Giuseppe S Sica1,2, Danilo Vinci3, Leandro Siragusa4,3, Bruno Sensi4,3, Andrea M Guida3, Vittoria Bellato3,5, Álvaro García-Granero6,7,8, Gianluca Pellino9,10. 1. Minimally Invasive Unit, Department of Surgical Science, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy. sigisica@gmail.com. 2. Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy. sigisica@gmail.com. 3. Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy. 4. Minimally Invasive Unit, Department of Surgical Science, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy. 5. Ospedale IRCCS San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. 6. Colorectal Unit, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Palma, Spain. 7. Applied Surgical Anatomy Unit, Human Embryology and Anatomy Department, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 8. Human Embryology and Anatomy Department, University of Islas Baleares, Palma, Spain. 9. Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, Università Degli Studi Della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy. 10. Colorectal Surgery, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several procedures have been proposed to reduce the rates of recurrence in patients with right-sided colon cancer. Different procedures for a radical right colectomy (RRC), including extended D3 lymphadenectomy, complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been associated with survival benefits by some authors, but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the variability in definition and reporting of RRC, which might be responsible for significant differences in outcome evaluation. METHODS: PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review to identify the definitions of RRC. Primary aims were to identify surgical steps and different nomenclature for RRC. Secondary aims were description of heterogeneity and overlap among different RRC techniques. RESULTS: Ninety-nine articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Eight surgical steps were identified and recorded as specific to RRC: Central arterial ligation was described in 100% of the included studies; preservation of mesocolic integrity in 73% and dissection along the SMV plane in 67%. Other surgical steps were inconstantly reported. Six differently named techniques for RRC have been identified. There were 35 definitions for the 6 techniques and 40% of these were used to identify more than one technique. CONCLUSIONS: The only universally adopted surgical step for RRC is central arterial ligation. There is great heterogeneity and consistent overlap among definitions of all RRC techniques. This is likely to jeopardise the interpretation of the outcomes of studies on the topic. Consistent use of definitions and reporting of procedures are needed to obtain reliable conclusions in future trials. PROSPERO CRD42021241650.
BACKGROUND: Several procedures have been proposed to reduce the rates of recurrence in patients with right-sided colon cancer. Different procedures for a radical right colectomy (RRC), including extended D3 lymphadenectomy, complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been associated with survival benefits by some authors, but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the variability in definition and reporting of RRC, which might be responsible for significant differences in outcome evaluation. METHODS: PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review to identify the definitions of RRC. Primary aims were to identify surgical steps and different nomenclature for RRC. Secondary aims were description of heterogeneity and overlap among different RRC techniques. RESULTS: Ninety-nine articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Eight surgical steps were identified and recorded as specific to RRC: Central arterial ligation was described in 100% of the included studies; preservation of mesocolic integrity in 73% and dissection along the SMV plane in 67%. Other surgical steps were inconstantly reported. Six differently named techniques for RRC have been identified. There were 35 definitions for the 6 techniques and 40% of these were used to identify more than one technique. CONCLUSIONS: The only universally adopted surgical step for RRC is central arterial ligation. There is great heterogeneity and consistent overlap among definitions of all RRC techniques. This is likely to jeopardise the interpretation of the outcomes of studies on the topic. Consistent use of definitions and reporting of procedures are needed to obtain reliable conclusions in future trials. PROSPERO CRD42021241650.
Authors: Jon D Vogel; Seth I Felder; Anuradha R Bhama; Alexander T Hawkins; Sean J Langenfeld; Virginia O Shaffer; Amy J Thorsen; Martin R Weiser; George J Chang; Amy L Lightner; Daniel L Feingold; Ian M Paquette Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Reem A Alharbi; Riyadh Hakami; Khayal A Alkhayal; Omar A Al-Obeed; Thamer A Bin Traiki; Ahmad Zubaidi; Samar Al Homoud; Luai Ashari; Alaa Abduljabbar; Nasser Alsanea Journal: Ann Saudi Med Date: 2020-06-04 Impact factor: 1.526
Authors: Matthew J Page; Joanne E McKenzie; Patrick M Bossuyt; Isabelle Boutron; Tammy C Hoffmann; Cynthia D Mulrow; Larissa Shamseer; Jennifer M Tetzlaff; Elie A Akl; Sue E Brennan; Roger Chou; Julie Glanville; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Manoj M Lalu; Tianjing Li; Elizabeth W Loder; Evan Mayo-Wilson; Steve McDonald; Luke A McGuinness; Lesley A Stewart; James Thomas; Andrea C Tricco; Vivian A Welch; Penny Whiting; David Moher Journal: BMJ Date: 2021-03-29
Authors: G Anania; R J Davies; F Bagolini; N Vettoretto; J Randolph; R Cirocchi; A Donini Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2021-06-12 Impact factor: 3.781