R Cirocchi1, F Cesare Campanile2, S Di Saverio3, G Popivanov4, L Carlini5, D Pironi6, R Tabola7, N Vettoretto8. 1. Department of general and oncologic surgery, university of Perugia, 1, via Tristano di Joannuccio, 05100 Terni, Italy. Electronic address: cirocchiroberto@yahoo.it. 2. General surgery unit, Andosilla hospital, Civita Castellana, VT, Italy. 3. Emergency surgery and trauma surgery unit, Maggiore hospital trauma center, Bologna, Italy. 4. Military medical academy, Sofia, Bulgaria. 5. Department of legal medicine, university of Perugia, Terni, Italy. 6. Department of surgical sciences, Sapienza university of Rome, Rome, Italy. 7. Department of gastrointestinal and general surgery, medical university of Wrocław, Wrocław, Poland. 8. Laparoscopic surgery unit, department of surgery, M Mellini hospital, Chiari, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hemicolectomy is the treatment of choice for intestinal obstruction from right colon cancer. This review compares the laparoscopic vs open access in hemicolectomy for patients with right colon cancer. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies published after January 2017 was performed according to the Prisma guidelines. The study has been recorded on the Prospero register (CRD42016044108). RESULTS: Five studies were included for review. Only one anastomotic leak was reported in conventional open anastomosis group (1.9%) and none of the studies included in the meta-analysis reported re-operations during the first 30 postoperative days. The 30-day postoperative mortality did not differ between the two groups. The length of incision, blood loss, early mobilization after surgery, the 30-day postoperative overall complication rate and hospital length of stay were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group. The difference in the duration of procedure was statistically significant in favor of the open group. The number of dissected lymph nodes, the overall survival at 5 years and time to flatus were described only in one study, without any significant difference. Finally, none of the trials reported any information concerning differences in the costs between the two techniques. CONCLUSIONS: The better outcomes described in this study achieved with laparoscopy, must be interpreted with caution because of the small number of patients involved, the selection and publication bias and the low level of evidence of the analysed trials. Indeed, the advantages of a minimally invasive approach, which have been demonstrated by the present meta-analysis, should encourage the use of laparoscopy also in emergency setting.
BACKGROUND: Hemicolectomy is the treatment of choice for intestinal obstruction from right colon cancer. This review compares the laparoscopic vs open access in hemicolectomy for patients with right colon cancer. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies published after January 2017 was performed according to the Prisma guidelines. The study has been recorded on the Prospero register (CRD42016044108). RESULTS: Five studies were included for review. Only one anastomotic leak was reported in conventional open anastomosis group (1.9%) and none of the studies included in the meta-analysis reported re-operations during the first 30 postoperative days. The 30-day postoperative mortality did not differ between the two groups. The length of incision, blood loss, early mobilization after surgery, the 30-day postoperative overall complication rate and hospital length of stay were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group. The difference in the duration of procedure was statistically significant in favor of the open group. The number of dissected lymph nodes, the overall survival at 5 years and time to flatus were described only in one study, without any significant difference. Finally, none of the trials reported any information concerning differences in the costs between the two techniques. CONCLUSIONS: The better outcomes described in this study achieved with laparoscopy, must be interpreted with caution because of the small number of patients involved, the selection and publication bias and the low level of evidence of the analysed trials. Indeed, the advantages of a minimally invasive approach, which have been demonstrated by the present meta-analysis, should encourage the use of laparoscopy also in emergency setting.
Authors: Andrew S Miller; Kathryn Boyce; Benjamin Box; Matthew D Clarke; Sarah E Duff; Niamh M Foley; Richard J Guy; Lisa H Massey; George Ramsay; Dominic A J Slade; James A Stephenson; Phil J Tozer; Danette Wright Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 3.917