Dataset Information

Vein-first versus artery-first ligation procedure for lung cancer surgery: An updated review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The optimal sequence of pulmonary vessel interruption during lung cancer resection remains controversial. This review aimed to elucidate the association of vein-first versus artery-first ligation and survival of the patients.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar from their inception to September 2021 for published articles that compared vein-first (the pulmonary vein was interrupted first) and artery-first procedure (the pulmonary artery was ligated first) during lung cancer surgery.

Results

Finally, a total of 13 full articles were obtained. First, 7 studies with survival information were included for meta-analyses. As compared with the artery-first ligation, vein-first approach did not decrease the risk of local recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 0.92 in favour of vein-first; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-1.39, p = 0.68) or distant metastasis (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.30-2.85, p = 0.89); but it was associated with better disease-free survival (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.37-0.73, p < 0.01) as well as 5-year overall survival (RR 0.60; 95% CI 0.41-0.86, p < 0.01). In addition, the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, total complications, and length of postoperative stay were mainly comparable between the two groups. Second, 7 studies provided the data of tumor cells indicated by different biomarkers and detection methods; and 3 of these reports showed that vein-first ligation decreased the extent of intraoperative tumor dissemination. However, a quantitative meta-analysis was not possible due to the significant heterogeneity.

Conclusion

Vein-first ligation in lung cancer surgery may be associated with improved survival of the patients, which might be ascribed to potentially lower risk of tumor cell dissemination. Well-designed, large-scale trials are warranted to clarify these occasional findings.

SUBMITTER: Zhao T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8474918 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effects of high ligation (HL) versus low ligation (LL) in colorectal cancer surgery. Materials and Methods: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (trial registries and ClinicalTrials.gov), other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings, with no restrictions on the language or publication status, up until 10 March 2021. We included all parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and considered cluster RCTs for inclusion. The risk of bias domains were "low risk," "high risk," or "unclear risk." We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and interpreted the results according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used the GRADE guidelines to rate the certainty of evidence (CoE) of the randomized controlled trials. Results: We found 12 studies (24 articles) from our search. We were very uncertain about the effects of HL on overall mortality, disease recurrence, cancer-specific mortality, postoperative mortality, and anastomotic leakage (very low CoE). There may be little to no difference between HL and LL in postoperative complications (low CoE). For short-term follow-up (within 6 months), HL may reduce defecatory function (constipation; low CoE). While HL and LL may have similar effects on sexual function in men, HL may reduce female sexual function compared with LL (low CoE). For long-term follow-up (beyond 6 months), HL may reduce defecatory function (constipation; low CoE). There were discrepancies in the effects regarding urinary dysfunction according to which questionnaire was used in the studies. HL may reduce male and female sexual function (low CoE). Conclusions: We are very uncertain about the effects of HL on survival outcomes, and there is no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between HL and LL. More rigorous RCTs are necessary to evaluate the effect of HL and LL on functional outcomes.

Project description:To compare the outcomes of modified-Associating Liver Partition and Portal vein Ligation for Staged hepatectomy (ALPPS) techniques with those of conventional-ALPPS.BackgroundALPPS is an established technique for treating advanced liver tumors.MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched. The outcomes were assessed by single-arm and 2-arm analyses.ResultsSeventeen studies containing 335 modified-ALPPS patients were included in single-arm meta-analysis. The estimated blood loss was 267 ± 29 mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 210-324 mL) during the first and 662 ± 51 mL (95% CI, 562-762 mL) during the second stage. The operation time was 166 ± 18 minutes (95% CI, 131-202 minutes) during the first and 225 ± 19 minutes (95% CI, 188-263 minutes) during the second stage. The major morbidity rate was 14% (95% CI, 9%-22%) after the first stage. The future liver remnant hypertrophy rate was 65.2% ± 5% (95% CI, 55%-75%) and the interstage interval was 16 ± 1 days (95% CI, 14-17 days). The dropout rate was 9% (95% CI, 5%-15%). The overall complication rate was 46% (95% CI, 37%-56%) and the major complication rate was 20% (95% CI, 14%-26%). The postoperative mortality rate was 7% (95% CI, 4%-11%). Seven studies containing 215 patients were included in comparative analysis. The hypertrophy rate was not different between 2 methods (mean difference [MD], -5.01; 95% CI, -19.16 to 9.14; P = 0.49). The interstage interval was shorter for partial-ALPPS (MD, 9.43; 95% CI, 3.29-15.58; P = 0.003). The overall complication rate (odds ratio [OR], 10.10; 95% CI, 2.11-48.35; P = 0.004) and mortality rate (OR, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.36-10.26; P = 0.01) were higher in the conventional-ALPPS.ConclusionsThe hypertrophy rate in partial-ALPPS was similar to conventional-ALPPS. This shows that minimizing the first stage of the operation does not affect hypertrophy. Moreover, the postoperative overall morbidity and mortality rates were lower following partial-ALPPS.

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the current scientific evidence regarding the impact of the level of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) ligation on post-operative and oncological outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the literature up to 06 September 2022. Included were RCTs that compared patients who underwent high (HL) vs. anterior (LL) IMA ligation for resection of rectal cancer. The literature search was performed on Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and the Web of Science without any language restrictions. The primary endpoint was overall anastomotic leakage (AL). Secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes, intraoperative complications, urogenital functional outcomes, and length of hospital stay.ResultsEleven RCTs (1331 patients) were included. The overall rate of AL was lower in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.96). The overall number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD 0.93, 95% CI - 2.21 to 0.34). The number of lymph nodes harvested was assessed in 256 patients, and all had a laparoscopic procedure. The number of lymph nodes was higher when LL was associated with lymphadenectomy of the vascular root than when IMA was ligated at its origin, but there the difference was not statistically significant (MD - 0.37, 95% CI - 1.00 to 0.26). Overall survival at 5 years was slightly better in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05). Disease-free survival at 5 years was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.04).ConclusionsThere is no evidence to support HL or LL according to results in terms of AL or oncologic outcome. Moreover, there is not enough evidence to determine the impact of the level of IMA ligation on functional outcomes. The level of IMA ligation should be chosen case by case based on expected functional and oncological outcomes.