1.
Effectiveness and safety of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for liver neoplasms: A meta-analysis of retrospective studies.
Hu, L, Yao, L, Li, X, Jin, P, Yang, K, Guo, T
Asian journal of surgery. 2018;(5):401-416
Abstract
This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of RAH and LLR for liver neoplasms. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, Web of science, and China Biology Medicine disc up to July 2016 for studies that provided comparisons between the surgical outcomes of RAH and LLR for liver neoplasms. WMD, OR and 95% CI were calculated and data combined using the random-effect model. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis, in which 487 patients were in the RAH group and 902 patients were in the LLR group. The meta-analysis results indicated: compared to LLR, RAH was associated with more estimated blood loss, longer operative time, and longer time to first nutritional intake (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay, conversion rate during operation, R0 resection rate, complications and mortality (p > 0.05). Three studies reported the total cost, and the result showed a higher cost in the RAH group when compared with the LLR group (p < 0.05). This meta-analysis indicated that RAH and LLR display similar effectiveness and safety in hepatectomy. Considering the lack of high quality original studies, prospective clinical trials should be conducted to provide strong evidence for clinical guidelines formation, and the insurance coverage policies should be established to promote the application of robotic surgery in the future.
2.
Fatal adverse events with molecular targeted agents in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Li, X, Wan, J, Wu, Z, Tu, J, Hu, Y, Wu, S, Lou, L
Drug design, development and therapy. 2018;:3043-3049
Abstract
AIMS: Concerns have increased about the risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) associated with molecular targeted agents (MTAs) in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The purpose of this study is to investigate the overall incidence and risk of FAEs in advanced HCC with administration of MTAs by using a meta-analysis of available clinical trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles before March 2017. Eligible studies were selected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Pooled incidence, Peto ORs and 95% CIs were calculated according to the heterogeneity of selected studies. RESULTS A total of 4,716 HCC participants from 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were finally considered for this meta-analysis. The pooled incidence of death due to MTAs was 2.1% (95% CI 1.6%-2.8%) with a Peto OR of 1.79 (95% CI 1.07-3.01; p=0.027) in comparison with controlled groups. Subgroup analysis according to biological agents showed that brivanib treatment in HCC patients significantly increased the risk of developing FAEs (Peto OR 3.97; 95% CI 1.17-13.51; p=0.028) but not for sorafenib (Peto OR 1.78; 95% CI 0.54-5.89; p=0.34) and other MTAs (Peto OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.75-2.76; p=0.28). Sensitive analysis showed that the pooled results were influenced by removing each single trial. The most common causes of FAEs were hepatic failure (22.2%) and hemorrhage (13.3%), respectively. CONCLUSION Clinicians should be aware of the risks of FAEs during the administration of MTAs in advanced HCC patients, especially for patients with abnormal liver function. However, the use of sorafenib remains justified in its approved indications due to their potential survival benefits and limited toxicities.