{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03237156931738212, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007741027445460943, 'mean_word_length': 5.32, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Clinical efficacy and safety of robot assisted surgery for choledochal cysts excisions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT Background This study aimed to evaluate the safety and therapeutic effect of Robot-assisted surgery (RAS) for choledochal cysts (CCs) excisions. Research design and methods PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and CBM were searched from database inception to 1 May 2022. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to conduct quality assessments, and RevMan (Version 5.4) was used to perform the meta-analysis. Results In all, 9 studies, involving 623 patients, were analyzed. RAS compared with LAS was associated with less intraoperative blood loss, shorter time to start solid diets, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and lower complications. There was no significant difference in operative time between the two groups, but the total costs were higher in RAS. Our subgroup analysis showed that RAS had significant advantages over LAS in the child group: minor bleeding, shorter length of hospital stay, and fewer postoperative complications. Conclusions The available evidence indicates that the RAS system has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss, minor tissue damage, quick recovery, and sound healing in treating choledochal cyst, which proves that the RAS is safely feasible. Especially in children, RAS tends to be a better choice.