Ottavia De Simoni1, Andrea Barina2, Antonio Sommariva1, Marco Tonello1, Mario Gruppo1, Genny Mattara1, Antonio Toniato3, Pierluigi Pilati1, Boris Franzato1. 1. Unit of Surgical Oncology of the Esophagus and Digestive Tract, Surgical Oncology Department, Veneto Institute of Oncology, IOV-IRCCS, Via dei Carpani, 16, 31033, Castelfranco Veneto, TV, Italy. 2. Unit of Surgical Oncology of the Esophagus and Digestive Tract, Surgical Oncology Department, Veneto Institute of Oncology, IOV-IRCCS, Via dei Carpani, 16, 31033, Castelfranco Veneto, TV, Italy. andrea.barina@iov.veneto.it. 3. Endocrine Surgery Unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology, IOV-IRCSS, Padua, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has introduced a promising surgical approach for treatment of right colon cancer. However, benefits of CME are still a matter of debate. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess safety and long-term outcomes of CME versus conventional right hemicolectomy (CRH). METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase for retrieving studies comparing CME with CRH in right colon cancer. After data extraction from the included studies, meta-analysis was performed to compare postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, 30-day mortality, number of lymph node yield, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1871 patients enrolled. No difference was observed in postoperative complications (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.88-1.47, p = 0.34). CME was associated with significantly higher number of lymph nodes retrieved (MD 9.17, CI 4.67-13.68, p < 0.001). CME also improved 3-year OS (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.17-2.11, p = 0.003), 5-year OS (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.89, p = 0.02), and 5-year DFS (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.29-3.07, p = 0.002). A sub-group analysis for patients with stage III colon cancer showed no significant impact of CME on 3-year and 5-year OS (OR 2.47, 95% CI 0.86-7.06, p = 0.09; OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.78-1.94, p = 0.38). CONCLUSION: Although with limited evidence, CME shows similar postoperative complication rates and an improved survival outcome compared with CRH.
PURPOSE: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has introduced a promising surgical approach for treatment of right colon cancer. However, benefits of CME are still a matter of debate. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess safety and long-term outcomes of CME versus conventional right hemicolectomy (CRH). METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase for retrieving studies comparing CME with CRH in right colon cancer. After data extraction from the included studies, meta-analysis was performed to compare postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, 30-day mortality, number of lymph node yield, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1871 patients enrolled. No difference was observed in postoperative complications (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.88-1.47, p = 0.34). CME was associated with significantly higher number of lymph nodes retrieved (MD 9.17, CI 4.67-13.68, p < 0.001). CME also improved 3-year OS (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.17-2.11, p = 0.003), 5-year OS (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.89, p = 0.02), and 5-year DFS (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.29-3.07, p = 0.002). A sub-group analysis for patients with stage III colon cancer showed no significant impact of CME on 3-year and 5-year OS (OR 2.47, 95% CI 0.86-7.06, p = 0.09; OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.78-1.94, p = 0.38). CONCLUSION: Although with limited evidence, CME shows similar postoperative complication rates and an improved survival outcome compared with CRH.
Entities:
Keywords:
Complete mesocolic excision; Right colon cancer; Right hemicolectomy
Authors: Nicholas P West; Werner Hohenberger; Klaus Weber; Aristoteles Perrakis; Paul J Finan; Philip Quirke Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-11-30 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Claus A Bertelsen; Anders U Neuenschwander; Jens E Jansen; Jutaka R Tenma; Michael Wilhelmsen; Anders Kirkegaard-Klitbo; Else R Iversen; Birgitte Bols; Peter Ingeholm; Leif A Rasmussen; Lars V Jepsen; Pernille W Born; Bent Kristensen; Jakob Kleif Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-09-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Phil Quirke; Robert Steele; John Monson; Robert Grieve; Subhash Khanna; Jean Couture; Chris O'Callaghan; Arthur Sun Myint; Eric Bessell; Lindsay C Thompson; Mahesh Parmar; Richard J Stephens; David Sebag-Montefiore Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-03-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Tamara Díaz-Vico; María Fernández-Hevia; Aida Suárez-Sánchez; Carmen García-Gutiérrez; Luka Mihic-Góngora; Daniel Fernández-Martínez; José Antonio Álvarez-Pérez; Jorge Luis Otero-Díez; José Electo Granero-Trancón; Luis Joaquín García-Flórez Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Javier A Luzon; Yngve Thorsen; Liebert P Nogueira; Solveig N Andersen; Bjørn Edwin; Håvard J Haugen; Dejan Ignjatovic; Bojan V Stimec Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-04-05 Impact factor: 3.453