Dataset Information

Quality of life in restorative versus non-restorative resections for rectal cancer: systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Low rectal cancers could be treated using restorative (anterior resection, AR) or non-restorative procedures with an end/permanent stoma (Hartmann's, HE; or abdominoperineal excision, APE). Although the surgical choice is determined by tumour and patient factors, quality of life (QoL) will also influence the patient's future beyond cancer. This systematic review of the literature compared postoperative QoL between the restorative and non-restorative techniques using validated measurement tools.

Methods

The review was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020131492). Embase and MEDLINE, along with grey literature and trials websites, were searched comprehensively for papers published since 2012. Inclusion criteria were original research in an adult population with rectal cancer that reported QoL using a validated tool, including the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-CR30, QLQ-CR29, and QLQ-CR38. Studies were included if they compared AR with APE (or HE), independent of study design. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Outcomes of interest were: QoL, pain, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (stool frequency, flatulence, diarrhoea and constipation), and body image.

Results

Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 6453 patients; all papers were observational and just four included preoperative evaluations. There was no identifiable difference in global QoL and pain between the two surgical techniques. Reported results regarding GI symptoms and body image documented similar findings. The ROBINS-I tool highlighted a significant risk of bias across the studies.

Conclusion

Currently, it is not possible to draw a firm conclusion on postoperative QoL, pain, GI symptoms, and body image following restorative or non-restorative surgery. The included studies were generally of poor quality, lacked preoperative evaluations, and showed considerable bias in the data.

SUBMITTER: Lawday S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8765336 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Over two million people in the UK are living with and beyond cancer. A third report diminished quality of life. DESIGN:A review of published systematic reviews to identify effective non-pharmacological interventions to improve the quality of life of cancer survivors. DATA SOURCES:Databases searched until May 2017 included PubMed, Cochrane Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and PsycINFO. STUDY SELECTION:Published systematic reviews of randomised trials of non-pharmacological interventions for people living with and beyond cancer were included; included reviews targeted patients aged over 18. All participants had already received a cancer diagnosis. Interventions located in any healthcare setting, home or online were included. Reviews of alternative therapies or those non-English reports were excluded. Two researchers independently assessed titles, abstracts and the full text of papers, and independently extracted the data. OUTCOMES:The primary outcome of interest was any measure of global (overall) quality of life. ANALYTICAL METHODS:Quality assessment assessing methdological quality of systematic reviews (AMSTAR) and narrative synthesis, evaluating effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions and their components. RESULTS:Of 14?430 unique titles, 21 were included in the review of reviews. There was little overlap in the primary papers across these reviews. Thirteen reviews covered mixed tumour groups, seven focused on breast cancer and one focused on prostate cancer. Face-to-face interventions were often combined with online, telephone and paper-based reading materials. Interventions included physical, psychological or behavioural, multidimensional rehabilitation and online approaches. Yoga specifically, physical exercise more generally, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) programmes showed benefit in terms of quality of life. CONCLUSIONS:Exercise-based interventions were effective in the short (less than 3-8 months) and long term. CBT and MBSR also showed benefits, especially in the short term. The evidence for multidisciplinary, online and educational interventions was equivocal.

Project description:BackgroundBreast cancer is one of the oncological diseases in which health-related quality of life (HRQL) has been most studied. This is mainly due to its high incidence and survival. This paper seeks to: review published research into HRQL among women with breast cancer in Spain; analyse the characteristics of these studies; and describe the instruments used and main results reported.MethodsThe databases consulted were MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Dialnet, IBECS, CUIDEN, ISOC and LILACS. The inclusion criteria required studies to: 1) include Spanish patients, and a breakdown of results where other types of tumours and/or women from other countries were also included; and, 2) furnish original data and measure HRQL using a purpose-designed questionnaire. The methodological quality of studies was assessed.ResultsSpain ranked midway in the European Union in terms of the number of studies conducted on the HRQL of breast cancer patients. Of the total of 133 papers published from 1993 to 2009, 25 met the inclusion criteria. Among them, only 12 were considered as having good or excellent quality. A total of 2236 women participated in the studies analysed. In descending order of frequency, the questionnaires used were the EORTC, FACT-B, QL-CA-Afex, SF-12, FLIC, RSCL and CCV. Five papers focused on validation or adaptation of questionnaires. Most papers examined HRQL in terms of type of treatment. Few differences were detected by type of chemotherapy, with the single exception of worse results among younger women treated with radiotherapy. In the short term, better results were reported for all HRQL components by women undergoing conservative rather than radical surgery. Presence of lymphedema was associated with worse HRQL. Three studies assessed differences in HRQL by patients' psychological traits. Psychosocial disorder and level of depression and anxiety, regardless of treatment or disease stage, worsened HRQL. In addition, there was a positive effect among patients who reported having a "fighting spirit" and using "denial" as a defence mechanism. One study found that breast cancer patients scored worse than did healthy women on almost all SF-12 scales.ConclusionResearch into health-related quality of life of breast-cancer patients is a little developed field in Spain.