ABSTRACT
Objective:This article aimed to systematically evaluate the safety, feasibility and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma.Methods:Relevant medical literatures published before November 30, 2021 were searched using PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, CBM databases. Based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, articles were selected, and RevMan5.4 software was used to conduct the meta-analysis of this study.Results:Twelve comparative cohort articles were enrolled, which included 634 patients. There were 275 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma in the laparoscopic group, and 359 patients who underwent open radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma in the open group. Meta-analysis showed that when compared with the open group, operation time of the laparoscopic group was significantly longer ( MD=58.36, 95% CI:13.54-103.18). However, intraoperative blood loss ( MD=-79.70, 95% CI:-90.01--69.39), hospital stay ( MD=-3.37, 95% CI:-4.29--2.45) and incision-related complications ( OR=0.36, 95% CI:0.16-0.80) were all significantly less (all P<0.05). The number of lymph node harvested, R 0 resection rates, postoperative bile leakage, intraperitoneal infection and effusion, total complication rates, and perioperative mortality and 1-year survival rates after operation between the two groups were not significantly different (all P>0.05). Conclusion:Laparoscopic radical resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma was feasible and safe in selected patients carried out in an experienced hepatobiliary surgery center.