Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 21, 2015; 21(27): 8441-8451
Published online Jul 21, 2015. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i27.8441
Table 1 Characteristics of included studies
Laparoscopic liver resection
Robotic liver resection
Ref.CountryType of studyTotal n. of patientsNo. of patientsAgeM/FNo. of patientsAgeM/FScore of study quality2
Berber et al[21]United StatesRetro/Comparative322366.7 ± 9.612/11966.6 ± 6.47/24+2+3
Ji et al[30]ChinaRetro/Case-control3320NRNR1353 (39-79)19/43+1+3
Troisi et al[45]Belgium-ItalyRetro/Comparative26322355.3 ± 15.798/1254064.6 ± 12.127/134+1+3
Lai et al[41]ChinaRetro/Comparative6633NRNR33NRNR4+1+3
Wu et al[47]TaiwanRetro/Comparative794154.1 ± 1428/133860.9 ± 14.932/64+1+3
Tsung et al[46]United StatesRetro/Case-control17111458.7 ± 15.847/675758.3 ± 14.624/333+2+3
Spampinato et al[43]ItalyRetro/Comparative502562 (33-80)110/152563 (32-80)13/124+2+3
Table 2 Raw data of each included study
First authorBlood loss (mL)Operative time (min)ConversionMorbidityR1 rateHospital stay (d)
Berber et al[21]
Laparoscopic liver resection155 ± 54233.6 ± 16.40%17%NRNR
Robotic liver resection136 ± 61258.5 ± 27.911.10%11%NRNR
Ji et al[30]
Laparoscopic liver resectionNA130 ± 42.510%10%NRNA
Robotic liver resectionNA338 ± 166.90%7.80%NRNA
Troisi et al[45]
Laparoscopic liver resection174 ± 133262 ± 1117.60%12.60%5.40%5.9 ± 3.8
Robotic liver resection330 ± 303271 ± 10020%12.50%7.50%6.1 ± 2.6
Lai et al[41]
Laparoscopic liver resection347.7 ± 498.7133.4 ± 42.7NR9%9.10%NR
Robotic liver resection373.4 ± 872202.7 ± 69.8NR3%9.10%NR
Wu et al[47]
Laparoscopic liver resection173 ± 165227 ± 8012.20%10%NR7.2 ± 4.4
Robotic liver resection325 ± 480380 ± 1665%8%NR7.9 ± 4.7
Tsung et al[46]
Laparoscopic liver resection100 ± 50198.5 ± 20.68.80%26%8%4 ± 0.3
Robotic liver resection200 ± 71.8253 ± 43.77%19.30%5%4 ± 0.6
Spampinato et al[43]
Laparoscopic liver resection512.5 ± 287.5375 ± 1054%36%9%10.2 ± 4.2
Robotic liver resection625 ± 450456.2 ± 1214%16%0%10.5 ± 4.5