经口机器人手术与激光手术治疗cT1-T3声门上型喉癌:比较性与非比较性研究的系统综述与荟萃分析。
Transoral robotic versus laser surgery for cT1-T3 supraglottic laryngeal cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative and non-comparative studies.
文献信息
| PMID | 42880162 |
|---|---|
| 原文 | 在 PubMed 查看原文 ↗ |
| 发表日期 | 2026 |
| 作者 | Jerome R Lechien |
| 作者单位 | Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, UMONS Research Institute for Health Sciences and Technology, University of Mons (UMons), Mons, Belgium; Department of Otolaryngology, Elsan Hospital, Poitiers, France; Department of Otolaryngology-Head Neck Surgery, Foch Hospital, UFR Simone Veil, University Versailles Saint-Quentin-en Yvelines (University Paris Saclay), Paris, France; Research Committee, Young Otolaryngologists of the International Federation of Otorhinolaryngological Societies (YO-IFOS), Paris, France. Electronic address: Jerome.Lechien@umons.ac.be. |
| 期刊 | Oral oncology |
| SCI 分区 | Q1 |
| IF | 4.6 |
| 研究类型 | 综述 Meta · 临床 |
| 所属专科 | 咽喉科 |
中文摘要
背景: 比较经口机器人手术(TORS)与经口激光显微手术(TOLM)治疗声门上型cT1-T3喉癌的功能、肿瘤学及手术结局的文献发现。
方法: 三位独立研究者检索了PubMed、Scopus和Cochrane Library,纳入报告TOLM和TORS肿瘤学、功能及手术(并发症)结局的论文。结局在对照(直接)研究中进行了统计比较,并在单臂队列研究之间进行了间接比较。
结果: 共纳入50项研究(2,644例患者):19项单臂TORS研究(n=615)、27项单臂TOLM研究(n=1,122)和4项比较性研究(n=907)。TORS术后合并阳性切缘率为7.3%(95%CI,4.3-12.0),TOLM术后为12.7%(8.6-18.3)(P=0.08);比较性荟萃分析得出风险比为0.65(0.21-1.99;P=0.45),同样非显著地倾向于TORS。术后出血(5.8%对6.4%;P=0.79)或永久性胃造瘘(7.4%对4.8%;P=0.33)方面未发现差异。永久性气管造瘘在两组中均罕见(1.6%对1.3%),喉保留率分别达到99.6%和93.0%。由于定义异质性,TOLM的并发症率无法合并(I2=87.0%)。TOLM系列的5年总生存率为72.6%(65.8-78.4),TORS无法合并。中位随访时间分别为26个月和50个月。
结论: TORS和TOLM在cT1-T3声门上型喉鳞状细胞癌中提供了目前相当的肿瘤学、手术和功能结局。直接和间接证据均趋向于TORS在切缘方面有非显著优势。文献中明显的差异更可能反映病例组合、时代、随访时长和结局定义,而非手术技术本身。迫切需要在匹配人群中进行随机比较。
英文摘要
BACKGROUND: To compare literature findings about functional, oncological and surgical outcomes of transoral robotic (TORS) versus transoral laser microsurgery (TOLM) for supraglottic cT1-T3 laryngeal cancers.
METHODS: Three independent investigators conducted a PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library search for papers reporting oncological, functional and surgical (complications) outcomes of TOLM and TORS. Outcomes were statistically compared considering controlled (direct) studies, and indirectly between single-arm cohort studies.
RESULTS: Fifty studies (2,644 patients) were included: 19 single-arm TORS (n = 615), 27 single-arm TOLM (n = 1,122), and four comparative studies (n = 907). Pooled positive margins were 7.3% (95%CI, 4.3-12.0) after TORS and 12.7% (8.6-18.3) after TOLM (P = 0.08); the comparative meta-analysis yielded a risk ratio of 0.65 (0.21-1.99; P = 0.45), also favoring TORS non-significantly. No difference was found for postoperative hemorrhage (5.8% versus 6.4%; P = 0.79) or permanent gastrostomy (7.4% versus 4.8%; P = 0.33). Permanent tracheostomy was rare in both groups (1.6% versus 1.3%), and laryngeal preservation reached 99.6% and 93.0%, respectively. Complication rates were not poolable for TOLM (I2 = 87.0%) owing to definitional heterogeneity. Five-year overall survival was 72.6% (65.8-78.4) in the TOLM series and not poolable for TORS. Median follow-up was 26 versus 50 months.
CONCLUSION: TORS and TOLM provide currently comparable oncological, surgical, and functional outcomes in cT1-T3 supraglottic LSCC. Direct and indirect evidence converged toward a non-significant margin advantage for TORS. Apparent differences across the literature more plausibly reflect case mix, era, follow-up duration, and outcome definitions than the surgical technique itself. Randomized comparisons in matched populations are critically needed.