Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Open Access
- 18 December 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Asian Pacific Organization for Cancer Prevention in Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
- Vol. 15 (22), 9985-9996
- https://doi.org/10.7314/apjcp.2014.15.22.9985
Abstract
Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Laparoscopic surgery;rectum;cancer;systematic review;meta-analysis; Background and Aim: Laparoscopic and open rectum surgery for rectal cancer remains controversial. This systematic review compared the short-term and long-term efficiency and complications associated with laparoscopic and open resection for rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Knowledge and the China Biology Medicine Database to identify potential randomized controlled trials from their inception to March 31, 2014 without language restriction. Additional articles were identified from searching bibliographies of retrieved articles. Two reviewers independently assessed the full-text articles according to the pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria as well as the methodological quality of included trials. The meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.2. Results: A total of 16 randomized controlled trials involving 3,045 participants (laparoscopic group, 1,804 cases; open group, 1,241 cases) were reviewed. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly lower intraoperative blood loss, earlier return of bowel movement and reduced length of hospital stay as compared to open surgery, although with increased operative time. It also showed an obvious advantage for minimizing late complications of adhesion-related bowel obstruction. Importantly, there were no significant differences in other postoperative complications, oncological clearance, 3-year and 5-year or 10 year recurrence and survival rates between two procedures. Conclusions: On the basis of this meta-analysis we conclude that laparoscopic surgery has advantages of earlier postoperative recovery, less blood loss and lower rates of adhesion-related bowel obstruction. In addition, oncological outcome is comparable after laparoscopic and open resection for rectal cancer.Keywords
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- Laparoscopic versus open surgery for colon cancer: A meta-analysis of 5-year follow-up outcomesSurgical Oncology, 2013
- Rectal CancerJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2012
- Colon CancerJournal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2011
- Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: a case-matched studySurgical Endoscopy, 2010
- Laparoscopic Resection in Rectal Cancer Patients: Outcome and Cost-Benefit AnalysisDiseases of the Colon & Rectum, 2007
- Laparoscopically Assisted vs Open Colectomy for Colon CancerArchives of Surgery, 2007
- Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for rectal cancerInternational Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2006
- Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Meta-AnalysisAnnals of Surgical Oncology, 2006
- Conventional approach x laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer treatment after neoadjuvant chemoradiation: results of a prospective randomized trialRevista Do Hospital Das Clinicas, 2003
- Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancerThe Lancet, 1994