Cargando…

Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) is a technique that involves collecting a specimen for extraction through a natural opening avoiding a mini-laparotomy incision. The aim of this study was to compare NOSE and transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic (LAP) colorectal ca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Brincat, Svetlana Doris, Lauri, Josef, Cini, Charles
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9155237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35640267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrac074
_version_ 1784718200920866816
author Brincat, Svetlana Doris
Lauri, Josef
Cini, Charles
author_facet Brincat, Svetlana Doris
Lauri, Josef
Cini, Charles
author_sort Brincat, Svetlana Doris
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) is a technique that involves collecting a specimen for extraction through a natural opening avoiding a mini-laparotomy incision. The aim of this study was to compare NOSE and transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic (LAP) colorectal cancer surgery for postoperative outcomes and oncological safety. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases from inception till October 2020. Articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria (studies comparing LAP and NOSE colorectal surgeries reporting at least one of the outcomes) and analysed. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, pathological results (resection margins and lymph node collection), and oncological outcomes. Secondary outcomes included operating time, blood losses, use of analgesics, functional recovery, duration of hospital stay, and cosmetic results. Fixed and random-effect models were used to measure the pooled estimates. RESULTS: Nineteen studies involving a total of 3432 participants were analysed (3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 16 retrospective non-randomized studies). Pooled results showed significantly reduced postoperative complications (OR 0.54; 95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 0.67; P < 0.00001). Pathological outcomes of NOSE were comparable to LAP with no significant difference noted in terms of resection margins (P > 0.05) and lymph node collection (weighted mean difference (WMD) −0.47; 95 per cent c.i. −0.94 to 0; P = 0.05). Pooled analysis demonstrated comparable long-term outcomes in terms of cancer recurrence (OR 0.94; 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 1.39; P = 0.75), 5-year disease-free survival (HR 0.97; 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 1.29; P = 0.83), and overall survival (HR 0.93, 95 per cent c.i. 0.58 to −1.51; P = 0.78). Finally, the NOSE group had decreased use of additional analgesia after surgery and earlier resumption of oral intake when compared with LAP (respectively OR 0.28; 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.37; P < 0.00001 and WMD −0.35; 95 per cent c.i. −0.54 to −0.15; P = 0.0005). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed that in comparison with LAP, NOSE decreases severe postoperative morbidity while improving postoperative recovery without compromising oncological safety, but it is limited by the small number of RCTs performed in this field.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9155237
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91552372022-06-04 Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis Brincat, Svetlana Doris Lauri, Josef Cini, Charles BJS Open Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) is a technique that involves collecting a specimen for extraction through a natural opening avoiding a mini-laparotomy incision. The aim of this study was to compare NOSE and transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic (LAP) colorectal cancer surgery for postoperative outcomes and oncological safety. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases from inception till October 2020. Articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria (studies comparing LAP and NOSE colorectal surgeries reporting at least one of the outcomes) and analysed. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, pathological results (resection margins and lymph node collection), and oncological outcomes. Secondary outcomes included operating time, blood losses, use of analgesics, functional recovery, duration of hospital stay, and cosmetic results. Fixed and random-effect models were used to measure the pooled estimates. RESULTS: Nineteen studies involving a total of 3432 participants were analysed (3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 16 retrospective non-randomized studies). Pooled results showed significantly reduced postoperative complications (OR 0.54; 95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 0.67; P < 0.00001). Pathological outcomes of NOSE were comparable to LAP with no significant difference noted in terms of resection margins (P > 0.05) and lymph node collection (weighted mean difference (WMD) −0.47; 95 per cent c.i. −0.94 to 0; P = 0.05). Pooled analysis demonstrated comparable long-term outcomes in terms of cancer recurrence (OR 0.94; 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 1.39; P = 0.75), 5-year disease-free survival (HR 0.97; 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 1.29; P = 0.83), and overall survival (HR 0.93, 95 per cent c.i. 0.58 to −1.51; P = 0.78). Finally, the NOSE group had decreased use of additional analgesia after surgery and earlier resumption of oral intake when compared with LAP (respectively OR 0.28; 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.37; P < 0.00001 and WMD −0.35; 95 per cent c.i. −0.54 to −0.15; P = 0.0005). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed that in comparison with LAP, NOSE decreases severe postoperative morbidity while improving postoperative recovery without compromising oncological safety, but it is limited by the small number of RCTs performed in this field. Oxford University Press 2022-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9155237/ /pubmed/35640267 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrac074 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Brincat, Svetlana Doris
Lauri, Josef
Cini, Charles
Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis
title Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis
title_full Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis
title_fullStr Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis
title_short Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis
title_sort natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9155237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35640267
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrac074
work_keys_str_mv AT brincatsvetlanadoris naturalorificeversustransabdominalspecimenextractioninlaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancermetaanalysis
AT laurijosef naturalorificeversustransabdominalspecimenextractioninlaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancermetaanalysis
AT cinicharles naturalorificeversustransabdominalspecimenextractioninlaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancermetaanalysis