Cargando…

Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis

Objective: To evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery using natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) compared with conventional laparoscopic (CL) colorectal surgery in patients with colorectal diseases. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EM...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Rui-Ji, Zhang, Chun-Dong, Fan, Yu-Chen, Pei, Jun-Peng, Zhang, Cheng, Dai, Dong-Qiu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6617713/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31334119
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00597
_version_ 1783433753884884992
author Liu, Rui-Ji
Zhang, Chun-Dong
Fan, Yu-Chen
Pei, Jun-Peng
Zhang, Cheng
Dai, Dong-Qiu
author_facet Liu, Rui-Ji
Zhang, Chun-Dong
Fan, Yu-Chen
Pei, Jun-Peng
Zhang, Cheng
Dai, Dong-Qiu
author_sort Liu, Rui-Ji
collection PubMed
description Objective: To evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery using natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) compared with conventional laparoscopic (CL) colorectal surgery in patients with colorectal diseases. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective non-randomized trials and retrospective trials up to September 1, 2018, and used 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), lymph node harvest, surgical site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and intra-abdominal abscess as the main endpoints. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to the different study types [RCT and NRCT (non-randomized controlled trial)]. A sensitivity analysis was carried out to evaluate the reliability of the outcomes. RevMan5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Results: Fourteen studies were included (two RCTs, seven retrospective trials and five prospective non-randomized trials) involving a total of 1,435 patients. Compared with CL surgery, the NOSE technique resulted in a shorter hospital stay, shorter time to first flatus, less post-operative pain, and fewer SSIs and total perioperative complications. Anastomotic leakage, blood loss, and intra-abdominal abscess did not differ between the two groups, while operation time was longer in the NOSE group. Oncological outcomes such as proximal margin [weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.49 to 1.42; P = 0.34], distal margin (WMD= −0.11; 95% CI −0.66 to 0.45; P = 0.70), lymph node harvest (WMD = −0.97; 95% CI −1.97 to 0.03; P = 0.06) and 5-year DFS (hazard ratio = 0.84; 95% CI 0.54–1.31; P = 0.45) were not different between the NOSE and CL surgery groups. Conclusions: Compared with CL surgery, NOSE may be a safe procedure, and can achieve similar oncological outcomes. Large multicenter RCTs are needed to provide high-level, evidence-based results in NOSE-treated patients and to determine the risk of local recurrence.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6617713
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66177132019-07-22 Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis Liu, Rui-Ji Zhang, Chun-Dong Fan, Yu-Chen Pei, Jun-Peng Zhang, Cheng Dai, Dong-Qiu Front Oncol Oncology Objective: To evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery using natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) compared with conventional laparoscopic (CL) colorectal surgery in patients with colorectal diseases. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective non-randomized trials and retrospective trials up to September 1, 2018, and used 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), lymph node harvest, surgical site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and intra-abdominal abscess as the main endpoints. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to the different study types [RCT and NRCT (non-randomized controlled trial)]. A sensitivity analysis was carried out to evaluate the reliability of the outcomes. RevMan5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Results: Fourteen studies were included (two RCTs, seven retrospective trials and five prospective non-randomized trials) involving a total of 1,435 patients. Compared with CL surgery, the NOSE technique resulted in a shorter hospital stay, shorter time to first flatus, less post-operative pain, and fewer SSIs and total perioperative complications. Anastomotic leakage, blood loss, and intra-abdominal abscess did not differ between the two groups, while operation time was longer in the NOSE group. Oncological outcomes such as proximal margin [weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.49 to 1.42; P = 0.34], distal margin (WMD= −0.11; 95% CI −0.66 to 0.45; P = 0.70), lymph node harvest (WMD = −0.97; 95% CI −1.97 to 0.03; P = 0.06) and 5-year DFS (hazard ratio = 0.84; 95% CI 0.54–1.31; P = 0.45) were not different between the NOSE and CL surgery groups. Conclusions: Compared with CL surgery, NOSE may be a safe procedure, and can achieve similar oncological outcomes. Large multicenter RCTs are needed to provide high-level, evidence-based results in NOSE-treated patients and to determine the risk of local recurrence. Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-07-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6617713/ /pubmed/31334119 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00597 Text en Copyright © 2019 Liu, Zhang, Fan, Pei, Zhang and Dai. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Liu, Rui-Ji
Zhang, Chun-Dong
Fan, Yu-Chen
Pei, Jun-Peng
Zhang, Cheng
Dai, Dong-Qiu
Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis
title Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis
title_full Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis
title_short Safety and Oncological Outcomes of Laparoscopic NOSE Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: A Meta-Analysis
title_sort safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic nose surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal diseases: a meta-analysis
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6617713/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31334119
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00597
work_keys_str_mv AT liuruiji safetyandoncologicaloutcomesoflaparoscopicnosesurgerycomparedwithconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectaldiseasesametaanalysis
AT zhangchundong safetyandoncologicaloutcomesoflaparoscopicnosesurgerycomparedwithconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectaldiseasesametaanalysis
AT fanyuchen safetyandoncologicaloutcomesoflaparoscopicnosesurgerycomparedwithconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectaldiseasesametaanalysis
AT peijunpeng safetyandoncologicaloutcomesoflaparoscopicnosesurgerycomparedwithconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectaldiseasesametaanalysis
AT zhangcheng safetyandoncologicaloutcomesoflaparoscopicnosesurgerycomparedwithconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectaldiseasesametaanalysis
AT daidongqiu safetyandoncologicaloutcomesoflaparoscopicnosesurgerycomparedwithconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectaldiseasesametaanalysis