Meng Kong1, Hongyuan Chen1, Yingying Xin1, Yugang Jiang1, Yue Han2, Hongguang Sheng1. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong, 250021, China. 2. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shandong Provincial Third Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China.
Abstract
AIM: Surgeons have concerns whether high ligation (HL) of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) increases the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the influence of HL of the IMA on AL compared with low ligation (LL). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Randomized controlled trial studies that compared HL with LL of the IMA in anterior resection for rectal cancer and reported AL outcomes were eligible for inclusion. The odds ratios and mean differences were analysed by a random-effects model. Trial sequential analysis was performed to minimize the risk of random errors. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence for outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 531 records screened, five randomized controlled trials with 779 patients were selected for analysis. The pooled incidence of AL was 12.1% (95% Cl 7.77-18.26) in the HL group and 9.7% (95% Cl 5.79-15.82) in the LL group (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77-1.87, P = 0.42). In trial sequential analysis, the cumulative Z-score curve exceeded the futility boundary, although the required information size of 1060 had not been reached. The quality of evidence was judged to be high according to the GRADE approach. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that HL of the IMA does not increase the incidence of AL in anterior resection for rectal cancer.
AIM: Surgeons have concerns whether high ligation (HL) of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) increases the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the influence of HL of the IMA on AL compared with low ligation (LL). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched. Randomized controlled trial studies that compared HL with LL of the IMA in anterior resection for rectal cancer and reported AL outcomes were eligible for inclusion. The odds ratios and mean differences were analysed by a random-effects model. Trial sequential analysis was performed to minimize the risk of random errors. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence for outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 531 records screened, five randomized controlled trials with 779 patients were selected for analysis. The pooled incidence of AL was 12.1% (95% Cl 7.77-18.26) in the HL group and 9.7% (95% Cl 5.79-15.82) in the LL group (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.77-1.87, P = 0.42). In trial sequential analysis, the cumulative Z-score curve exceeded the futility boundary, although the required information size of 1060 had not been reached. The quality of evidence was judged to be high according to the GRADE approach. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that HL of the IMA does not increase the incidence of AL in anterior resection for rectal cancer.