» Articles » PMID: 39548479

Comparison of the Outcomes Between Ultrasonic Devices and Clamping in Hepatectomy: a Meta-analysis

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Date 2024 Nov 16
PMID 39548479
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Recent advances in ultrasound technology have led to widespread adoption of ultrasonic energy devices in liver resections. While various studies have assessed the comparative advantages of ultrasonic devices and traditional clamp-crushing, their findings vary. Moreover, a specific systematic review on this topic has not yet been conducted.

Objectives: This study aims to present a comprehensive, up-to-date analysis comparing outcomes between ultrasonic devices and conventional clamp-crushing methods in liver resection, based on currently available literature.

Patients And Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search in databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CNKI up to November 2023. Studies that compared the efficacy or safety of ultrasonic devices against traditional clamp-crushing methods in hepatectomy were included. The analysis covered intraoperative outcomes like operating time, blood loss, and transfusion rate, as well as postoperative outcomes such as complication rate, mortality, postoperative bleeding, and bile leakage. Review Manager version 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) and Stata 17.0 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX, USA) were used for data analysis.

Results: Thirteen studies, involving a total of 1,417 patients (630 using ultrasonic devices and 787 using clamp-crushing methods), were included. The clamp-crush method resulted in a shorter operation time. Contrarily, the ultrasonic device group experienced reduced blood loss and lower transfusion rates. Postoperatively, there was no significant difference in mortality or postoperative bleeding between the groups. However, the ultrasonic group had a lower overall complication rate, particularly a reduced incidence of bile leakage. Overall, the ultrasonic devices were associated with improved perioperative outcomes.

Conclusions: The findings suggest that ultrasonic devices provide better outcomes in hepatectomy compared to traditional clamp-crushing techniques. Nonetheless, large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results due to potential heterogeneity and biases. The choice of using ultrasonic devices should consider the surgeon's experience and individual patient circumstances.

References
1.
Shi J, Luo D, Weng H, Zeng X, Lin L, Chu H . Optimally estimating the sample standard deviation from the five-number summary. Res Synth Methods. 2020; 11(5):641-654. DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1429. View

2.
Luo D, Wan X, Liu J, Tong T . Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res. 2016; 27(6):1785-1805. DOI: 10.1177/0962280216669183. View

3.
Doklestic K, Karamarkovic A, Stefanovic B, Stefanovic B, Milic N, Gregoric P . The efficacy of three transection techniques of the liver resection: a randomized clinical trial. Hepatogastroenterology. 2011; 59(117):1501-6. DOI: 10.5754/hge11552. View

4.
Poon R, Fan S, Lo C, Liu C, Ming Lam C, Yuen W . Improving perioperative outcome expands the role of hepatectomy in management of benign and malignant hepatobiliary diseases: analysis of 1222 consecutive patients from a prospective database. Ann Surg. 2004; 240(4):698-708. PMC: 1356471. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000141195.66155.0c. View

5.
Nanashima A, Abo T, Arai J, Takagi K, Matsumoto H, Takeshita H . Usefulness of vessel-sealing devices combined with crush clamping method for hepatectomy: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2013; 11(9):891-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.07.012. View