The CONVERSION Study: Open Conversion Risk in Robotic vs Laparoscopic Surgery-A 20-Year Meta-analysis.
meta_analysis · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 41233947.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006976.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To compare the rate of conversion to open surgery (OC) between robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) and laparoscopy (LAP) across 15 abdominal procedures. OC worsens outcomes and costs; a cross-disciplinary estimate of OC risk in RAS versus LAP across general surgery and subspecialties has been lacking. PRISMA-guided systematic review (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus; 2000-2023). Primary endpoint: pooled random-effects odds ratio (OR) for OC (RAS vs LAP) with 95% CIs; heterogeneity quantified by I² and τ². Meta-regression tested age, BMI, and sex. 360 studies (14 RCTs, 36 prospective, 310 retrospective; 211,078 RAS and 1,358,201 LAP) from 30 countries met inclusion. RAS had lower pooled odds of OC than LAP across procedures and study types. Meta-regression showed no significant effect of age, BMI, or sex on OC. Heterogeneity was moderate-to-high overall and varied by procedure (full metrics and forest plots in SDC, http://links.lww.com/SLA/F670). Across diverse abdominal procedures, RAS is associated with lower OC risk. Findings support multi-specialty decision-making, while acknowledging heterogeneity, learning-curve effects, and procedure-specific evidence gaps.