The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery versus laparoscopic NOSE for sigmoid and rectal cancer
- 21 January 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Surgical Endoscopy
- Vol. 36 (1), 222-235
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-08260-6
Abstract
Background Laparoscopic surgery with natural orifice specimen extraction (La-NOSE) is being performed more frequently for the minimally invasive management of sigmoid and rectal cancer. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical and oncological safety and efficacy of La-NOSE versus conventional laparoscopy (CL). Methods A search of the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was performed for studies that compared clinical or oncological outcomes of conventional laparoscopic resection using NOSE with conventional laparoscopic resection for sigmoid and rectal cancer. Results Compared with CL group, the length of hospital stay and the pain score on the first day were shorter in the La-Nose group. The La-NOSE group had a lower incidence of total perioperative complications (OR 0.46; 95% CI [0.32 to 0.66]; I2 = 0%; P < 0.0001) and a lower incidence of surgical site infections (SSIs) (OR 0.11; 95% CI [0.04 to 0.29]; I2 = 0%; P < 0.0001) than the CL group, while the anastomotic leakage showed no significant difference between the La-Nose group and the CL group (P = 0.19). 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year overall survival (OS) were no significant difference between the La-Nose group and the CL group (P = 0.43, P = 0.40, respectively). Conclusions La-NOSE can achieve oncological and surgical safety comparable to that of CL for patients with sigmoid and rectal cancer. La-NOSE in patients was associated with a shorter hospital stay, shorter time to first flatus or defecation, less postoperative pain, and fewer surgical site infections (SSIs) and total perioperative complications. In general, the operative time in La-NOSE was longer than that in CL. The long-term oncological efficacy of La-NOSE seems to be equivalent to that of CL.Keywords
This publication has 56 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prospective evaluation of peritoneal fluid contamination following transabdominal vs. transanal specimen extraction in laparoscopic left-sided colorectal resectionsSurgical Endoscopy, 2011
- The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trialsBMJ, 2011
- Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysesEuropean Journal of Epidemiology, 2010
- Totally laparoscopic right colectomy with transvaginal specimen extraction: the authors’ initial institutional experienceSurgical Endoscopy, 2010
- The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and ElaborationPLoS Medicine, 2009
- Robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excison of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized trialSurgical Endoscopy, 2008
- Laparoscopic colorectal resection does not reduce incisional hernia rates when compared with open colorectal resectionSurgical Endoscopy, 2007
- Practical methods for incorporating summary time-to-event data into meta-analysisTrials, 2007
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Wound complications of laparoscopic vs open colectomySurgical Endoscopy, 2002