Robotic versus Open Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Zhenjie Wu, Mingmin Li, Bing Liu, Chen Cai, Huamao Ye, Chen Lv, Qing Yang, Jing Sheng, Shangqing Song, Le Qu, Liang Xiao, Yinghao Sun and Linhui Wang

PLOS ONE, 2014, vol. 9, issue 4, 1-8

Abstract: Objectives: To critically review the currently available evidence of studies comparing robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN). Materials and Methods: A comprehensive review of the literature from Pubmed, Web of Science and Scopus was performed in October 2013. All relevant studies comparing RPN with OPN were included for further screening. A cumulative meta-analysis of all comparative studies was performed and publication bias was assessed by a funnel plot. Results: Eight studies were included for the analysis, including a total of 3418 patients (757 patients in the robotic group and 2661 patients in the open group). Although RPN procedures had a longer operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 40.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 14.39–67.40; p = 0.002), patients in this group benefited from a lower perioperative complication rate (19.3% for RPN and 29.5% for OPN; odds ratio [OR]: 0.53; 95%CI, 0.42–0.67; p

Date: 2014
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0094878 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 94878&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0094878

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094878

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().