultsThe main types of evidence were guidelines, textbooks, standard indicators and consensus views. Approximately 80% of the pathways cited clinical practice guidelines and 36% cited the textbooks. The median number of evidence for each clinical pathway was 2. Approximately 85% of the evidence could be obtained the time when the evidence published. The average time interval (between the time when the pathways released and the time when the evidence published) was 5.2 years. Specifically, textbooks constituted the largest proportion in all evidence that was over 15 years of time interval. In addition to the textbook comparison standard indicators, there were significant differences in time interval between guidelines or consensus and textbooks or standard indicators.Conclusions The evidence types selection is based on the concept of evidence-based medicine, yet the time span of the referred evidence is larger. Therefore, developing clinical pathways not only need to refer to the latest research evidence comprehensively and enhance transparency of clinical pathways, but also use evidence quality evaluation standards to evaluate and select the referred evidences.