Literature DB >> 18191529

Oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.

C Anderson1, G Uman, A Pigazzi.   

Abstract

AIM: To review and compare the oncologic outcomes in patients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic vs. open rectal surgery.
METHODS: An electronic literature search was performed for trials reporting oncologic outcomes for laparoscopic rectal resections. Variables of interest were survival, recurrence rates, margin status and nodal retrieval. Trials were excluded if variables were not specifically analysed for rectal resections. A meta-analysis was performed to assess the difference in oncologic outcomes between the two treatment approaches.
RESULTS: Data on a total of 1403 laparoscopic (LG) and 1755 open (OG) rectal resections were gathered from 24 publications. Overall survival at 3 years (LG=76%, OG=69%) was not statistically different between the two treatment groups. The mean local recurrence rates were 7% for laparoscopic and 8% for open procedures (NS). There was no difference in radial margin positivity, 5% of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery compared to 8% for open surgery. Laparoscopic procedures harvested a mean of 10 nodes as compared to 12 for open procedures, p=0.001.
CONCLUSIONS: Data gathered in this meta-analysis indicate that there are no oncologic differences between laparoscopic and open resections for treatment of primary rectal cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18191529     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2007.11.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0748-7983            Impact factor:   4.424


  32 in total

1.  Magnetic resonance (MR) pelvimetry as a predictor of difficulty in laparoscopic operations for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Tim Killeen; Saswata Banerjee; Vardhini Vijay; Zaid Al-Dabbagh; Daren Francis; Steve Warren
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-05-13       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on oncologic adequacy of resection and long-term oncologic outcomes.

Authors:  Mei-Jin Huang; Jing-Lin Liang; Hui Wang; Liang Kang; Yan-Hong Deng; Jian-Ping Wang
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 3.  Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestive surgery: Present and future directions.

Authors:  Juan C Rodríguez-Sanjuán; Marcos Gómez-Ruiz; Soledad Trugeda-Carrera; Carlos Manuel-Palazuelos; Antonio López-Useros; Manuel Gómez-Fleitas
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-02-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Influence of conversion on the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer compared with primarily open resection.

Authors:  Alexander Rickert; Florian Herrle; Fabian Doyon; Stefan Post; Peter Kienle
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Does chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine preoperative antisepsis reduce surgical site infection in cranial neurosurgery?

Authors:  B M Davies; H C Patel
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Resection of rectal cancer: laparoscopy or open surgery?

Authors:  M R Marsden; A Parvaiz; B Moran
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 7.  Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: where do we stand?

Authors:  Mukta K Krane; Alessandro Fichera
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-12-14       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision compared to open surgery.

Authors:  Jing Gong; De-Bing Shi; Xin-Xiang Li; San-Jun Cai; Zu-Qing Guan; Ye Xu
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Short-term follow-up after laparoscopic versus conventional total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer in a large teaching hospital.

Authors:  A H W Schiphorst; A Doeksen; M E Hamaker; D D E Zimmerman; A Pronk
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-09-17       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 10.  Evolving treatment strategies for colorectal cancer: a critical review of current therapeutic options.

Authors:  Daniel C Damin; Anderson R Lazzaron
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.