Laparoscopy for extraperitoneal rectal cancer reduces short‐term morbidity: Results of a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Issue 1 (1st February 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Arezzo, Alberto; Passera, Roberto; Scozzari, Gitana; Verra, Mauro; Morino, Mario
• Is Part Of: United European Gastroenterology journal. Volume 1:Issue 1(2013:Feb.)
• Page Start: 32
• Page End: 47
• Publication Date: 2013-02-01
• Subjects: Laparoscopy -- meta‐analysis -- rectal cancer -- rectal neoplasms -- systematic review; Gastroenterology -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 616.33005
• DOI: 10.1177/2050640612473753
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2050-6406

Abstract

Abstract : Background: The role of laparoscopy in the treatment of extraperitoneal rectal cancer is still controversial. The aim of the study was to evaluate differences in safety of laparoscopic rectal resection for extraperitoneal cancer, compared with open surgery. Materials and methods: A systematic review from 2000 to July 2012 was performed searching the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (PROSPERO registration number CRD42012002406). We included randomized and prospective controlled clinical studies comparing laparoscopic and open resection for rectal cancer. Primary endpoints were 30‐day mortality and 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. Results: Eleven studies, representing 1684 patients, met the inclusion criteria: four were randomized for a total of 814 patients. Mortality was observed in 1.2% of patients in the laparoscopic group and in 2.3% of patients in the open group, with an RR of 0.56 (95% CI 0.19–1.64, p = 0.287). The overall incidence of short‐term complications was lower in the laparoscopic group (31.5%) compared to the open group (38.2%), with an RR of 0.83 (95% CI 0.73–0.94, p = 0.004). Surgical complications, wound complications, blood loss and the need for blood transfusion, time for bowel movement recovery, food intake recovery, and hospital stay were significantly lower or less frequent in the laparoscopic group. The incidence of intra‐operative injuries, anastomotic leakages, and surgical re‐interventions was similar in the two groups. Only operative time was in favour of the open group. Conclusions: Based on the evidence of both randomized and prospective controlled series, mortality was lower after laparoscopy although not significantly so, while the short‐term morbidity RR, including subgroup analysis, was significantly lower after laparoscopy for extraperitoneal rectal cancer compared to open surgery.