A meta-analysis of laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery in the treatment of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to explore the overall effect and safety of anterior laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery for patients with colorectal cancer based on eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs), especially the difference in the postoperative incidence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase were searched based on keywords to identify eligible studies before February 2018. Only RCTs were eligible. We analyzed the main outcomes using the relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) along with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, we analyzed a total of 24 studies with 4592 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group and 3865 patients in the open surgery group. The results indicated that compared with the open surgery, laparoscopic surgery significantly decreased estimated blood loss (SMD: −1.14, 95%CI: −1.70 to −0.57), hospital stay (SMD: −1.12, 95%CI: −1.76 to −0.47), postoperative mortality (RR: 0.60, 95%CI: 0.41–0.86) and postoperative complication (RR: 0.83, 95%CI: 0.72–0.95). However, the operative time (WMD: 40.46, 95%CI: 35.94–44.9) was statistically higher in the laparoscopic surgery group than the open surgery group, and there was no significant difference in the incidence of DVT between the 2 groups (RR: 0.96, 95%CI: 0.46–2.02). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery is superior to open surgery for patients with colorectal cancer. But the 2 surgeries showed no significant difference in the incidence of DVT.