PAULO HERMAN

(Fonte: Lattes)
Índice h a partir de 2011
19
Lattes
ResearcherID
ORCID
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Departamento de Gastroenterologia, Faculdade de Medicina - Docente
Instituto Central, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
LIM/37 - Laboratório de Transplante e Cirurgia de Fígado, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina

Filtros

Limpar filtros

Configurações

search.filters.applied.f.dateIssued: 2019 ×

Resultados de Busca

Agora exibindo 1 - 1 de 1
  • article 36 Citação(ões) na Scopus
    Laparoscopic vs. open left lateral sectionectomy: An update meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized controlled trials
    (2019) MACACARI, Rodrigo Luiz; COELHO, Fabricio Ferreira; BERNARDO, Wanderley Marques; KRUGER, Jaime Arthur Pirola; JEISMANN, Vagner Birk; FONSECA, Gilton Marques; CESCONETTO, Danielle Menezes; CECCONELLO, Ivan; HERMAN, Paulo
    Background: Left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) is thought to be the anatomical liver resection most suitable for the laparoscopic approach. Despite increasing popularity, comparative analysis of laparoscopic and open LLS are mostly limited to retrospective, underpowered studies with small sample size. Recent population-based studies and prospective trials have generated new data; however, this new body of knowledge has not been submitted systematic reviews or meta-analyses and high quality evidence regarding the actual benefits of minimally invasive LLS is lacking. Methods: Systematic review of studies published until December 31st, 2017 and indexed in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central and Scielo/LILACS databases. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing perioperative results of laparoscopic and open LLS were included. Studies with patients submitted to LLS for living donation were excluded. Treatment outcomes, including conversion rates, estimated blood loss, transfusion rates, operative time, length of in-hospital stay, morbidity and mortality rates, were evaluated. Results: The primary search yielded 2838 articles, 23 of which (21 observational studies and 2 randomized controlled trials; 3415 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall conversion rate was 7.4%. Patients submitted to laparoscopic LLS had less blood loss (mean difference, MD = - 119.81 ml, 95% CI = - 127.90, - 111.72, P < .00001, I-2 = 32%, N = 618), lower transfusion rates (4.1% vs. 10.1%; risk difference, RD = - 0.06, 95% CI = - 0.08, - 0.05, P < .00001, I-2 = 13%, N = 2968) and shorter length of in-hospital stay (MD = - 2.02 days, 95% CI = - 2.15, - 1.89, P < .00001, I-2 = 77%, N= 3160) compared to those undergoing open surgery. Marginally decreased overall complication (21.4% vs. 27.5%; RD = -0.03, 95% CI = - 0.06, 0.00, P =. 05, I-2 = 0%, N= 3268) and perioperative mortality (0.3% vs. 1.5%; RD = - 0.01, 95% CI = - 0.02, - 0.00, P =. 01, I-2 = 0%; N= 3332) rates were also observed. Operative time and biliary, cardiac or pulmonary complication rates did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusion: Current evidence supports the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic LLS. The laparoscopic approach is associated with reduced blood loss, lower transfusion rates and shorter length of in-hospital stay and should be considered the gold-standard for LLS.