Laparoscopic versus open left hemicolectomy for left-sided colon cancer: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
Laparoscopic colectomy has been widely used clinically due to its minimally invasive advantages, and many studies have also demonstrated its safety and efficacy. However, the efficacy of laparoscopic left hemicolectomy remains unclear due to the differences in pathogenesis and surgical details between left and right colon cancers. Therefore, we plan to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate whether laparoscopic techniques can be safely used in left hemicolectomy.Method and analysis
This meta-analysis protocol will be completed and reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines. A systematic search was performed for all articles related to laparoscopic left hemicolectomy in PubMed, Web of Science, Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception to 5 November 2021. Article screening and data extraction were performed independently by two authors and cross-checked after completion. The literature to be included will use corresponding tools for bias risk assessment. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses will be used to explore potential heterogeneity.Ethics and dissemination
Because this systematic review is based on studies with published results and does not involve intervention in patients, no ethical review is required. The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration number
CRD42022291526.
SUBMITTER: Du Q
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9226930 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILS) has long used in surgery for a long time. However, there is barely a systemic review related to the comparison between the SILS and the conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (CLS) for the right colon cancer in the long term follow-up. Herein, we used the most recent articles to compare these two techniques by meta-analysis. METHODS:We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Wanfang databases to compare SILS with CLS for right colon cancer up to May 2019. The operative, postoperative, pathological and mid-term follow-up outcomes of nine studies were extracted and compared. RESULTS:A total of 1356 patients participated in 9 studies, while 653 patients were assigned to the SILS group and 703 patients were assigned to the CLS group. The patients' baselines in the SILS group were consistent with those in the CLS group. Compared to the CLS group, the SILS group had a shorter operation duration (SMD - 23.49, 95%CI - 36.71 to - 10.27, P < 0.001, chi-square = 24.11), shorter hospital stay (SMD - 0.76, 95% `CI - 1.07 to - 0.45, P < 0.001, chi-square = 9.85), less blood loss (SMD - 8.46, 95% CI - 14.59 to - 2.34; P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.26), smaller incision length (SMD - 1.60, 95% CI - 2.66 to - 0.55, P < 0.001; chi-square = 280.44), more lymph node harvested (SMD - 0.98, 95% CI - 1.79 to - 0.16, P < 0.05; chi-square = 4.61), and a longer proximal surgical edge (SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.93 to - 0.09, P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.42). No significant difference was found in other indexes. After we removed a single large study, we performed another meta-analysis again. The operation duration in the SILS group was still better than that in the CLS group. CONCLUSION:SILS could be a faster and more reliable approach than CLS for the right colon cancer and could accelerate patient recovery, especially for patients with a low BMI.
| S-EPMC6829956 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess whether laparoscopy has any advantages over open resection for right-sided colon cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA:Right hemicolectomy can be performed using either a conventional open or a minimally invasive laparoscopic technique. It is not clear whether these different access routes differ with regard to short-term postoperative outcomes. METHODS:Patients documented in the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|ColonCancer registry who underwent right hemicolectomy were analyzed regarding early postoperative complications according to Clavien-Dindo (primary endpoint), operation (OP) time, length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS), MTL30 and number of lymph nodes retrieved (secondary endpoints). RESULTS:A total of 4.997 patients were identified as undergoing oncological right hemicolectomy without additional interventions. Of these, 4.062 (81.3%) underwent open, 935 (18.7%) laparoscopic surgery. Propensity score analysis showed a significantly shorter LOS (OR: 0.55 CI 95%0.47-.64) and a significantly longer OP time (OR2.32 CI 1.98-2.71) for the laparoscopic route. Risk factors for postoperative complications, anastomotic insufficiency, ileus, reoperation and positive MTL30 were higher ASA status, higher age and increasing BMI. The surgical access route (open / lap) had no influence on these factors, but the laparoscopic group did have markedly fewer lymph nodes retrieved. CONCLUSION:The present registry-based analysis could detect no relevant advantages for the minimally invasive laparoscopic access route. Further oncological analyses are needed to clarify the extent to which the smaller lymph node harvest in the laparoscopic group is accompanied by a poorer oncological outcome.
| S-EPMC6597089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although conventional laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is widely used today, there remain many technical challenges especially for right colon cancer in obese patients. Herein, we develop a novel hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) with complete mesocolic excision (CME), D3 lymphadenectomy, and a total "no-touch" isolation technique (HALS-CME) in right hemicolectomy to overcome these issues. According to previous clinic practice, this novel procedure is not only feasible and safe but has several technical merits. However, the feasibility, short-term minimally invasive virtues, long-term oncological superiority, and potential total "no-touch" isolation technique benefits of HALS-CME should be confirmed by a prospective randomized controlled trial.This is a single-center, open-label, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to the HALS-CME group or to the laparoscopic surgery with CME, D3 lymphadenectomy, and total "no-touch" isolation technique (LAP-CME) group, or to conventional laparoscopic surgery with CME and D3 lymphadenectomy (cLAP) group at a 1:1:1 ratio using a centralized randomization list. Primary endpoints include safety, efficacy, and being oncologically clear, and 3-year disease-free, progression-free, and overall survival. Second endpoints include operative outcomes (operation time, blood loss, and incision length), pathologic evaluation (grading the plane of surgery, length of proximal and distal resection margins, distance between the tumor and the central arterial high tie, distance between the nearest bowel wall and the same high tie, area of mesentery resected, width of the chain of lymph-adipose tissue, length of the central lymph-adipose chain, number of harvested lymph nodes), and postoperative outcomes (pain intensity, postoperative inflammatory and immune responses, postoperative recovery).This trial will provide valuable clinical evidence for the feasibility, safety, and potential total "no-touch" isolation technique benefits of HALS-CME for right hemicolectomy. The hypothesis is that HALS-CME is feasible for the radical D3 resection of right colon cancer and offers short-term safety and long-term oncological superiority compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02625272 . Registered on 8 December 2015.
| S-EPMC5530577 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of right hemicolectomy with CME performed with laparoscopic and open surgery.MethodsPubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, Google Scholar and the ClinicalTrials.gov register were searched. Primary outcome was the overall number of harvested lymph nodes. Secondary outcomes were short and long-term course variables. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate risk ratios.ResultsTwenty-one studies were identified with 5038 patients enrolled. The difference in number of harvested lymph nodes was not statistically significant (MD 0.68, - 0.41-1.76, P = 0.22). The only RCT shows a significant advantage in favour of laparoscopy (MD 3.30, 95% CI - 0.20-6.40, P = 0.04). The analysis of CCTs showed an advantage in favour of the laparoscopic group, but the result was not statically significantly (MD - 0.55, 95% CI - 0.57-1.67, P = 0.33). The overall incidence of local recurrence was not different between the groups, while systemic recurrence at 5 years was lower in laparoscopic group. Laparoscopy showed better short-term outcomes including overall complications, lower estimated blood loss, lower wound infections and shorter hospital stay, despite a longer operative time. The rate of anastomotic and chyle leak was similar in the two groups.ConclusionsDespite the several limitations of this study, we found that the median number of lymph node harvested in the laparoscopic group is not different compared to open surgery. Laparoscopy was associated with a lower incidence of systemic recurrence.
| S-EPMC8280018 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The role of laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer has been supported by the results of randomized controlled trials. However, its benefits and disadvantages in the real world setting should be further assessed with population-based studies.The hospitalization data of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer were sourced from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Patient and hospital characteristics and perioperative outcomes including length of hospital stay, operation time, opioid use, blood transfusion, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and use of mechanical ventilation were compared. The overall survival was also assessed. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery had shorter hospital stay (p < 0.0001) and less demand for opioid analgesia (p = 0.0005). Further logistic regression revealed that patients undergoing open surgery were 1.70, 2.89, and 3.00 times more likely to have blood transfusion, to be admitted to ICU, and to use mechanical ventilation than patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Operations performed in medical centers were also associated with less adverse events. The overall survival was comparable between the 2 groups.With adequate hospital quality and volume, laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer was associated with improved perioperative outcomes. The long-term survival was not compromised.
| S-EPMC6952445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to explore the association of tumor sidedness with the prognosis of patients with colon signet ring cell carcinoma (SRCC). Eligible patients were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 2004 and 2015. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients with left-sided colon SRCC and those with right-sided lesions. A total of 2660 patients were included, among them, 1983 (74.5%) had right-sided colon SRCC. Compared to patients with left-sided colon SRCC, those who had the right-sided colon SRCC showed higher proportion of white race, female, aged ??65 years, receiving total colectomy and ??4 regional lymph node dissection; while had lower proportion of advanced AJCC stage. Besides, right-sided patients exhibited superior 5-year CSS (32.74% vs. 25.89%, P?=?0.001) and OS (27.38% vs. 23.02%, P?=?0.024) rates compared with left-sided ones. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor sidedness was an independent prognostic factor. To be specific, patients with right-sided colon SRCC showed better CSS (HR: 0.873; 95% CI 0.777-0.981; P?=?0.023) and OS (HR: 0.838; 95% CI 0.753-0.965; P?=?0.002). Moreover, subgroup analysis demonstrated superior CSS and OS for right-sided patients in most subgroups. Tumor sidedness was an independent prognostic indicator for colon SRCC. Besides, patients with right-sided colon SRCC have superior prognosis than those with left-sided lesions.
| S-EPMC7578060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Laparoscopic approaches have become a standard strategy for colon cancer patients who undergo surgical treatment. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL) is the fundamental principle of radical resection of colon cancers. Splenic flexure colon cancer (SFCC) is rare, accounting for less than 4% of all colorectal cancer cases. Moreover, a laparoscopic approach for SFCC following the CME/CVL concept can be challenging because the blood supply of the splenic flexure is derived from either the middle colic artery (MCA) branching from the superior mesenteric artery, the left colic artery (LCA) branching from the inferior mesenteric artery. In addition, approximately one third of SFCC patients have an accessory MCA that can originate from the celiac trunk. Herein, we describe the technical procedure of a laparoscopic left hemicolectomy for SFCC using indocyanine green (ICG) for necessary and sufficient lymphadenectomy followed by intracorporeal anastomosis. Two injections of ICG (0.5 mg/0.2 ml × 2) into the subserosa of the proximal and distal sides of the tumor preceded the surgical procedure after pneumoperitoneum. Near infrared images obtained throughout the laparoscopic procedure helped visualize lymphatic drainage vessels and inform decision making for determining vessels requiring ligation according to the CVL concept: MCA, LCA or accessory MCA. Complete intracorporeal anastomosis following necessary and sufficient lymphadenectomy with ICG can minimize the dissecting area of the laparoscopic left hemicolectomy for SFCC patients. Intravenous ICG injection (2.5 mg) after anastomosis helps confirm blood perfusion at the anastomosis site. Four patients with SFCC underwent a laparoscopic colectomy under ICG navigation in 2019 at our institute. The median operative time was 237 min, the median estimated blood loss was 0 ml, and the median number of dissected lymph nodes was 13. No patients experienced postoperative complications. In conclusion, laparoscopic left hemicolectomy with ICG navigation and intracorporeal anastomosis for SFCC patients may be a feasible option for the radical resection of colon cancer.
| S-EPMC7450033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of mortality worldwide and in the UK. Surgical resection is the main curative treatment modality available and using a laparoscopic vs. an open approach may have a direct influence on the inflammatory response, influencing cancer biology and potentially the recurrence kinetics by promoting cancer growth. This systematic review aims to compare laparoscopic with open surgery for the treatment of colon cancer with a specific focus on the moment of the recurrence. We included randomised controlled trials in intended curative surgery for colon cancer in adults. Studies investigating laparoscopic vs. open resection as an intended curative treatment for patients with confirmed carcinoma of the colon. The two co-primary outcomes were the time to recurrence and the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at three and five years. Meta-analyses were done on the mean differences. After selection, we reviewed ten randomised controlled trials. Most of the trials did not display a statistically significant difference in either DFS or OS at three or at five years when comparing laparoscopic to open surgery. Groups did not differ for the OS and DFS, especially regarding the time needed to observe the median recurrence rate. The quality of evidence (GRADE) was moderate to very low. We observed no difference in the recurrence kinetics, OS or DFS at three or five years when comparing laparoscopic to open surgery in colon cancer.
| S-EPMC8466495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to review the new evidence to understand whether the robotic approach could find some clear indication also in left colectomy.MethodsA systematic review of studies published from 2004 to 2022 in the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases and comparing laparoscopic (LLC) and robotic left colectomy (RLC) was performed. All comparative studies evaluating robotic left colectomy (RLC) versus laparoscopic (LLC) left colectomy with at least 20 patients in the robotic arm were included. Abstract, editorials, and reviews were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to assess the methodological quality. The random-effect model was used to calculate pooled effect estimates.ResultsAmong the 139 articles identified, 11 were eligible, with a total of 52,589 patients (RLC, n = 13,506 versus LLC, n = 39,083). The rate of conversion to open surgery was lower for robotic procedures (RR 0.5, 0.5-0.6; p < 0.001). Operative time was longer for the robotic procedures in the pooled analysis (WMD 39.1, 17.3-60.9, p = 0.002). Overall complications (RR 0.9, 0.8-0.9, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (RR 0.7, 0.7-0.8; p < 0.001), and superficial wound infection (RR 3.1, 2.8-3.4; p < 0.001) were less common after RLC. There were no significant differences in mortality (RR 1.1; 0.8-1.6, p = 0.124). There were no differences between RLC and LLC with regards to postoperative variables in the subgroup analysis on malignancies.ConclusionsRobotic left colectomy requires less conversion to open surgery than the standard laparoscopic approach. Postoperative morbidity rates seemed to be lower during RLC, but this was not confirmed in the procedures performed for malignancies.
| S-EPMC9262793 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe extent of bowel resection is widely debated in colon cancer surgery. Right hemicolectomy (RHC) and partial colectomy (PC) are the most common operation options for right-sided colon cancer (RCC). However, there are still no treatment guidelines or published studies to guide surgical options for mucinous adenocarcinoma (MAC) of RCC.MethodsPatients with MAC and non-specific adenocarcinoma (AC) of RCC who underwent RHC and PC from 2010 to 2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were retrieved. The general characteristics and survival were compared and analyzed.ResultsA total of 27,910 RCC patients were enrolled in this study, among them 3,413 were MAC. The results showed that race, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, perineural invasion (PNI), tumor size, tumor location, TNM stage, liver metastasis, chemotherapy were significantly different between MAC and AC groups. The MAC group had similar dissected lymph nodes, but more positive lymph nodes than the AC group. The overall survival (OS) of the MAC group was poorer than that of the AC group, but cancer-specific survival (CSS) was similar between the two groups. The RHC subgroup of the MAC group had more patients of age ≤60 years, larger tumor size, cecum/ascending colon location and dissected lymph nodes than the PC subgroup, but similar positive lymph nodes, perioperative mortality, OS and CSS as the PC subgroup. Moreover, the univariate and multivariable analyses for the survival of RCC patients with MAC showed that RHC might not be a superior predictor for OS and CSS compared with PC.ConclusionsRHC could not dissect more positive lymph nodes or provide long-term survival benefits for RCC patients with MAC compared with PC. This study could provide some evidence for surgery treatment selection for MAC of RCC, which has important clinical value in individual management of colon cancer patients.
| S-EPMC7882730 | biostudies-literature