Cargando…

Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection

BACKGROUND: Achieving a clear resection margins for low rectal cancer is technically challenging. Transanal approach to total mesorectal excision (TME) was introduced in order to address the challenges associated with the laparoscopic approach in treating low rectal cancers. However, previous meta-a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bhattacharya, Pratik, Patel, Ishaan, Fazili, Noureen, Hajibandeh, Shahab, Hajibandeh, Shahin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9827567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36632123
http://dx.doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v14.i12.1397
_version_ 1784867080364883968
author Bhattacharya, Pratik
Patel, Ishaan
Fazili, Noureen
Hajibandeh, Shahab
Hajibandeh, Shahin
author_facet Bhattacharya, Pratik
Patel, Ishaan
Fazili, Noureen
Hajibandeh, Shahab
Hajibandeh, Shahin
author_sort Bhattacharya, Pratik
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Achieving a clear resection margins for low rectal cancer is technically challenging. Transanal approach to total mesorectal excision (TME) was introduced in order to address the challenges associated with the laparoscopic approach in treating low rectal cancers. However, previous meta-analyses have included mixed population with mid and low rectal tumours when comparing both approaches which has made the interpretation of the real differences between two approaches in treating low rectal cancer difficult. AIM: To investigate the outcomes of transanal TME (TaTME) and laparoscopic TME (LaTME) in patients with low rectal cancer. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review of comparative studies was performed in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. Intraoperative and postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, R0 resection, completeness of mesorectal excision, circumferential resection margin (CRM), distal resection margin (DRM), harvested lymph nodes, and operation time were the investigated outcome measures. RESULTS: We included twelve comparative studies enrolling 969 patients comparing TaTME (n = 969) and LaTME (n = 476) in patients with low rectal tumours. TaTME was associated with significantly lower risk of postoperative complications (OR: 0.74, P = 0.04), anastomotic leak (OR: 0.59, P = 0.02), and conversion to an open procedure (OR: 0.29, P = 0.002) in comparison with LaTME. Moreover, the rate of R0 resection was significantly higher in the TaTME group (OR: 1.96, P = 0.03). Nevertheless, TaTME and LaTME were comparable in terms of rate of intraoperative complications (OR: 1.87; P = 0.23), completeness of mesoractal excision (OR: 1.57, P = 0.15), harvested lymph nodes (MD: -0.05, P = 0.96), DRM (MD: -0.94; P = 0.17), CRM (MD: 1.08, P = 0.17), positive CRM (OR: 0.64, P = 0.11) and procedure time (MD: -6.99 min, P = 0.45). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated that for low rectal tumours, TaTME is associated with better clinical and short term oncological outcomes compared to LaTME. More randomised controlled trials are required to confirm these findings and to evaluate long term oncological and functional outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9827567
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98275672023-01-10 Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection Bhattacharya, Pratik Patel, Ishaan Fazili, Noureen Hajibandeh, Shahab Hajibandeh, Shahin World J Gastrointest Surg Meta-Analysis BACKGROUND: Achieving a clear resection margins for low rectal cancer is technically challenging. Transanal approach to total mesorectal excision (TME) was introduced in order to address the challenges associated with the laparoscopic approach in treating low rectal cancers. However, previous meta-analyses have included mixed population with mid and low rectal tumours when comparing both approaches which has made the interpretation of the real differences between two approaches in treating low rectal cancer difficult. AIM: To investigate the outcomes of transanal TME (TaTME) and laparoscopic TME (LaTME) in patients with low rectal cancer. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review of comparative studies was performed in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. Intraoperative and postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, R0 resection, completeness of mesorectal excision, circumferential resection margin (CRM), distal resection margin (DRM), harvested lymph nodes, and operation time were the investigated outcome measures. RESULTS: We included twelve comparative studies enrolling 969 patients comparing TaTME (n = 969) and LaTME (n = 476) in patients with low rectal tumours. TaTME was associated with significantly lower risk of postoperative complications (OR: 0.74, P = 0.04), anastomotic leak (OR: 0.59, P = 0.02), and conversion to an open procedure (OR: 0.29, P = 0.002) in comparison with LaTME. Moreover, the rate of R0 resection was significantly higher in the TaTME group (OR: 1.96, P = 0.03). Nevertheless, TaTME and LaTME were comparable in terms of rate of intraoperative complications (OR: 1.87; P = 0.23), completeness of mesoractal excision (OR: 1.57, P = 0.15), harvested lymph nodes (MD: -0.05, P = 0.96), DRM (MD: -0.94; P = 0.17), CRM (MD: 1.08, P = 0.17), positive CRM (OR: 0.64, P = 0.11) and procedure time (MD: -6.99 min, P = 0.45). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated that for low rectal tumours, TaTME is associated with better clinical and short term oncological outcomes compared to LaTME. More randomised controlled trials are required to confirm these findings and to evaluate long term oncological and functional outcomes. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2022-12-27 2022-12-27 /pmc/articles/PMC9827567/ /pubmed/36632123 http://dx.doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v14.i12.1397 Text en ©The Author(s) 2022. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Meta-Analysis
Bhattacharya, Pratik
Patel, Ishaan
Fazili, Noureen
Hajibandeh, Shahab
Hajibandeh, Shahin
Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection
title Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection
title_full Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection
title_fullStr Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection
title_full_unstemmed Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection
title_short Meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: Importance of appropriate patient selection
title_sort meta-analysis of transanal vs laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of low rectal cancer: importance of appropriate patient selection
topic Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9827567/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36632123
http://dx.doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v14.i12.1397
work_keys_str_mv AT bhattacharyapratik metaanalysisoftransanalvslaparoscopictotalmesorectalexcisionoflowrectalcancerimportanceofappropriatepatientselection
AT patelishaan metaanalysisoftransanalvslaparoscopictotalmesorectalexcisionoflowrectalcancerimportanceofappropriatepatientselection
AT fazilinoureen metaanalysisoftransanalvslaparoscopictotalmesorectalexcisionoflowrectalcancerimportanceofappropriatepatientselection
AT hajibandehshahab metaanalysisoftransanalvslaparoscopictotalmesorectalexcisionoflowrectalcancerimportanceofappropriatepatientselection
AT hajibandehshahin metaanalysisoftransanalvslaparoscopictotalmesorectalexcisionoflowrectalcancerimportanceofappropriatepatientselection