Cargando…

Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis.

Purpose: To date, there is not enough evidence concerning the optimal treatment strategy for early rectal carcinoids, we conducted a meta-analysis in order to determine the feasible local treatment for these selected patients. Methods: We searched the studies from the PubMed, Cochrane database, Medl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sui, Qiaoqi, Lin, Junzhong, Peng, Jianhong, Zhao, Yujie, Deng, Yuxiang, Pan, Zhizhong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Ivyspring International Publisher 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5705998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29187871
http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/jca.21476
_version_ 1783282138045480960
author Sui, Qiaoqi
Lin, Junzhong
Peng, Jianhong
Zhao, Yujie
Deng, Yuxiang
Pan, Zhizhong
author_facet Sui, Qiaoqi
Lin, Junzhong
Peng, Jianhong
Zhao, Yujie
Deng, Yuxiang
Pan, Zhizhong
author_sort Sui, Qiaoqi
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To date, there is not enough evidence concerning the optimal treatment strategy for early rectal carcinoids, we conducted a meta-analysis in order to determine the feasible local treatment for these selected patients. Methods: We searched the studies from the PubMed, Cochrane database, Medline, Ovid, SpringerLink, PMC and Embase between January 2007 and April 2017. Studies of local surgical excision compared with endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoids less than 20mm without adverse features were included. Data were analyzed by using Stata SE 12.0. Results: Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis, with a total of 1056 patients. The data showed that local surgical excision was associated with higher complete resection rate than that of endoscopic resection (OR 5.837, 95%CI 2.048 to 16.632, P=0.001) but consuming longer procedural time (SMD 1.757, 95% CI 1.263 to 2.251, P=0.000). Additionally, incidences of recurrence and en bloc resection rate were comparable between two kinds of resections. The difference of post-operative complications remained unclear. Conclusions: For rectal carcinoids sized 20mm or smaller without adverse features, endoscopic resection might be an efficient treatment, which achieved a comparable oncological safety as local surgical excision.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5705998
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Ivyspring International Publisher
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57059982017-11-29 Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis. Sui, Qiaoqi Lin, Junzhong Peng, Jianhong Zhao, Yujie Deng, Yuxiang Pan, Zhizhong J Cancer Research Paper Purpose: To date, there is not enough evidence concerning the optimal treatment strategy for early rectal carcinoids, we conducted a meta-analysis in order to determine the feasible local treatment for these selected patients. Methods: We searched the studies from the PubMed, Cochrane database, Medline, Ovid, SpringerLink, PMC and Embase between January 2007 and April 2017. Studies of local surgical excision compared with endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoids less than 20mm without adverse features were included. Data were analyzed by using Stata SE 12.0. Results: Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis, with a total of 1056 patients. The data showed that local surgical excision was associated with higher complete resection rate than that of endoscopic resection (OR 5.837, 95%CI 2.048 to 16.632, P=0.001) but consuming longer procedural time (SMD 1.757, 95% CI 1.263 to 2.251, P=0.000). Additionally, incidences of recurrence and en bloc resection rate were comparable between two kinds of resections. The difference of post-operative complications remained unclear. Conclusions: For rectal carcinoids sized 20mm or smaller without adverse features, endoscopic resection might be an efficient treatment, which achieved a comparable oncological safety as local surgical excision. Ivyspring International Publisher 2017-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5705998/ /pubmed/29187871 http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/jca.21476 Text en © Ivyspring International Publisher This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). See http://ivyspring.com/terms for full terms and conditions.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Sui, Qiaoqi
Lin, Junzhong
Peng, Jianhong
Zhao, Yujie
Deng, Yuxiang
Pan, Zhizhong
Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis.
title Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis.
title_full Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis.
title_fullStr Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis.
title_short Local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: A meta-analysis.
title_sort local surgical excision versus endoscopic resection for rectal carcinoid: a meta-analysis.
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5705998/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29187871
http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/jca.21476
work_keys_str_mv AT suiqiaoqi localsurgicalexcisionversusendoscopicresectionforrectalcarcinoidametaanalysis
AT linjunzhong localsurgicalexcisionversusendoscopicresectionforrectalcarcinoidametaanalysis
AT pengjianhong localsurgicalexcisionversusendoscopicresectionforrectalcarcinoidametaanalysis
AT zhaoyujie localsurgicalexcisionversusendoscopicresectionforrectalcarcinoidametaanalysis
AT dengyuxiang localsurgicalexcisionversusendoscopicresectionforrectalcarcinoidametaanalysis
AT panzhizhong localsurgicalexcisionversusendoscopicresectionforrectalcarcinoidametaanalysis