Methods to decrease blood loss during liver resection: a network meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Moggia E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6472530 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Methods to decrease blood loss during liver resection: a network meta-analysis.
Moggia Elisabetta E Rouse Benjamin B Simillis Constantinos C Li Tianjing T Vaughan Jessica J Davidson Brian R BR Gurusamy Kurinchi Selvan KS
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20161031
<h4>Background</h4>Liver resection is a major surgery with significant mortality and morbidity. Specialists have tested various methods in attempts to limit blood loss, transfusion requirements, and morbidity during elective liver resection. These methods include different approaches (anterior versus conventional approach), use of autologous blood donation, cardiopulmonary interventions such as hypoventilation, low central venous pressure, different methods of parenchymal transection, different ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPerioperative bleeding and allogeneic blood transfusion are generally thought to affect the outcomes of patients. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the benefits and risks of several cardiovascular interventions in patients undergoing hepatectomy.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were searched in the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and Web of Science to February 02, 2023. RCTs focused on cardiovascular interventions aimed at reducing blood loss or blood transfusion requirements during hepatectomy were included. The primary outcomes were perioperative blood loss amount, number of patients requiring allogeneic blood transfusion and overall occurrence of postoperative complications. The secondary outcomes were operating time, perioperative mortality rate, postoperative liver and kidney function and length of hospital stay.ResultsSeventeen RCTs were included in the analysis. A total of 841 patients who underwent hepatectomy in 10 trials were included in the comparative analysis between low central venous pressure (CVP) and control groups. The forest plots showed a low operative bleeding volume [(mean difference (MD): -409.75 mL, 95% confidence intervals (CI) -616.56 to -202.94, P < 0.001], reduced blood transfusion rate [risk ratio (RR): 0.47, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.65, P < 0.001], shortened operating time (MD: -13.42 min, 95% CI -22.59 to -4.26, P = 0.004), and fewer postoperative complications (RR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.99, P = 0.04) in the low CVP group than in the control group. Five and two trials compared the following interventions, respectively: 'acute normovolaemic haemodilution (ANH) vs control' and 'autologous blood donation vs control'. ANH and autologous blood donation could not reduce the blood loss amount but greatly decreased the number of patients requiring allogeneic blood transfusion. No benefits were found in the rate of mortality and length of postoperative hospital stay in any of the comparisons.ConclusionLowering the CVP seems to be effective and safe in adult patients undergoing hepatectomy. ANH and autologous blood donation should be used as a part of blood management for suitable patients in certain circumstances.Trial registrationPROSPERO, CRD42022314061.
| S-EPMC10032024 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10703584 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAs an emerging technology, robot-assisted surgical system has some potential merits in many complicated endoscopic procedures compared with laparoscopic surgery. But robot-assisted liver resection is still a controversial problem on its advantages compared with laparoscopic liver resection. We aimed to perform the meta-analysis to assess and compare the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase databases, Clinicaltrials, and Opengrey through March 24, 2020, including references of qualifying articles. English-language, original investigations in humans about robot-assisted and laparoscopic hepatectomy were included. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed by at least 2 independent readers. Continuous and dichotomous variables were compared by the weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR), respectively.ResultsOf 936 titles identified in our original search, 28 articles met our criteria, involving 3544 patients. Compared with laparoscopy, the robot-assisted groups had longer operative time (WMD: 36.93; 95% CI, 19.74-54.12; P < 0.001), lower conversion rate (OR: 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46-0.87; P = 0.005), higher transfusion rate (WMD: 2.39; 95% CI, 1.51-3.76; P < 0.001) and higher total cost (WMD:0.49; 95% CI, 0.42-0.55; P < 0.001). In addition, the baseline characteristics of patients about largest tumor size was larger (WMD: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.56; P < 0.001) and malignant lesions rate was higher (WMD: 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21-1.86; P < 0.001) in the robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy. The subgroup analysis of minor hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time (WMD: 36.00; 95% CI, 12.59-59.41; P = 0.003), longer length of stay (WMD: 0.51; 95% CI, 0.02-1.01; p = 0.04) and higher total cost (WMD: 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25-0.72; P < 0.001) (Table 3); while the subgroup analysis of major hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with lower estimated blood loss (WMD: -122.43; 95% CI, -151.78--93.08; P < 0.001).ConclusionsOur meta-analysis revealed that robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time, lower conversion rate, higher transfusion rate and total cost, and robot-assisted has certain advantages in major hepatectomy compared with laparoscopic hepatectomy.
| S-EPMC7553328 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTranexamic acid (TXA) has been widely used for bleeding reduction in spinal surgery. Available evidence is insufficient to inform clinical decisions making and there remains a lack of comprehensive comparisons of dose regimens and delivery routes. This study is aimed to assess and compare different strategies regarding the involvement of TXA in spinal surgery for the optimal pathway of efficacy and safety.Materials and methodsCochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CNKI were searched for the period from January 1990 to October 2021. A random-effect model was built in the Bayesian network meta-analysis. The surface under the cumulative ranking analysis (SUCRA) and clustering rank analysis was performed for ranking the effects.ResultsThe current network meta-analysis incorporated data from 33 studies with 3302 patients. Combination administration showed superior effects on reducing intraoperative bleeding (SUCRA 78.78%, MD -129.67, 95% CI [(-222.33, -40.58)]) than placebo, and was ranked as top in reducing postoperative bleeding (SUCRA 86.91%, MD -169.92, 95% CI [(-262.71, -83.52)]), changes in haemoglobin (SUCRA 97.21%, MD -1.28, 95% CI [(-1.84, -0.73)]), and perioperative blood transfusion (SUCRA 93.23%, RR 0.10, 95% CI [(0.03, 0.25)]) simultaneously, and was shown as the best effectiveness and safety (cluster-rank value for IBL and VTE: 4057.99 and for TRF and VTE: 4802.26).ConclusionsIntravenous (IV) plus topical administration of TXA appears optimal in the reduction of perioperative bleeding and blood transfusion, while the local infiltration administration is not effective for blood conservation. Further studies are required to verify the current findings.
| S-EPMC9307111 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTranexamic acid (TXA) is an inexpensive antifibrinolytic agent that significantly reduces peri-operative blood loss and transfusion requirements after total hip and knee replacement. This meta-analysis demonstrates the effects of TXA on blood loss in total shoulder replacement (TSR) and total elbow replacement (TER).MethodsWe systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL from inception to September 03, 2020 for randomised controlled trial (RCTs) and observational studies. Our primary outcome was blood loss. Secondary outcomes included the need for blood transfusion, and post-operative venous thromboembolic (VTE) complications. Mean differences (MD) and relative risks with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported.ResultsFour RCTs and five retrospective cohort studies (RCS) met eligibility criteria for TSRs, but none for TERs. RCT data determined that TXA administration significantly decreased estimated total blood loss (MD -358mL), post-operative blood loss (MD -113mL), change in haemoglobin (Hb) (MD -0.71 g/dL) and total Hb loss (MD -35.3g) when compared to placebo. RCS data demonstrated significant association between TXA administration and decreased in post-operative blood loss, change in Hb, change in Hct and length of stay. There was no significant difference in transfusion requirements or VTE complications.ConclusionTXA administration in safe and effective in patients undergoing primary TSR: it significantly decreases blood loss compared with placebo and is associated with shorter length of stay compared with no treatment. No significant increase in VTE complications was found. TXA administration should be routinely considered for patients undergoing TSR. Further research is needed to demonstrate the treatment effect in patients undergoing TER.
| S-EPMC8022108 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo compare surgical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases.ResultsA total of 14 retrospective studies with 1679 colorectal liver metastases patients were analyzed: 683 patients treated with laparoscopic liver resection and 996 patients with open liver resection. With respect to surgical outcomes, laparoscopic compared with open liver resection was associated with lower blood loss (MD, -216.7, 95% CI, -309.4 to -124.1; P < 0.00001), less requiring blood transfusion (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.55; P < 0.00001), lower postoperative complication morbidity (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.80; P = 0.003), and shorter hospitalization time (MD, -3.85, 95% CI, -5.00 to -2.71; P < 0.00001). However, operation time and postoperative mortality were no significant difference between the two approaches. With respect to oncological outcomes, laparoscopic liver resection group was prone to lower recurrence rate (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61-0.99; P = 0.04), but surgical margins R0, overall survival and disease-free survival were no significant difference.Materials and methodsWe performed a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for all relevant studies. All statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. Dichotomous data were calculated by odds ratio (OR) and continuous data were calculated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ConclusionsLaparoscopic and open liver resection for colorectal liver metastases have the same effect on oncological outcomes, but laparoscopic liver resection achieves better surgical outcomes.
| S-EPMC5356680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionLiver resection carries a high risk for extensive bleeding and need for blood transfusions, which is associated with significant negative impact on outcome. In malignant disease, the most common indication for surgery, it also includes increased risk for recurrence of cancer. Argipressin decreases liver and portal blood flow and may have the potential to reduce bleeding during liver surgery, although this has not been explored.Method and analysisARG-01 is a prospective, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study on 248 patients undergoing liver resection at Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden. Patients will be randomised to one of two parallel groups, infusion of argipressin or normal saline administered peroperatively. The primary endpoint is peroperative blood loss. Secondary outcomes include need for blood transfusion, perioperative variables, length of hospital stay, the inflammatory response, organ damage markers and complications at 30 days.Ethics and disseminationThe study is enrolling patients since March 2022. The trial is approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (Dnr 2021-03557) and the Swedish Medical Product Agency (Dnr 5.1-2021-90115). Results will be announced at scientific meetings and in international peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05293041 and EudraCT, 2021-001806-32.
| S-EPMC10450082 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8168449 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBladder cancer is the most common malignancy of the urinary system, and accounts for 3% of newly diagnosed tumors. Transurethral resection of bladder tumor plays a key role in treating bladder cancer, among which one of the most serious complications is bladder perforation caused by obturator nerve reflex. Obturator nerve reflex can be prevented by inducing obturator nerve block after lumbar anesthesia. However, No study so far has compared the inhibitory effect of different obturator nerve block approaches on intraoperative obturator nerve reflex and bladder perforation.MethodIn this study, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) of studies comparing the efficacy of different obturator nerve block approaches performed after lumbar anesthesia in operation.ResultThe distal obturator nerve block guided by peripheral nerve stimulator is the best approach for preventing obturator reflex. The proximal obturator nerve block guided by ultrasound is the best approach for preventing bladder perforation.ConclusionSpinal anesthesia combined with the distal obturator nerve block guided by peripheral nerve stimulator is the most optimal approach to prevent the obturator nerve reflex. But the doctor should choose the appropriate anesthesia method according to the patient's general condition, tumor location, and doctor's proficiency in puncture techniques.
| S-EPMC10028043 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNo randomized controlled trial (RCT) has yet been performed to provide the evidence to clarify the therapeutic debate on liver resection (LR) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in treating colorectal liver metastases (CLM). The meta-analysis was performed to summarize the evidence mostly from retrospective clinical trials and to investigate the effect of LR and RFA.Methodology/principal findingsSystematic literature search of clinical studies was carried out to compare RFA and LR for CLM in Pubmed, Embase and the Cochrane Library Central databases. The meta-analysis was performed using risk ratio (RR) and random effect model, in which 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for RR were calculated. Primary outcomes were the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at 3 and 5 years plus mortality and morbidity. 1 prospective study and 12 retrospective studies were finally eligible for meta-analysis. LR was significantly superior to RFA in 3 -year OS (RR 1.377, 95% CI: 1.246-1.522); 5-year OS (RR: 1.474, 95%CI: 1.284-1.692); 3-year DFS (RR 1.735, 95% CI: 1.483-2.029) and 5-year DFS (RR 2.227, 95% CI: 1.823-2.720). The postoperative morbidity was higher in LR (RR: 2.495, 95% CI: 1.881-3.308), but no significant difference was found in mortality between LR and RFA. The data from the 3 subgroups (tumor<3 cm; solitary tumor; open surgery or laparoscopic approach) showed significantly better OS and DFS in patients who received surgical resection.Conclusions/significancesAlthough multiple confounders exist in the clinical trials especially the bias in patient selection, LR was significantly superior to RFA in the treatment of CLM, even when conditions limited to tumor<3 cm, solitary tumor and open surgery or laparoscopic (lap) approach. Therefore, caution should be taken when treating CLM with RFA before more supportive evidences for RFA from RCTs are obtained.
| S-EPMC3448670 | biostudies-literature