Qingbin Wu1,2, Chengwu Jin3, Tao Hu1,2, Mingtian Wei1,4, Ziqiang Wang1. 1. 1 Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University , Chengdu, China . 2. 2 West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University , Chengdu, China . 3. 3 Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Fifth People's Hospital of Chengdu , Chengdu, China . 4. 4 State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center/Collaborative Innovation Center for Biotherapy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University , Chengdu, China .
Abstract
AIM: To compare intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search with no limits was performed in PubMed and Embase. The last search was performed on April 9, 2016. The outcomes of interests included intraoperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, length of incision, conversion, lymph nodes harvested, and intraoperative complications) and postoperative outcomes (time to first flatus, time to first defecation, time to liquid diet, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, mortality, ileus, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, wound infection, hernia, and intra-abdominal abscess). RESULTS: Fifteen articles and four conference abstracts published between 2004 and 2016 with a total of 1957 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. IA was associated with significant less blood loss, smaller length of incision, shorter time to first defecation, shorter time to liquid diet, and shorter length of hospital stay. No differences were found for operative time, conversion, lymph nodes harvested, intraoperative complications, time to first flatus, postoperative complications, mortality, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, ileus, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, or hernia between IA and EA. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that the IA for LRC improves cosmesis and results in better postoperative recovery outcomes without increasing intraoperative and postoperative complications. Furthermore, a large randomized control study is warranted to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of those two anastomosis techniques.
AIM: To compare intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search with no limits was performed in PubMed and Embase. The last search was performed on April 9, 2016. The outcomes of interests included intraoperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, length of incision, conversion, lymph nodes harvested, and intraoperative complications) and postoperative outcomes (time to first flatus, time to first defecation, time to liquid diet, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, mortality, ileus, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, wound infection, hernia, and intra-abdominal abscess). RESULTS: Fifteen articles and four conference abstracts published between 2004 and 2016 with a total of 1957 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. IA was associated with significant less blood loss, smaller length of incision, shorter time to first defecation, shorter time to liquid diet, and shorter length of hospital stay. No differences were found for operative time, conversion, lymph nodes harvested, intraoperative complications, time to first flatus, postoperative complications, mortality, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, ileus, wound infection, intra-abdominal abscess, or hernia between IA and EA. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that the IA for LRC improves cosmesis and results in better postoperative recovery outcomes without increasing intraoperative and postoperative complications. Furthermore, a large randomized control study is warranted to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of those two anastomosis techniques.
Entities:
Keywords:
extracorporeal anastomosis; intracorporeal anastomosis; laparoscopic right colectomy; outcomes
Authors: Lise Courtot; Bertrand Le Roy; Ricardo Memeo; Thibault Voron; Nicolas de Angelis; Nicolas Tabchouri; Francesco Brunetti; Anne Berger; Didier Mutter; Johan Gagniere; Ephrem Salamé; Denis Pezet; Mehdi Ouaïssi Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2018-05-07 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: M Milone; U Elmore; M E Allaix; P P Bianchi; A Biondi; L Boni; U Bracale; E Cassinotti; G Ceccarelli; F Corcione; D Cuccurullo; M Degiuli; Nicolò De Manzini; D D'Ugo; G Formisano; M Manigrasso; M Morino; S Palmisano; R Persiani; R Reddavid; F Rondelli; N Velotti; R Rosati; Giovanni Domenico De Palma Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-04-22 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: J Bollo; P Salas; M C Martinez; P Hernandez; A Rabal; E Carrillo; E Targarona Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2018-09-06 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: L Martinek; K You; S Giuratrabocchetta; M Gachabayov; K Lee; R Bergamaschi Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 2.571