Purpose: While definitive long-term results are not yet available, the global safety and oncologic adequacy of laparoscopic surgery for right colectomy remain controversial. The aim of the study was to evaluate differences in safety of laparoscopic right colectomy, compared with open surgery, with particular attention to cancer patients. Methods: A systematic review from 1991 to 2014 was performed searching the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42014015256). We included randomised and controlled clinical studies comparing laparoscopic and open resection for rectal cancer. Primary endpoints were 30 days mortality and overall morbidity. Then, a meta-analysis was conducted by a fixed-effect model, performing a sensitivity analysis by a random-effect model. Relative risk (RR) was used as an indicator of treatment effect; a RR less than 1.0 was in favour of laparoscopy. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot, heterogeneity by the I2 test and subgroup analysis on oncologic patients. Results: Twenty-seven studies, representing 3049 patients, met the inclusion criteria; only 2 were randomised for a total of 211 patients. Mortality was observed in 1.2 % of patients in the laparoscopic group and in 3.4 % of patients in the open group. The overall RR was 0.45 (95 % CI 0.21–0.93, p = 0.031). The raw incidence of overall complications was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (16.8 %) compared to the open group (24.2 %). The overall RR was 0.81 (95 % CI 0.70–0.95, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Based on the evidence of few randomised and mostly controlled series, mortality and morbidity were significantly lower after laparoscopy compared to open surgery.
Laparoscopic right colectomy reduces short-term mortality and morbidity. Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis
CIROCCHI, Roberto;
2015
Abstract
Purpose: While definitive long-term results are not yet available, the global safety and oncologic adequacy of laparoscopic surgery for right colectomy remain controversial. The aim of the study was to evaluate differences in safety of laparoscopic right colectomy, compared with open surgery, with particular attention to cancer patients. Methods: A systematic review from 1991 to 2014 was performed searching the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42014015256). We included randomised and controlled clinical studies comparing laparoscopic and open resection for rectal cancer. Primary endpoints were 30 days mortality and overall morbidity. Then, a meta-analysis was conducted by a fixed-effect model, performing a sensitivity analysis by a random-effect model. Relative risk (RR) was used as an indicator of treatment effect; a RR less than 1.0 was in favour of laparoscopy. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot, heterogeneity by the I2 test and subgroup analysis on oncologic patients. Results: Twenty-seven studies, representing 3049 patients, met the inclusion criteria; only 2 were randomised for a total of 211 patients. Mortality was observed in 1.2 % of patients in the laparoscopic group and in 3.4 % of patients in the open group. The overall RR was 0.45 (95 % CI 0.21–0.93, p = 0.031). The raw incidence of overall complications was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group (16.8 %) compared to the open group (24.2 %). The overall RR was 0.81 (95 % CI 0.70–0.95, p = 0.007). Conclusions: Based on the evidence of few randomised and mostly controlled series, mortality and morbidity were significantly lower after laparoscopy compared to open surgery.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
