Cargando…

A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of right hemicolectomy with CME performed with laparoscopic and open surgery. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, Google Scholar and the ClinicalTrials.gov register were searched. P...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anania, Gabriele, Arezzo, Alberto, Davies, Richard Justin, Marchetti, Francesco, Zhang, Shu, Di Saverio, Salomone, Cirocchi, Roberto, Donini, Annibale
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8280018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33644837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-021-03891-0
_version_ 1783722564532568064
author Anania, Gabriele
Arezzo, Alberto
Davies, Richard Justin
Marchetti, Francesco
Zhang, Shu
Di Saverio, Salomone
Cirocchi, Roberto
Donini, Annibale
author_facet Anania, Gabriele
Arezzo, Alberto
Davies, Richard Justin
Marchetti, Francesco
Zhang, Shu
Di Saverio, Salomone
Cirocchi, Roberto
Donini, Annibale
author_sort Anania, Gabriele
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of right hemicolectomy with CME performed with laparoscopic and open surgery. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, Google Scholar and the ClinicalTrials.gov register were searched. Primary outcome was the overall number of harvested lymph nodes. Secondary outcomes were short and long-term course variables. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate risk ratios. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were identified with 5038 patients enrolled. The difference in number of harvested lymph nodes was not statistically significant (MD 0.68, − 0.41–1.76, P = 0.22). The only RCT shows a significant advantage in favour of laparoscopy (MD 3.30, 95% CI − 0.20–6.40, P = 0.04). The analysis of CCTs showed an advantage in favour of the laparoscopic group, but the result was not statically significantly (MD − 0.55, 95% CI − 0.57–1.67, P = 0.33). The overall incidence of local recurrence was not different between the groups, while systemic recurrence at 5 years was lower in laparoscopic group. Laparoscopy showed better short-term outcomes including overall complications, lower estimated blood loss, lower wound infections and shorter hospital stay, despite a longer operative time. The rate of anastomotic and chyle leak was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the several limitations of this study, we found that the median number of lymph node harvested in the laparoscopic group is not different compared to open surgery. Laparoscopy was associated with a lower incidence of systemic recurrence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00384-021-03891-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8280018
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82800182021-07-20 A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision Anania, Gabriele Arezzo, Alberto Davies, Richard Justin Marchetti, Francesco Zhang, Shu Di Saverio, Salomone Cirocchi, Roberto Donini, Annibale Int J Colorectal Dis Review PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of right hemicolectomy with CME performed with laparoscopic and open surgery. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, Google Scholar and the ClinicalTrials.gov register were searched. Primary outcome was the overall number of harvested lymph nodes. Secondary outcomes were short and long-term course variables. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate risk ratios. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were identified with 5038 patients enrolled. The difference in number of harvested lymph nodes was not statistically significant (MD 0.68, − 0.41–1.76, P = 0.22). The only RCT shows a significant advantage in favour of laparoscopy (MD 3.30, 95% CI − 0.20–6.40, P = 0.04). The analysis of CCTs showed an advantage in favour of the laparoscopic group, but the result was not statically significantly (MD − 0.55, 95% CI − 0.57–1.67, P = 0.33). The overall incidence of local recurrence was not different between the groups, while systemic recurrence at 5 years was lower in laparoscopic group. Laparoscopy showed better short-term outcomes including overall complications, lower estimated blood loss, lower wound infections and shorter hospital stay, despite a longer operative time. The rate of anastomotic and chyle leak was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the several limitations of this study, we found that the median number of lymph node harvested in the laparoscopic group is not different compared to open surgery. Laparoscopy was associated with a lower incidence of systemic recurrence. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00384-021-03891-0. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-03-01 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8280018/ /pubmed/33644837 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-021-03891-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review
Anania, Gabriele
Arezzo, Alberto
Davies, Richard Justin
Marchetti, Francesco
Zhang, Shu
Di Saverio, Salomone
Cirocchi, Roberto
Donini, Annibale
A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision
title A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision
title_full A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision
title_fullStr A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision
title_full_unstemmed A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision
title_short A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision
title_sort global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8280018/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33644837
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-021-03891-0
work_keys_str_mv AT ananiagabriele aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT arezzoalberto aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT daviesrichardjustin aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT marchettifrancesco aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT zhangshu aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT disaveriosalomone aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT cirocchiroberto aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT doniniannibale aglobalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT ananiagabriele globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT arezzoalberto globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT daviesrichardjustin globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT marchettifrancesco globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT zhangshu globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT disaveriosalomone globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT cirocchiroberto globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision
AT doniniannibale globalsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisonlaparoscopicvsopenrighthemicolectomywithcompletemesocolicexcision