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...
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |