Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND:Recently, it has been questioned if minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer was surgically successful. We decided to perform a meta-analysis to determine if minimally invasive surgery is adequate to obtain a complete resection for curable rectal cancer. METHODS:A systematic search pe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Marco Milone, Michele Manigrasso, Morena Burati, Nunzio Velotti, Francesco Milone, Giovanni Domenico De Palma
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6177141?pdf=render
id doaj-70c8c61ac1c240deaaa2e69460f924a9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-70c8c61ac1c240deaaa2e69460f924a92020-11-25T01:17:10ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-011310e020488710.1371/journal.pone.0204887Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.Marco MiloneMichele ManigrassoMorena BuratiNunzio VelottiFrancesco MiloneGiovanni Domenico De PalmaBACKGROUND:Recently, it has been questioned if minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer was surgically successful. We decided to perform a meta-analysis to determine if minimally invasive surgery is adequate to obtain a complete resection for curable rectal cancer. METHODS:A systematic search pertaining to evaluation between laparoscopic and open rectal resection for rectal cancer was performed until 30th November 2016 in the electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE), using the following search terms in all possible combinations: rectal cancer, laparoscopy, minimally invasive and open surgery. Outcomes analyzed were number of clear Distal Resection Margins (DRM or DM), complete Circumferential Resection Margins (CRM) and complete, nearly complete and incomplete Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) and of patients who received laparoscopic or open treatment for rectal cancer. RESULTS:12 articles were included in the final analysis. The prevalence of successful surgical resection was similar between open and laparoscopic surgery. About distance from distal margin of the specimen, clear CRM and complete TME there were no statistically significant difference between the two groups (MD = -0.090 cm, p = 0.364, 95% CI -0.283, 0.104; OR = 1.032, p = 0.821, 95% CI 0.784, 1.360; OR = 0.933, p = 0.720, 95% CI 0.638, 1.364, respectively). The analysis of nearly complete TME showed a significant difference between the two groups (OR = 1.407, p = 0.006, 95% CI 1.103, 1.795), while the analysis of incomplete TME showed a non-significant difference (OR = 1.010, p = 0.964, 95% CI 0.664, 1.534). CONCLUSIONS:By pooling together data from 5 RCTs and 7 nRCTs, we are able to provide evidence of safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery. Waiting for further randomized clinical trials, our results are encouraging to introduce laparoscopic rectal resection in daily practice.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6177141?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marco Milone
Michele Manigrasso
Morena Burati
Nunzio Velotti
Francesco Milone
Giovanni Domenico De Palma
spellingShingle Marco Milone
Michele Manigrasso
Morena Burati
Nunzio Velotti
Francesco Milone
Giovanni Domenico De Palma
Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Marco Milone
Michele Manigrasso
Morena Burati
Nunzio Velotti
Francesco Milone
Giovanni Domenico De Palma
author_sort Marco Milone
title Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.
title_short Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.
title_full Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.
title_fullStr Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis.
title_sort surgical resection for rectal cancer. is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? a systematic review with meta-analysis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2018-01-01
description BACKGROUND:Recently, it has been questioned if minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer was surgically successful. We decided to perform a meta-analysis to determine if minimally invasive surgery is adequate to obtain a complete resection for curable rectal cancer. METHODS:A systematic search pertaining to evaluation between laparoscopic and open rectal resection for rectal cancer was performed until 30th November 2016 in the electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE), using the following search terms in all possible combinations: rectal cancer, laparoscopy, minimally invasive and open surgery. Outcomes analyzed were number of clear Distal Resection Margins (DRM or DM), complete Circumferential Resection Margins (CRM) and complete, nearly complete and incomplete Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) and of patients who received laparoscopic or open treatment for rectal cancer. RESULTS:12 articles were included in the final analysis. The prevalence of successful surgical resection was similar between open and laparoscopic surgery. About distance from distal margin of the specimen, clear CRM and complete TME there were no statistically significant difference between the two groups (MD = -0.090 cm, p = 0.364, 95% CI -0.283, 0.104; OR = 1.032, p = 0.821, 95% CI 0.784, 1.360; OR = 0.933, p = 0.720, 95% CI 0.638, 1.364, respectively). The analysis of nearly complete TME showed a significant difference between the two groups (OR = 1.407, p = 0.006, 95% CI 1.103, 1.795), while the analysis of incomplete TME showed a non-significant difference (OR = 1.010, p = 0.964, 95% CI 0.664, 1.534). CONCLUSIONS:By pooling together data from 5 RCTs and 7 nRCTs, we are able to provide evidence of safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery. Waiting for further randomized clinical trials, our results are encouraging to introduce laparoscopic rectal resection in daily practice.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC6177141?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT marcomilone surgicalresectionforrectalcancerislaparoscopicsurgeryassuccessfulasopenapproachasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis
AT michelemanigrasso surgicalresectionforrectalcancerislaparoscopicsurgeryassuccessfulasopenapproachasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis
AT morenaburati surgicalresectionforrectalcancerislaparoscopicsurgeryassuccessfulasopenapproachasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis
AT nunziovelotti surgicalresectionforrectalcancerislaparoscopicsurgeryassuccessfulasopenapproachasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis
AT francescomilone surgicalresectionforrectalcancerislaparoscopicsurgeryassuccessfulasopenapproachasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis
AT giovannidomenicodepalma surgicalresectionforrectalcancerislaparoscopicsurgeryassuccessfulasopenapproachasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysis
_version_ 1725147656819310592