Mario Schietroma1, Lucia Romano2, Adriana Ionelia Apostol1, Silvia Vada1, Stefano Necozione3, Francesco Carlei1, Antonio Giuliani1. 1. Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Science, General Surgery, University of L'Aquila, San Salvatore Hospital, Coppito (AQ), 67100, L'Aquila, Italy. 2. Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Science, General Surgery, University of L'Aquila, San Salvatore Hospital, Coppito (AQ), 67100, L'Aquila, Italy. lucia.romano@graduate.univaq.it. 3. Epidemiology Unit, Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach in the treatment of mid- or low-rectal cancer is still controversial. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic resection of extraperitoneal cancer is associated with improved short-time non-oncological outcomes, although high-level evidence showing similar short- and long-term oncological outcomes is scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our paper is to study the oncological and non-oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of MedLine, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed by combining various key words. STUDY SELECTION: Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer were included. The quality of RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane reviewer's handbook. This meta-analysis was based on the recommendation of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. INTERVENTION(S): This study analyzes laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were oncological parameters. RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs comprising 4,411 patients matched the selection criteria. Meta-analysis showed a significant difference between laparoscopic and open surgery in short-time non-oncological outcomes. Although laparoscopic approach increased operation time, it decreases significantly the blood loss and length of hospital stay. No significant difference was noted regarding short- and long-term oncological outcomes, but 4 and 5 years disease-free survival were statistically higher in the open group. LIMITATIONS: There are still questions about the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer being comparable to the open technique. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that all surgical resections have been performed in high volume centers by expert surgeons, the minimally invasive surgery in patients with extraperitoneal cancer could still be not considered equivalent to open surgery in terms of oncological radicality.
BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach in the treatment of mid- or low-rectal cancer is still controversial. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic resection of extraperitoneal cancer is associated with improved short-time non-oncological outcomes, although high-level evidence showing similar short- and long-term oncological outcomes is scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our paper is to study the oncological and non-oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of MedLine, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from January 1990 to October 2020 was performed by combining various key words. STUDY SELECTION: Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer were included. The quality of RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane reviewer's handbook. This meta-analysis was based on the recommendation of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. INTERVENTION(S): This study analyzes laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were oncological parameters. RESULTS: Fifteen RCTs comprising 4,411 patients matched the selection criteria. Meta-analysis showed a significant difference between laparoscopic and open surgery in short-time non-oncological outcomes. Although laparoscopic approach increased operation time, it decreases significantly the blood loss and length of hospital stay. No significant difference was noted regarding short- and long-term oncological outcomes, but 4 and 5 years disease-free survival were statistically higher in the open group. LIMITATIONS: There are still questions about the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer being comparable to the open technique. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that all surgical resections have been performed in high volume centers by expert surgeons, the minimally invasive surgery in patients with extraperitoneal cancer could still be not considered equivalent to open surgery in terms of oncological radicality.
Authors: Nam Kyu Kim; Tae Wan Aahn; Jea Kun Park; Kang Young Lee; Woong Hee Lee; Seung Kook Sohn; Jin Sik Min Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Ruben Veldkamp; Esther Kuhry; Wim C J Hop; J Jeekel; G Kazemier; H Jaap Bonjer; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio M Lacy Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Pierre J Guillou; Philip Quirke; Helen Thorpe; Joanne Walker; David G Jayne; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 May 14-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Oktar Asoglu; Tugba Matlim; Hasan Karanlik; Murat Atar; Mahmut Muslumanoglu; Yersu Kapran; Abdullah Igci; Vahit Ozmen; Mustafa Kecer; Mesut Parlak Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-04-09 Impact factor: 4.584