Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for live liver donors

21Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To document the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy in comparison with open liver resection for living donor liver transplantation. Methods: Medline database, EMASE and Cochrane library were searched for original studies comparing laparoscopic living donor hepatectomy (LLDH) and open living donor hepatectomy (OLDH) by January 2015. Meta-analysis was performed to evaluate donors' perioperative outcomes. Results: Nine studies met selection criteria, involving 1346 donors of whom 318 underwent LLDH and 1028 underwent OLDH. The Meta analysis demonstrated that LLDH group had less operative blood loss [patients 1346; WMD: -56.09 mL; 95%CI: -100.28-(-11.90) mL; P = 0.01], shorter hospital stay [patients 737; WMD: -1.75 d; 95%CI: -3.01-(-0.48) d; P = 0.007] but longer operative time (patients 1346; WMD: 41.05 min; 95%CI: 1.91±80.19 min; P = 0.04), compared with OLDH group. There were no significant difference in other outcomes between LLDH and OLDH groups, including overall complication, bile leakage, postoperative bleeding, pulmonary complication, wound complication, time to dietary intake and period of analgesic use. Conclusions: LLDH appears to be a safe and effective option for LDLT. It improves donors' perioperative outcomes as compared with OLDH.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Xu, J., Hu, C., Cao, H. L., Zhang, M. L., Ye, S., Zheng, S. S., & Wang, W. L. (2016). Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open hepatectomy for live liver donors. PLoS ONE, 11(10). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165319

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free