首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     

手助腹腔镜与开放手术活体供肾取肾术的系统评估
引用本文:李涛, 付生军, 董治龙, 等. 手助腹腔镜与开放手术活体供肾取肾术的系统评估[J]. 器官移植, 2014, 5(2): 68-73. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7445.2014.02.003
作者姓名:李涛  付生军  董治龙  王志平  王娟  杨立
作者单位:730030 兰州大学泌尿外科研究所 兰州大学第二医院泌尿外科 甘肃省泌尿系统疾病临床医学中心 甘肃省泌尿系统疾病研究重点实验室
基金项目:甘肃省科技支撑计划项目(1011FKCA090)
摘    要:目的 系统评价手助腹腔镜下活体供肾切取术(HLDN)与开放活体供肾切取术(ODN)的安全性及效果。方法 采用计算机互联网检索Pubmed数据库、Sciverse数据库、考克兰图书馆数据库、中国知网、中文科技期刊数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库及万方数据库收录期刊已发表的包含HLDN和ODN两种术式的随机对照试验(RCT)研究。两位研究者根据纳入、排除标准独立筛选文献,应用RevMan 5.2软件进行Meta分析。结果 通过筛选共纳入10个RCT,共1 230例患者。Meta分析结果提示,活体供肾取肾时,与ODN术式比较,HLDN术式的手术时间和热缺血时间较长[合并比值比(OR)值为35.81,95%可信区间(CI)13.98~57.65,P=0.001;合并OR 43.99,95% CI 32.31~55.66,P<0.00001],但HLDN术式的术中出血量较少(合并OR-78.90,95% CI -123.59~-34.22,P=0.0005)、并发症发生率较低(合并OR0.58,95%CI0.39~0.86,P=0.006)、住院时间较短[权重均差(WMD)为-1.15,95%CI-1.40~-0.90,P<0.00001];两组患者的术后进普食时间差异无统计学意义(WMD为-0.11,95%CI -0.67~-0.45,P=0.70)。结论 与ODN术式比较,HLDN术式提高了手术的安全性,降低了手术难度,值得临床推广应用。

关 键 词:手助腹腔镜   开放手术   活体供肾取肾术   Meta分析   系统评估
收稿时间:2014-01-07

System evaluation of hand-assisted laparoscopic and open living donor nephrectomy
Li Tao, Fu Shengjun, Dong Zhilong, et al. System evaluation of hand-assisted laparoscopic and open living donor nephrectomy[J]. ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION, 2014, 5(2): 68-73. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7445.2014.02.003
Authors:Li Tao  Fu ShengJun  Dong Zhilong  Wang Zhiping  Wang Juan  Yang Li
Affiliation:Institute of Urology of Lanzhou University, Department of Urology, the Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Clinical Center of Diseases of Urological System in Gansu Province, Key Laboratory of Diseases of Urological System in Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730030, China
Abstract:Objective To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HLDN) and open donor nephrectomy (ODN) systematically. Methods Literatures of randomized controlled trials (RCT) about HLDN and ODN were searched in Pubmed, Sciverse, Cochrone Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Scientific Journal Database (VIP), China Biology Medicine (CBM) , and Wangfang Database through internet. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 2 reviewers screened the literatures independently, and Meta-analysis was conducted by software RevMan 5.2. Results A total of 10 RCTs including 1 230 patients were eligible after screening. Compared with ODN, the Meta-analysis revealed that HLDN possessed significantly longer operation duration and warm ischemia time [pooled odds ratio (OR) =35.81, 95% confidence interval (CI): 13.98-57.65, P = 0. 001 ; pooled OR = 43.99, 95% CI: 32.31-55.66, P 〈 0. 00001 ), but less intraoperative blood loss (pooled OR = - 78.90, 95% CI: - 123.59 - - 34. 22, P = 0. 0005 ) , lower incidence of complications ( pooled OR = 0. 58, 95 % CI: O. 39 - 0. 86, P = 0. 006), and shorter hospital length of stay [ weight mean difference (WMD) = - 1.15, 95% CI: - 1.40- - 0. 90, P 〈 0. 000011. There was no significant difference in the time of takingnormal diet between two groups (WMD = -0. 11, 95% CI: -0.67 --0.45, P =0.70). Conclusions Compared with ODN, HLDN can improve the safety of operation and reduce the difficulty of operation. It is worthy of clinical promotion and application.
Keywords:Hand-assisted laparoscopic  Open surgery  Living donor nephrectomy  Meta-analysis  System evaluation
本文献已被 CNKI 维普 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《器官移植》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《器官移植》下载全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号