Wound complications frequency in minor technique gastrectomy compared to open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A meta-analysis-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Wound complications frequency in minor technique gastrectomy compared to open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A meta-analysis

Published:2023-10-03 Issue:3 Volume:1 Page:
ISSN:3005-480X
Container-title:International Journal of Clinical Medical Research
language:en
Short-container-title:IJCMR

Author:

Sundaresan A.

Abstract

Background: A meta-analysis investigation was executed to measure the wound complications (WCs) frequency in minor technique gastrectomy (MTG) compared to open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer (GC). Methods: A comprehensive literature inspection till February 2023 was applied and 2078 interrelated investigations were reviewed. The 17 chosen investigations enclosed 12746 individuals with GC were in the chosen investigations' starting point, 3052 of them were utilizing robotic gastrectomy (RG), 6603 of them were utilizing laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and 3091 were utilizing OG. Odds ratio (OR) in addition to 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were utilized <span style="font-size: 10.0pt; font-family: 'Arial',sans-serif; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi;">to compute the value of the WCs frequency in MTG compared to OG for GC by the dichotomous approaches and a fixed or random model. Results: No significant difference was found in surgical site wound infection (SSWI) between RG and OG (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.89-2.35, p=0.13), LG and OG (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.47-1.18, p=0.21), and RG and LG (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.72-1.60, p=0.73) in individuals with GC. Conclusions: No significant difference was found in SSWI between RG, OG, and LG in individuals with GC. However, care must be exercised when dealing with its values because of the low number of nominated in the meta-analysis and the low sample size of some of the nominated investigations for the meta-analysis.

Publisher

Pharaoh Academy International Publishing Co., Limited

Reference41 articles.

1. Kitano, S., Y. Iso, M. Moriyama, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted Billroth I gastrectomy. Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques 4(2): p. 146-148 (1994).

2. Cadière, M., Ph. D, Guy-Bernard, M. Himpens, Jacques, O. Germay, et al. Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World journal of surgery 25: p. 1467-1477 (2001).

3. Pigazzi, A., J. Ellenhorn, G. Ballantyne, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques 20: p. 1521-1525 (2006).

4. Song, J., S.J. Oh, W.H. Kang, et al. Robot-assisted gastrectomy with lymph node dissection for gastric cancer: lessons learned from an initial 100 consecutive procedures. Annals of surgery 249(6): p. 927-932 (2009).

5. Baik, S.H., H.Y. Kwon, J.S. Kim, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Annals of surgical oncology 16: p. 1480-1487 (2009).