Scholarlink

<p>Currently, the Da Vinci surgical robot is the most widely used robotic system for surgery, but its high cost has hindered its adoption in less developed regions. To meet diverse surgical needs, Chinese companies have independently developed robotic surgery systems such as Kangduo. However, comparative studies on the effectiveness of these two systems in robot-assisted nephrectomy remain very limited. This study represents the first attempt to conduct a comparative analysis between them. A structured literature search was carried out on EMBASE, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science to obtain prospective studies that compared KD-RAN and DV-RAN from January 1, 2000 to October 1, 2025. Through the determination of inclusion and exclusion criteria, the main focus of the screening was directed towards the perioperative results of operative times, blood loss, and WIT. A total of four primary studies were eventually pooled into this meta-analysis, including two prospective studies and two randomized controlled trials. All of the enrolled studies involved a total of 446 participants with 197 participants in the KD-RAN group and 249 participants in the DV-RAN group. Results of the analysis demonstrated that, relative to the DV system, the KD system presented no statistically significant differences with respect to operative time, WIT, EBL, eGFR at 4&#xa0;weeks after the operation, and incidence of Clavien-Dindo Grade I and II complications. Yet, for the KD system, relative to the DV system, Docking Time was significantly longer (WMD: 1.38&#xa0;min, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.65, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), and Console Time was also appreciably longer (WMD: 27.60&#xa0;min, 95% CI 17.02 to 38.18, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). Despite the KD robotic system required longer docking and console operation times, which may be primarily attributed to the surgical team’s initial learning curve with the Kangduo system, it demonstrated comparable efficacy to the DV system in other key surgical outcome measures. With accumulated experience along the learning curve, the KD system is expected to become a reliable clinical alternative in the future. However, these findings remain preliminary and exploratory, requiring further validation through more high-quality studies.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Perioperative outcomes of KangDuo versus Da Vinci robotic-assisted nephrectomy: a meta-analysis of prospective studies

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月9日

查看全文
  • ZongYing Lv,
  • LiangSuo Zhang,
  • ChunYu Huang,
  • SiJin Lin,
  • WenKai Tang,
  • Kai Peng,
  • LiKe Zeng,
  • Xin Li,
  • Peng Du

摘要

Currently, the Da Vinci surgical robot is the most widely used robotic system for surgery, but its high cost has hindered its adoption in less developed regions. To meet diverse surgical needs, Chinese companies have independently developed robotic surgery systems such as Kangduo. However, comparative studies on the effectiveness of these two systems in robot-assisted nephrectomy remain very limited. This study represents the first attempt to conduct a comparative analysis between them. A structured literature search was carried out on EMBASE, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science to obtain prospective studies that compared KD-RAN and DV-RAN from January 1, 2000 to October 1, 2025. Through the determination of inclusion and exclusion criteria, the main focus of the screening was directed towards the perioperative results of operative times, blood loss, and WIT. A total of four primary studies were eventually pooled into this meta-analysis, including two prospective studies and two randomized controlled trials. All of the enrolled studies involved a total of 446 participants with 197 participants in the KD-RAN group and 249 participants in the DV-RAN group. Results of the analysis demonstrated that, relative to the DV system, the KD system presented no statistically significant differences with respect to operative time, WIT, EBL, eGFR at 4 weeks after the operation, and incidence of Clavien-Dindo Grade I and II complications. Yet, for the KD system, relative to the DV system, Docking Time was significantly longer (WMD: 1.38 min, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.65, p < 0.05), and Console Time was also appreciably longer (WMD: 27.60 min, 95% CI 17.02 to 38.18, p < 0.05). Despite the KD robotic system required longer docking and console operation times, which may be primarily attributed to the surgical team’s initial learning curve with the Kangduo system, it demonstrated comparable efficacy to the DV system in other key surgical outcome measures. With accumulated experience along the learning curve, the KD system is expected to become a reliable clinical alternative in the future. However, these findings remain preliminary and exploratory, requiring further validation through more high-quality studies.