Open Versus Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Versus Transanal Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.


Journal

Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 6 2 2019
medline: 28 1 2020
entrez: 6 2 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To compare techniques for rectal cancer resection. Different surgical approaches exist for mesorectal excision. Systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis performed. Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials included, reporting on 6237 participants, comparing: open versus laparoscopic versus robotic versus transanal mesorectal excision. No significant differences identified between treatments in intraoperative morbidity, conversion rate, grade III/IV morbidity, reoperation, anastomotic leak, nodes retrieved, involved distal margin, 5-year overall survival, and locoregional recurrence. Operative blood loss was less with laparoscopic surgery compared with open, and with robotic surgery compared with open and laparoscopic. Robotic operative time was longer compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal. Laparoscopic operative time was longer compared with open. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in lower overall postoperative morbidity and fewer wound infections compared with open. Robotic surgery had fewer wound infections compared with open. Time to defecation was longer with open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic. Hospital stay was longer after open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic, and after laparoscopic surgery compared with robotic. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in more incomplete or nearly complete mesorectal excisions compared with open, and in more involved circumferential resection margins compared with transanal. Robotic surgery resulted in longer distal resection margins compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal. The different techniques result in comparable perioperative morbidity and long-term survival. The laparoscopic and robotic approaches may improve postoperative recovery, and the open and transanal approaches may improve oncological resection. Technique selection should be based on expected benefits by individual patient.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVE
To compare techniques for rectal cancer resection.
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
Different surgical approaches exist for mesorectal excision.
METHODS
Systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis performed.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials included, reporting on 6237 participants, comparing: open versus laparoscopic versus robotic versus transanal mesorectal excision. No significant differences identified between treatments in intraoperative morbidity, conversion rate, grade III/IV morbidity, reoperation, anastomotic leak, nodes retrieved, involved distal margin, 5-year overall survival, and locoregional recurrence. Operative blood loss was less with laparoscopic surgery compared with open, and with robotic surgery compared with open and laparoscopic. Robotic operative time was longer compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal. Laparoscopic operative time was longer compared with open. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in lower overall postoperative morbidity and fewer wound infections compared with open. Robotic surgery had fewer wound infections compared with open. Time to defecation was longer with open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic. Hospital stay was longer after open surgery compared with laparoscopic and robotic, and after laparoscopic surgery compared with robotic. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in more incomplete or nearly complete mesorectal excisions compared with open, and in more involved circumferential resection margins compared with transanal. Robotic surgery resulted in longer distal resection margins compared with open, laparoscopic, and transanal.
CONCLUSIONS
The different techniques result in comparable perioperative morbidity and long-term survival. The laparoscopic and robotic approaches may improve postoperative recovery, and the open and transanal approaches may improve oncological resection. Technique selection should be based on expected benefits by individual patient.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30720507
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003227
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Meta-Analysis Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

59-68

Auteurs

Constantinos Simillis (C)

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.

Nikhil Lal (N)

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Sarah N Thoukididou (SN)

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Christos Kontovounisios (C)

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.

Jason J Smith (JJ)

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.

Roel Hompes (R)

Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Michel Adamina (M)

Department of Surgery, Cantonal Hospital Winterthur, Winterthur, Switzerland.

Paris P Tekkis (PP)

Department of Colorectal Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH