TY - JOUR
T1 - Robotic Living Donor Right Hepatectomy
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
AU - Lincango Naranjo, Eddy P.
AU - Garces-Delgado, Estefany
AU - Siepmann, Timo
AU - Mirow, Lutz
AU - Solis-Pazmino, Paola
AU - Alexander-Leon, Harold
AU - Restrepo-Rodas, Gabriela
AU - Mancero-Montalvo, Rafael
AU - Ponce, Cristina J.
AU - Cadena-Semanate, Ramiro
AU - Vargas-Cordova, Ronnal
AU - Herrera-Cevallos, Glenda
AU - Vallejo, Sebastian
AU - Liu-Sanchez, Carolina
AU - Prokop, Larry J.
AU - Ziogas, Ioannis A.
AU - Vailas, Michail G.
AU - Guerron, Alfredo D.
AU - Visser, Brendan C.
AU - Ponce, Oscar J.
AU - Barbas, Andrew S.
AU - Moris, Dimitrios
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2022/5/1
Y1 - 2022/5/1
N2 - The introduction of robotics in living donor liver transplantation has been revolutionary. We aimed to examine the safety of robotic living donor right hepatectomy (RLDRH) compared to open (ODRH) and laparoscopic (LADRH) approaches. A systematic review was carried out in Medline and six additional databases following PRISMA guidelines. Data on morbidity, postoperative liver function, and pain in donors and recipients were extracted from studies comparing RLDRH, ODRH, and LADRH published up to September 2020; PROSPERO (CRD42020214313). Dichotomous variables were pooled as risk ratios and continuous variables as weighted mean differences. Four studies with a total of 517 patients were included. In living donors, the postoperative total bilirubin level (MD: −0.7 95%CI −1.0, −0.4), length of hospital stay (MD: −0.8 95%CI −1.4, −0.3), Clavien– Dindo complications I–II (RR: 0.5 95%CI 0.2, 0.9), and pain score at day > 3 (MD: −0.6 95%CI −1.6, 0.4) were lower following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Furthermore, the pain score at day > 3 (MD: −0.4 95%CI −0.8, −0.09) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In recipients, the postoperative AST level was lower (MD: −0.5 95%CI −0.9, −0.1) following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Moreover, the length of stay (MD: −6.4 95%CI −11.3, −1.5) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In summary, we identified low‐ to unclear‐quality evidence that RLDRH seems to be safe and feasible for adult living donor liver transplantation compared to the conventional approaches. No postoperative deaths were reported.
AB - The introduction of robotics in living donor liver transplantation has been revolutionary. We aimed to examine the safety of robotic living donor right hepatectomy (RLDRH) compared to open (ODRH) and laparoscopic (LADRH) approaches. A systematic review was carried out in Medline and six additional databases following PRISMA guidelines. Data on morbidity, postoperative liver function, and pain in donors and recipients were extracted from studies comparing RLDRH, ODRH, and LADRH published up to September 2020; PROSPERO (CRD42020214313). Dichotomous variables were pooled as risk ratios and continuous variables as weighted mean differences. Four studies with a total of 517 patients were included. In living donors, the postoperative total bilirubin level (MD: −0.7 95%CI −1.0, −0.4), length of hospital stay (MD: −0.8 95%CI −1.4, −0.3), Clavien– Dindo complications I–II (RR: 0.5 95%CI 0.2, 0.9), and pain score at day > 3 (MD: −0.6 95%CI −1.6, 0.4) were lower following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Furthermore, the pain score at day > 3 (MD: −0.4 95%CI −0.8, −0.09) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In recipients, the postoperative AST level was lower (MD: −0.5 95%CI −0.9, −0.1) following RLDRH compared to ODRH. Moreover, the length of stay (MD: −6.4 95%CI −11.3, −1.5) was lower after RLDRH when compared to LADRH. In summary, we identified low‐ to unclear‐quality evidence that RLDRH seems to be safe and feasible for adult living donor liver transplantation compared to the conventional approaches. No postoperative deaths were reported.
KW - liver transplantation
KW - meta-analysis
KW - robot
KW - systematic review
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85132281959
U2 - 10.3390/jcm11092603
DO - 10.3390/jcm11092603
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85132281959
SN - 2077-0383
VL - 11
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
JF - Journal of Clinical Medicine
IS - 9
M1 - 2603
ER -