Radiofrequency-assisted Versus Clamp-Crush Liver Resection: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Wei-Kai Xiao,Dong Chen,An-Bin Hu,Bao-Gang Peng,Yi-Zhan Guo,Shun-Jun Fu,Li-Jian Liang,Shao-Qiang Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2013.10.055
2013-01-01
Abstract:BACKGROUND:Conflicting results were found between radiofrequency-assisted liver resection (RF-LR) and clamp-crush liver resection (CC-LR) during liver surgery. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis that included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs to compare the effectiveness and safety of RF-LR versus CC-LR during liver surgery.METHODS:Articles comparing RF-LR and CC-LR that were published before December 2012 were retrieved and subjected to a systematic review and meta-analysis. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out by Review Manager Version 5.2 software.RESULTS:In all, four RCTs and five nonrandomized studies evaluating 728 patients were included. Compared with CC-LR, the RF-LR group had significantly reduced total intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -187 mL; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -312, -62; data on 628 patients), and blood loss during liver transection (WMD = -143.7 mL; 95% CI = -200, -87; data on 190 patients). However, RF-LR is associated with a higher rate of intra-abdominal abscess than the clamp-crushing method (odds ratio = 3.61; 95% CI = 1.26, 10.32; data on 366 patients). No significant difference was observed between both the groups for the incidence of both blood transfusion and bile leak.CONCLUSIONS:There is currently not sufficient evidence to support or refute the use of RF-LR in liver surgery. RF-LR has advantages in terms of reducing blood loss. However, RF-LR may increase the rates of both bile leak and abdominal abscess. So, the safety of RF-LR has not been established. Future well-designed RCTs are awaited to further investigate the efficacy and safety of RF devices in liver resection.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?