Scholarlink

Background <p>This study aimed to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes between robotic and open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in patients with testicular cancer.</p> Methods <p>The study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, and quality assessment was performed following the AMSTAR criteria. A systematic search was performed in Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases, with the search period up to July 2025. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 17 software.</p> Results <p>The current results showed that compared with open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (O-RLND), robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) had a shorter hospital length of stay (effect, −&#xa0;3.68; 95 % confidence interval [CI], −&#xa0;4.16 to −&#xa0;3.21; <i>P</i>&#xa0;&lt;&#xa0;0.05), less estimated blood loss (effect, −&#xa0;296.09; 95 % CI, −&#xa0;416.62 to −&#xa0;175.55; <i>P</i>&#xa0;&lt;&#xa0;0.05), and a lower overall complication rate (relative risk, 0.66; 95 % CI, 0.49–0.89; <i>P</i>&#xa0;&lt;&#xa0;0.05). Lymph node production and recurrence rate did not differ significantly between the two.</p> Conclusion <p>Robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection appears to be safer than O-RLND and has a faster postoperative recovery. Oncologic outcomes did not differ significantly, but more research is needed to explore further.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparison of Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes Between Robotic and Open Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection in Testicular Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月2日

查看全文
  • Pan Zhao,
  • Xiaojun Tan,
  • Ye Xie,
  • Ran Deng,
  • Fang Peng

摘要

Background

This study aimed to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes between robotic and open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in patients with testicular cancer.

Methods

The study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, and quality assessment was performed following the AMSTAR criteria. A systematic search was performed in Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases, with the search period up to July 2025. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 17 software.

Results

The current results showed that compared with open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (O-RLND), robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (R-RPLND) had a shorter hospital length of stay (effect, − 3.68; 95 % confidence interval [CI], − 4.16 to − 3.21; P < 0.05), less estimated blood loss (effect, − 296.09; 95 % CI, − 416.62 to − 175.55; P < 0.05), and a lower overall complication rate (relative risk, 0.66; 95 % CI, 0.49–0.89; P < 0.05). Lymph node production and recurrence rate did not differ significantly between the two.

Conclusion

Robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection appears to be safer than O-RLND and has a faster postoperative recovery. Oncologic outcomes did not differ significantly, but more research is needed to explore further.