Cargando…

Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies

BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopy surgery (SILS) is a new laparoscopic technique that has emerged in the past decade. Whether it has advantages over conventionl laparoscopy surgery (CLS) is inconclusive. This article aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Fang-han, Zeng, De-xin, Chen, Li, Xu, Cheng-fei, Tan, Ling, Zhang, Pan, Xiao, Jiang-wei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9621120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36324593
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.997894
_version_ 1784821469929275392
author Li, Fang-han
Zeng, De-xin
Chen, Li
Xu, Cheng-fei
Tan, Ling
Zhang, Pan
Xiao, Jiang-wei
author_facet Li, Fang-han
Zeng, De-xin
Chen, Li
Xu, Cheng-fei
Tan, Ling
Zhang, Pan
Xiao, Jiang-wei
author_sort Li, Fang-han
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopy surgery (SILS) is a new laparoscopic technique that has emerged in the past decade. Whether it has advantages over conventionl laparoscopy surgery (CLS) is inconclusive. This article aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer through high-quality literature text mining and meta-analysis. METHODS: Relevant articles were searched on the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from January 2012 to November 2021. All data was from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in order to increase the confidence of the analytical results.The main outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 10 RCTs were included, involving 1609 patients. The quality of the included studies was generally high. No significant difference was found between SILS and CLS in the postoperative complications, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, readmission, reoperation, complication level I- II, complication level IIIa, complication level IIIb, prolonged Ileus, blood loss, infection, anastomotic leakage and operation time. The results showed that SILS group had a higher rate of intraoperative complications, but it had lower incision length and better cosmetic effects. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that SILS did not have a comprehensive and obvious advantage over the CLS. On the contrary, SILS has higher intraoperative complications, which may be related to the more difficulty of SILS operation, but SILS still has better cosmetic effects, which is in line with the concept of surgical development. Therefore, the SILS needs to be selected in patients with higher cosmetic requirements and performed by more experienced surgeons.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9621120
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96211202022-11-01 Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies Li, Fang-han Zeng, De-xin Chen, Li Xu, Cheng-fei Tan, Ling Zhang, Pan Xiao, Jiang-wei Front Oncol Oncology BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopy surgery (SILS) is a new laparoscopic technique that has emerged in the past decade. Whether it has advantages over conventionl laparoscopy surgery (CLS) is inconclusive. This article aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer through high-quality literature text mining and meta-analysis. METHODS: Relevant articles were searched on the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from January 2012 to November 2021. All data was from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in order to increase the confidence of the analytical results.The main outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 10 RCTs were included, involving 1609 patients. The quality of the included studies was generally high. No significant difference was found between SILS and CLS in the postoperative complications, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, readmission, reoperation, complication level I- II, complication level IIIa, complication level IIIb, prolonged Ileus, blood loss, infection, anastomotic leakage and operation time. The results showed that SILS group had a higher rate of intraoperative complications, but it had lower incision length and better cosmetic effects. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that SILS did not have a comprehensive and obvious advantage over the CLS. On the contrary, SILS has higher intraoperative complications, which may be related to the more difficulty of SILS operation, but SILS still has better cosmetic effects, which is in line with the concept of surgical development. Therefore, the SILS needs to be selected in patients with higher cosmetic requirements and performed by more experienced surgeons. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9621120/ /pubmed/36324593 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.997894 Text en Copyright © 2022 Li, Zeng, Chen, Xu, Tan, Zhang and Xiao https://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
Li, Fang-han
Zeng, De-xin
Chen, Li
Xu, Cheng-fei
Tan, Ling
Zhang, Pan
Xiao, Jiang-wei
Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies
title Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies
title_full Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies
title_fullStr Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies
title_short Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies
title_sort comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9621120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36324593
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.997894
work_keys_str_mv AT lifanghan comparisonofclinicalefficacyofsingleincisionandtraditionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancerametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandpropensityscorematchedstudies
AT zengdexin comparisonofclinicalefficacyofsingleincisionandtraditionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancerametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandpropensityscorematchedstudies
AT chenli comparisonofclinicalefficacyofsingleincisionandtraditionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancerametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandpropensityscorematchedstudies
AT xuchengfei comparisonofclinicalefficacyofsingleincisionandtraditionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancerametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandpropensityscorematchedstudies
AT tanling comparisonofclinicalefficacyofsingleincisionandtraditionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancerametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandpropensityscorematchedstudies
AT zhangpan comparisonofclinicalefficacyofsingleincisionandtraditionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancerametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandpropensityscorematchedstudies
AT xiaojiangwei comparisonofclinicalefficacyofsingleincisionandtraditionallaparoscopicsurgeryforcolorectalcancerametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrialsandpropensityscorematchedstudies