Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease 3/2020

01-03-2020 | Colectomy | Review

Comparing the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open colectomy in transverse colon cancer: a meta-analysis

Authors: Ioannis Baloyiannis, Konstantinos Perivoliotis, Panagiotis Ntellas, Katerina Dadouli, George Tzovaras

Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease | Issue 3/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

In order to compare the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic (LC) and open colectomy (OC) for transverse colon cancer (TCC) patients, the present systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was designed.

Methods

This study was conducted following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic screening of the electronic databases was performed (Medline, Web of Science and Scopus). The validity of the pooled results was verified through the performance of trial sequential analysis (TSA). The level of evidence was estimated using the GRADE approach.

Results

Overall, 21 studies and 2498 patients were included in our study. Pooled comparisons and TSA analyses reported a superiority of LC over OC in terms of postoperative complications (OR 0.64, p = 0.0003), blood loss (WMD − 86.84, p < 0.00001), time to first flatus (WMD − 0.94, p < 0.00001) and oral diet (WMD − 1.25, p < 0.00001), and LOS (WMD − 2.39, p < 0.00001). Moreover, OC displayed a lower operation duration (p < 0.00001). A higher rate of complete mesocolic excision (p = 0.001) was related to OC. Although inconclusive in TSA, the recurrence rate in LC group was lower. LC and OC were equivalent in terms of postoperative survival outcomes.

Conclusions

Considering several limitations of the eligible studies and the subsequent low level of evidence, further RCTs of a higher quality and methodological level are required to verify the findings of our meta-analysis.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS (1991) Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:144–150PubMed Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS (1991) Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:144–150PubMed
2.
go back to reference Fowler DL, White SA (1991) Laparoscopy-assisted sigmoid resection. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:183–188PubMed Fowler DL, White SA (1991) Laparoscopy-assisted sigmoid resection. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:183–188PubMed
3.
go back to reference Yamamoto S, Inomata M, Katayama H, Mizusawa J, Etoh T, Konishi F, Sugihara K, Watanabe M, Moriya Y, Kitano S, Japan Clinical Oncology Group Colorectal Cancer Study Group (2014) Short-term surgical outcomes from a randomized controlled trial to evaluate laparoscopic and open D3 dissection for stage II/III colon cancer. Ann Surg 260:23–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000499 CrossRefPubMed Yamamoto S, Inomata M, Katayama H, Mizusawa J, Etoh T, Konishi F, Sugihara K, Watanabe M, Moriya Y, Kitano S, Japan Clinical Oncology Group Colorectal Cancer Study Group (2014) Short-term surgical outcomes from a randomized controlled trial to evaluate laparoscopic and open D3 dissection for stage II/III colon cancer. Ann Surg 260:23–30. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1097/​SLA.​0000000000000499​ CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas M, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Lacy AM, Bemelman WA, Andersson J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J, Fuerst A, Haglind E, COLOR II Study Group (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1414882 CrossRefPubMed Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas M, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Lacy AM, Bemelman WA, Andersson J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J, Fuerst A, Haglind E, COLOR II Study Group (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1056/​NEJMoa1414882 CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al (2000) The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomized studies in meta-analysis Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al (2000) The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of non-randomized studies in meta-analysis
35.
go back to reference Parmar MK, Torri V, Stewart L (1998) Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Stat Med 17:2815–2834CrossRefPubMed Parmar MK, Torri V, Stewart L (1998) Extracting summary statistics to perform meta-analyses of the published literature for survival endpoints. Stat Med 17:2815–2834CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Bormann I (2016) DigitizeIt 2.2. Digitizer software—digitize a scanned graph or chart into (x, y) data Bormann I (2016) DigitizeIt 2.2. Digitizer software—digitize a scanned graph or chart into (x, y) data
38.
go back to reference Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR (2009) Introduction to Meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, ChichesterCrossRef Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR (2009) Introduction to Meta-analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, ChichesterCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O'Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schünemann HJ, Edejer T, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW Jr, Zaza S, GRADE Working Group (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328:1490. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490 CrossRefPubMed Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O'Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schünemann HJ, Edejer T, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW Jr, Zaza S, GRADE Working Group (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328:1490. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1136/​bmj.​328.​7454.​1490 CrossRefPubMed
47.
go back to reference Sheng W, Zhang B, Chen W, Gu D, Gao W (2015) Laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer: comparative analysis of short- and long-term outcomes. Int J Clin Exp Med 8:16029–16035PubMedPubMedCentral Sheng W, Zhang B, Chen W, Gu D, Gao W (2015) Laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer: comparative analysis of short- and long-term outcomes. Int J Clin Exp Med 8:16029–16035PubMedPubMedCentral
48.
go back to reference Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, Rockall TA, Young-Fadok TM, Hill AG, Soop M, de Boer HD, Urman RD, Chang GJ, Fichera A, Kessler H, Grass F, Whang EE, Fawcett WJ, Carli F, Lobo DN, Rollins KE, Balfour A, Baldini G, Riedel B, Ljungqvist O (2019) Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 43:659–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4844-y CrossRefPubMed Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Hubner M, Nygren J, Demartines N, Francis N, Rockall TA, Young-Fadok TM, Hill AG, Soop M, de Boer HD, Urman RD, Chang GJ, Fichera A, Kessler H, Grass F, Whang EE, Fawcett WJ, Carli F, Lobo DN, Rollins KE, Balfour A, Baldini G, Riedel B, Ljungqvist O (2019) Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations: 2018. World J Surg 43:659–695. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00268-018-4844-y CrossRefPubMed
53.
go back to reference Targarona EM, Balague C, Marin J, Neto RB, Martinez C, Garriga J, Trias M (2005) Energy sources for laparoscopic colectomy: a prospective randomized comparison of conventional electrosurgery, bipolar computer-controlled electrosurgery and ultrasonic dissection. Operative outcome and costs analysis. Surg Innov 12:339–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/155335060501200409 CrossRefPubMed Targarona EM, Balague C, Marin J, Neto RB, Martinez C, Garriga J, Trias M (2005) Energy sources for laparoscopic colectomy: a prospective randomized comparison of conventional electrosurgery, bipolar computer-controlled electrosurgery and ultrasonic dissection. Operative outcome and costs analysis. Surg Innov 12:339–344. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​1553350605012004​09 CrossRefPubMed
54.
go back to reference Wei D, Johnston S, Goldstein L, Nagle D (2019) Minimally invasive colectomy is associated with reduced risk of anastomotic leak and other major perioperative complications and reduced hospital resource utilization as compared with open surgery: a retrospective population-based study of comparative effectiveness and trends of surgical approach. Surg Endosc 34(2):610–621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06805-y CrossRefPubMed Wei D, Johnston S, Goldstein L, Nagle D (2019) Minimally invasive colectomy is associated with reduced risk of anastomotic leak and other major perioperative complications and reduced hospital resource utilization as compared with open surgery: a retrospective population-based study of comparative effectiveness and trends of surgical approach. Surg Endosc 34(2):610–621. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00464-019-06805-y CrossRefPubMed
55.
go back to reference Salimath J, Jones MW, Hunt DL, Lane MK (2007) Comparison of return of bowel function and length of stay in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open colectomy. JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 11:72–75 Salimath J, Jones MW, Hunt DL, Lane MK (2007) Comparison of return of bowel function and length of stay in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open colectomy. JSLS J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 11:72–75
Metadata
Title
Comparing the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open colectomy in transverse colon cancer: a meta-analysis
Authors
Ioannis Baloyiannis
Konstantinos Perivoliotis
Panagiotis Ntellas
Katerina Dadouli
George Tzovaras
Publication date
01-03-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
International Journal of Colorectal Disease / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0179-1958
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1262
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03516-y

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

International Journal of Colorectal Disease 3/2020 Go to the issue