Abstract: Background: Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) has not been widely accepted for recurrent liver cancer (RLC). This study aims to conduct a systematic review of the current literature for determining LLR effectiveness and safety for patients with RLC. Methods: Before April 2022, a comprehensive literature search was undertaken in Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase relied on a specified search strategy for eligible propensity score matching (PSM) studies comparing LLR or OLR. Meta-analysis of operative times, duration of stay, mortality, blood loss, overall survival rate, blood transfusion, recurrence-free survival rate, and overall complications was undertaken using a random/fixed-effects model. Results: Eight PSM studies of LLR versus OLR were incorporated, including 1128 patients. The current meta-analysis revealed nonsignificant variations between the two groups in overall survival rate, operation time, blood transfusion, mortality, overall complications, and long-term recurrence-free survival rate. Alternatively, when LLR is compared to OLR, LLR results in lower blood loss (p=0.002) and a shorter hospitalization (p=0.04). Conclusion: Although both techniques appear equal, LLR seems to have certain advantages over OLR. Notably, the evidence quality is generally confined to cohort studies, necessitating the performance of a high-quality randomized trial that compares both approaches. Keywords: Laparoscopic surgery, Liver resection, Recurrent liver cancer, Propensity score matching, Meta-analysis.
Processing Request
No Comments.