Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Robot-Assisted Heller Myotomy Versus Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ataya, Karim; Bsat, Ayman; Aljaafreh, Almoutuz; Bourji, Hussein; Al Ayoubi, Amir Rabih; Hassan, Najwa.
Afiliación
  • Ataya K; Institute of Minimally Invasive Surgery, King's College Hospital, London, GBR.
  • Bsat A; Department of General Surgery, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, LBN.
  • Aljaafreh A; Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, King's College Hospital, London, GBR.
  • Bourji H; General Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, USA.
  • Al Ayoubi AR; General Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Lebanese University, Beirut, LBN.
  • Hassan N; Department of Surgery, Beirut Arab University, Beirut, LBN.
Cureus ; 15(11): e48495, 2023 Nov.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38073943
ABSTRACT
Robot-assisted Heller myotomy (RAHM) is an increasingly popular alternative to the traditional laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) in the surgical management of achalasia, with similar outcomes and potentially lower complication rates. We aimed to systematically review the literature by comparing the technical success, outcomes, and complications of RAHM and LHM. We searched PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane Central Register for articles published between 2001 and 2023. Data on technical success, clinical outcomes, length of hospital stay, esophageal perforation rate, and overall mortality were extracted. A total of 11 articles were included in the study, comparing a total of 3,543 RAHM and 15,434 LHM cases. The mean operative time was significantly higher in the RAHM procedure with a total mean difference of 23.95 (95% confidence interval (Cl) 17.09, 30.81; p < 0.00001; I2 = 99%). However, the RAHM was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay, with a total mean difference of -0.24 (95% Cl = -0.40, -0.08; p < 0.00001; I2 = 81%). The volume of blood loss was significantly smaller in RAHM with a total mean difference of -61.11 (95% CI = -150.31, 28.09; p < 0.00001; I2 = 99%). Esophageal mucosal perforation was significantly lower in RAHM with an odds ratio of 0.36 (95% CI = 0.16, 0.82; p = 0.02; I2 = 22%). Both procedures were associated with similar rates of symptom relief. Although no mortality was recorded in patients who underwent RAHM as opposed to 16 cases in patients who underwent LHM, no statistically significant difference could be reached. Our results demonstrate that while both procedures yield comparable clinical outcomes, RAHM is associated with a lower overall complication rate, particularly a lower rate of esophageal mucosal perforation, shorter hospital stay, and possibly a lower mortality rate. This confirms that RAHM is a viable and justifiable alternative to the conventional LHM in the surgical management of achalasia.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Tipo de estudio: Systematic_reviews Idioma: En Revista: Cureus Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article