Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy
Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Zhan, Shixiong [verfasserIn] Zhu, Zhicheng [verfasserIn] Yu, Haitao [verfasserIn] Xia, Yu [verfasserIn] Xu, Tian [verfasserIn] Wan, Zhenda [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2024 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Anmerkung: |
© The Author(s) 2024 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: BMC surgery - BioMed Central, 2001, 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:24 ; year:2024 ; number:1 ; day:22 ; month:08 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR057062749 |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR057062749 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20240823064745.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 240823s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR057062749 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
084 | |a 44.00 |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Zhan, Shixiong |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy |
264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © The Author(s) 2024 | ||
520 | |a Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Colorectal cancer |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a NOSE |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a TWSR |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Meta-analysis |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Zhu, Zhicheng |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Yu, Haitao |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Xia, Yu |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Xu, Tian |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Wan, Zhenda |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t BMC surgery |d BioMed Central, 2001 |g 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. |w (DE-627)331018837 |w (DE-600)2050442-1 |x 1471-2482 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:24 |g year:2024 |g number:1 |g day:22 |g month:08 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x |m X:SPRINGER |x Resolving-System |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a SYSFLAG_0 | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 44.00 |q VZ |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 24 |j 2024 |e 1 |b 22 |c 08 |
author_variant |
s z sz z z zz h y hy y x yx t x tx z w zw |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:14712482:2024----::eanlssfooiassensvrutaiinlwrnooetlacrugrp |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2024 |
bklnumber |
44.00 |
publishDate |
2024 |
allfields |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x doi (DE-627)SPR057062749 (SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 44.00 bkl Zhan, Shixiong verfasserin aut Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. Colorectal cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 NOSE (dpeaa)DE-He213 TWSR (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhu, Zhicheng verfasserin aut Yu, Haitao verfasserin aut Xia, Yu verfasserin aut Xu, Tian verfasserin aut Wan, Zhenda verfasserin aut Enthalten in BMC surgery BioMed Central, 2001 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:24 year:2024 number:1 day:22 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.00 VZ AR 24 2024 1 22 08 |
spelling |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x doi (DE-627)SPR057062749 (SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 44.00 bkl Zhan, Shixiong verfasserin aut Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. Colorectal cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 NOSE (dpeaa)DE-He213 TWSR (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhu, Zhicheng verfasserin aut Yu, Haitao verfasserin aut Xia, Yu verfasserin aut Xu, Tian verfasserin aut Wan, Zhenda verfasserin aut Enthalten in BMC surgery BioMed Central, 2001 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:24 year:2024 number:1 day:22 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.00 VZ AR 24 2024 1 22 08 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x doi (DE-627)SPR057062749 (SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 44.00 bkl Zhan, Shixiong verfasserin aut Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. Colorectal cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 NOSE (dpeaa)DE-He213 TWSR (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhu, Zhicheng verfasserin aut Yu, Haitao verfasserin aut Xia, Yu verfasserin aut Xu, Tian verfasserin aut Wan, Zhenda verfasserin aut Enthalten in BMC surgery BioMed Central, 2001 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:24 year:2024 number:1 day:22 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.00 VZ AR 24 2024 1 22 08 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x doi (DE-627)SPR057062749 (SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 44.00 bkl Zhan, Shixiong verfasserin aut Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. Colorectal cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 NOSE (dpeaa)DE-He213 TWSR (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhu, Zhicheng verfasserin aut Yu, Haitao verfasserin aut Xia, Yu verfasserin aut Xu, Tian verfasserin aut Wan, Zhenda verfasserin aut Enthalten in BMC surgery BioMed Central, 2001 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:24 year:2024 number:1 day:22 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.00 VZ AR 24 2024 1 22 08 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x doi (DE-627)SPR057062749 (SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 44.00 bkl Zhan, Shixiong verfasserin aut Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy 2024 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © The Author(s) 2024 Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. Colorectal cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 NOSE (dpeaa)DE-He213 TWSR (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 Zhu, Zhicheng verfasserin aut Yu, Haitao verfasserin aut Xia, Yu verfasserin aut Xu, Tian verfasserin aut Wan, Zhenda verfasserin aut Enthalten in BMC surgery BioMed Central, 2001 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 1471-2482 nnns volume:24 year:2024 number:1 day:22 month:08 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x X:SPRINGER Resolving-System kostenfrei Volltext SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 44.00 VZ AR 24 2024 1 22 08 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in BMC surgery 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. volume:24 year:2024 number:1 day:22 month:08 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in BMC surgery 24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug. volume:24 year:2024 number:1 day:22 month:08 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Colorectal cancer NOSE TWSR Meta-analysis |
dewey-raw |
610 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
BMC surgery |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Zhan, Shixiong @@aut@@ Zhu, Zhicheng @@aut@@ Yu, Haitao @@aut@@ Xia, Yu @@aut@@ Xu, Tian @@aut@@ Wan, Zhenda @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2024-08-22T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
331018837 |
dewey-sort |
3610 |
id |
SPR057062749 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR057062749</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240823064745.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240823s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR057062749</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhan, Shixiong</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Colorectal cancer</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">NOSE</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">TWSR</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meta-analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhu, Zhicheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yu, Haitao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xia, Yu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xu, Tian</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wan, Zhenda</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:22</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x</subfield><subfield code="m">X:SPRINGER</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.00</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">22</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Zhan, Shixiong |
spellingShingle |
Zhan, Shixiong ddc 610 bkl 44.00 misc Colorectal cancer misc NOSE misc TWSR misc Meta-analysis Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy |
authorStr |
Zhan, Shixiong |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)331018837 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1471-2482 |
topic_title |
610 VZ 44.00 bkl Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy Colorectal cancer (dpeaa)DE-He213 NOSE (dpeaa)DE-He213 TWSR (dpeaa)DE-He213 Meta-analysis (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.00 misc Colorectal cancer misc NOSE misc TWSR misc Meta-analysis |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.00 misc Colorectal cancer misc NOSE misc TWSR misc Meta-analysis |
topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.00 misc Colorectal cancer misc NOSE misc TWSR misc Meta-analysis |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
BMC surgery |
hierarchy_parent_id |
331018837 |
dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
hierarchy_top_title |
BMC surgery |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 |
title |
Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR057062749 (SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e |
title_full |
Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy |
author_sort |
Zhan, Shixiong |
journal |
BMC surgery |
journalStr |
BMC surgery |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2024 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Zhan, Shixiong Zhu, Zhicheng Yu, Haitao Xia, Yu Xu, Tian Wan, Zhenda |
container_volume |
24 |
class |
610 VZ 44.00 bkl |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Zhan, Shixiong |
doi_str_mv |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x |
dewey-full |
610 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
meta-analysis of robotic-assisted nose versus traditional twsr in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy |
title_auth |
Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy |
abstract |
Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. © The Author(s) 2024 |
abstractGer |
Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. © The Author(s) 2024 |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted. © The Author(s) 2024 |
collection_details |
SYSFLAG_0 GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
1 |
title_short |
Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Zhu, Zhicheng Yu, Haitao Xia, Yu Xu, Tian Wan, Zhenda |
author2Str |
Zhu, Zhicheng Yu, Haitao Xia, Yu Xu, Tian Wan, Zhenda |
ppnlink |
331018837 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x |
up_date |
2024-08-23T04:50:02.535Z |
_version_ |
1808152503293837312 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000naa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR057062749</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240823064745.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">240823s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR057062749</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s12893-024-02516-x-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.00</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhan, Shixiong</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© The Author(s) 2024</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Colorectal cancer</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">NOSE</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">TWSR</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Meta-analysis</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhu, Zhicheng</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yu, Haitao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xia, Yu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xu, Tian</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Wan, Zhenda</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">BioMed Central, 2001</subfield><subfield code="g">24(2024), 1 vom: 22. Aug.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:24</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2024</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:22</subfield><subfield code="g">month:08</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-024-02516-x</subfield><subfield code="m">X:SPRINGER</subfield><subfield code="x">Resolving-System</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.00</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">24</subfield><subfield code="j">2024</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">22</subfield><subfield code="c">08</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.399637 |