• Colorectal Dis · Aug 2012

    Meta Analysis

    Is laparoscopic right colectomy more effective than open resection? A meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studies.

    • F Rondelli, S Trastulli, N Avenia, G Schillaci, R Cirocchi, N Gullà, E Mariani, G Bistoni, and G Noya.
    • Department of General Surgery, S.Maria della Misericordia Hospital, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
    • Colorectal Dis. 2012 Aug 1;14(8):e447-69.

    AimThe aim of this systematic review was to compare laparoscopic and/or laparoscopic-assisted right colectomy (LRC) with open right colectomy (ORC). Many randomized clinical trial have shown that laparoscopic colectomy benefits patients with improved short-term outcomes and comparable overall survival in respect to the open approach. These results, however, could not be applied to right colectomy owing to its wide range of resection and more complicated vascular regional anatomy.MethodWe performed a meta-analysis of the literature in order to compare LRC vs ORC by examining 21 end-points including operative and recovery outcomes, early postoperative mortality and morbidity, and oncological parameters. A subgroup analysis of patients undergoing right colectomy for cancer was carried out. The meta-analysis was conducted following all aspects of the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis (PRISMA) statement. The search strategies were developed using the following electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EBM reviews and CINAHL until March 2011. We included randomized and non randomized studies that compared the LRC vs ORC for benign disease and malignant neoplasm irrespective of publication status. Only studies in English, French, German, Spanish and Italian languages were considered for inclusion. Emergency right colectomies were excluded. To perform the statistical analysis we used the odds ratio (OR) for categorical variables and the weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed.ResultsSeventeen studies, 15 nonrandomized clinical trials and two randomized clinical trials, involving a total of 1489 patients, were identified. The mean operative time was longer in the group of patients undergoing LRC [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 37.94, 95% CI: 25.01 to 50.88; P < 0.00001]. Intra-operative blood loss (WMD = -96.61; 95% CI: -150.68 to -42.54; P = 0.0005), length of hospital stay (WMD = -2.29; 95% CI: -3.96 to -0.63; P = 0.007) and short-term postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.83; P = 0.0009) were significantly in favour of LRC.ConclusionLaparoscopic-assisted right colectomy results in less blood loss, a shorter length of hospital stay and lower postoperative short-term morbidity compared with ORC.© 2012 The Authors. Colorectal Disease © 2012 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…