Display options
Share it on

J Cancer. 2011;2:425-34. doi: 10.7150/jca.2.425. Epub 2011 Aug 01.

A meta-analysis of the short- and long-term results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopy-assisted and conventional open surgery for colorectal cancer.

Journal of Cancer

Hiroshi Ohtani, Yutaka Tamamori, Yuichi Arimoto, Yukio Nishiguchi, Kiyoshi Maeda, Kosei Hirakawa

Affiliations

  1. 1. Department of Surgery, Osaka City Sumiyoshi Hospital.

PMID: 21850210 PMCID: PMC3157019 DOI: 10.7150/jca.2.425

Abstract

PURPOSE: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the short- and long-term results of laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCRS) and conventional open surgery (OCRS) for colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS: We searched relevant papers published between January 1990 and May 2011. We analyzed the outcomes of each type of surgery over the short- and long-term periods.

RESULTS: In the short-term period, we found no significant differences in overall perioperative complications and anastomotic leakage between LCRS and OCRS groups. We found no significant differences in overall, distant, local and wound-site recurrence, overall mortality, 3 and 5 year disease-free survival rate, and cancer-related mortality between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS: LCRS has the benefits of reducing intraoperative blood loss, earlier resumption of oral intake, and shorter duration of hospital stay in the short-term. The long-term outcomes of LCRS seem to be similar to those of OCRS.

Keywords: colorectal cancer; laparoscopy-assisted colorectal surgery; meta-analysis

References

  1. Control Clin Trials. 1986 Sep;7(3):177-88 - PubMed
  2. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2011 Jun;26(6):809-10 - PubMed
  3. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 13;350(20):2050-9 - PubMed
  4. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991 Sep;1(3):144-50 - PubMed
  5. Lancet Oncol. 2009 Jan;10(1):44-52 - PubMed
  6. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2008 Oct;18(5):679-85 - PubMed
  7. Br J Surg. 2010 Aug;97(8):1180-6 - PubMed
  8. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Dec;48(12):2217-23 - PubMed
  9. Surg Endosc. 2009 Aug;23(8):1818-24 - PubMed
  10. J Am Coll Surg. 1998 Jul;187(1):46-54; discussion 54-5 - PubMed
  11. Br J Surg. 1997 Mar;84(3):391-6 - PubMed
  12. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2006 Oct;21(7):652-6 - PubMed
  13. Surg Endosc. 2000 Nov;14(11):1062-6 - PubMed
  14. Surg Endosc. 1998 Sep;12(9):1131-6 - PubMed
  15. Surg Endosc. 2004 Aug;18(8):1211-5 - PubMed
  16. Rev Hosp Clin Fac Med Sao Paulo. 2003 May-Jun;58(3):133-40 - PubMed
  17. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011 Aug;15(8):1375-85 - PubMed
  18. Colorectal Dis. 2008 Oct;10(8):757-68 - PubMed
  19. Lancet. 2004 Apr 10;363(9416):1187-92 - PubMed
  20. Lancet. 2002 Jun 29;359(9325):2224-9 - PubMed
  21. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007 Apr;50(4):464-71 - PubMed
  22. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2004 Dec;14(6):329-34 - PubMed
  23. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Apr 16;(2):CD003432 - PubMed
  24. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 20;25(21):3061-8 - PubMed
  25. Br J Surg. 2004 Sep;91(9):1111-24 - PubMed
  26. Surg Endosc. 2002 Oct;16(10):1420-5 - PubMed
  27. Ann Surg. 2005 Dec;242(6):890-5, discussion 895-6 - PubMed
  28. Lancet Oncol. 2005 Jul;6(7):477-84 - PubMed
  29. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Jan;14(1):109-17 - PubMed
  30. Br J Surg. 2010 Nov;97(11):1638-45 - PubMed
  31. Arch Surg. 2007 Mar;142(3):298-303 - PubMed
  32. Lancet. 2005 May 14-20;365(9472):1718-26 - PubMed

Publication Types