Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer

safe and effective? - a systematic review

Tania Lourenco, Alison Catherine Murray, Adrian Maxwell Grant, Aileen Joyce McKinley, Zygmunt H Krukowski, Luke David Vale

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

56 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic and laparoscopically assisted surgery in comparison with open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Background Open resection is the standard method for surgical removal of primary colorectal tumours. However, there is significant morbidity associated with this procedure. Laparoscopic resection (LR) is technically more difficult but may overcome problems associated with open resections (OR).

Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-and long-term data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LS with OR.

Results Highly sensitive searches of nine databases identified 19 primary RCTs describing data from over 4,500 participants. Length of hospital stay is shorter, blood loss and pain are less, and return to usual activities is likely to be faster after LR than after OR, but duration of operation is longer. Lymph node retrieval, completeness of resection and quality of life do not appear to differ. No statistically significant differences were observed in rates of anastomotic leakage, abdominal wound breakdown, incisional hernia, wound and urinary tract infections, operative and 30-day mortality, and recurrences, nor in overall and disease-free survival up to three years.

Conclusions LR is associated with a quicker recovery in terms of return to usual activities and length of hospital stay with no evidence of a difference in complications or long-term outcomes in comparison to OR, up to three years postoperatively.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1146-1160
Number of pages14
JournalSurgical Endoscopy
Volume22
Issue number5
Early online date11 Dec 2007
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2008

Keywords

  • colorectal cancer
  • laparoscopic surgery
  • systematic review
  • meta analysis
  • prospective randomized-trial
  • quality-of-life
  • open colectomy
  • colon-cancer
  • assisted colectomy
  • clinical-trial
  • resection
  • carcinoma
  • outcomes

Cite this

Lourenco, T., Murray, A. C., Grant, A. M., McKinley, A. J., Krukowski, Z. H., & Vale, L. D. (2008). Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: safe and effective? - a systematic review. Surgical Endoscopy, 22(5), 1146-1160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9686-x

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer : safe and effective? - a systematic review. / Lourenco, Tania; Murray, Alison Catherine; Grant, Adrian Maxwell; McKinley, Aileen Joyce; Krukowski, Zygmunt H; Vale, Luke David.

In: Surgical Endoscopy, Vol. 22, No. 5, 05.2008, p. 1146-1160.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lourenco, T, Murray, AC, Grant, AM, McKinley, AJ, Krukowski, ZH & Vale, LD 2008, 'Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: safe and effective? - a systematic review', Surgical Endoscopy, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 1146-1160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9686-x
Lourenco T, Murray AC, Grant AM, McKinley AJ, Krukowski ZH, Vale LD. Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: safe and effective? - a systematic review. Surgical Endoscopy. 2008 May;22(5):1146-1160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9686-x
Lourenco, Tania ; Murray, Alison Catherine ; Grant, Adrian Maxwell ; McKinley, Aileen Joyce ; Krukowski, Zygmunt H ; Vale, Luke David. / Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer : safe and effective? - a systematic review. In: Surgical Endoscopy. 2008 ; Vol. 22, No. 5. pp. 1146-1160.
@article{437296f8c9ff457ba6ae5e984780be18,
title = "Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: safe and effective? - a systematic review",
abstract = "Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic and laparoscopically assisted surgery in comparison with open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer.Background Open resection is the standard method for surgical removal of primary colorectal tumours. However, there is significant morbidity associated with this procedure. Laparoscopic resection (LR) is technically more difficult but may overcome problems associated with open resections (OR).Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-and long-term data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LS with OR.Results Highly sensitive searches of nine databases identified 19 primary RCTs describing data from over 4,500 participants. Length of hospital stay is shorter, blood loss and pain are less, and return to usual activities is likely to be faster after LR than after OR, but duration of operation is longer. Lymph node retrieval, completeness of resection and quality of life do not appear to differ. No statistically significant differences were observed in rates of anastomotic leakage, abdominal wound breakdown, incisional hernia, wound and urinary tract infections, operative and 30-day mortality, and recurrences, nor in overall and disease-free survival up to three years.Conclusions LR is associated with a quicker recovery in terms of return to usual activities and length of hospital stay with no evidence of a difference in complications or long-term outcomes in comparison to OR, up to three years postoperatively.",
keywords = "colorectal cancer, laparoscopic surgery, systematic review, meta analysis, prospective randomized-trial, quality-of-life, open colectomy, colon-cancer, assisted colectomy, clinical-trial, resection, carcinoma, outcomes",
author = "Tania Lourenco and Murray, {Alison Catherine} and Grant, {Adrian Maxwell} and McKinley, {Aileen Joyce} and Krukowski, {Zygmunt H} and Vale, {Luke David}",
note = "The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com",
year = "2008",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1007/s00464-007-9686-x",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "1146--1160",
journal = "Surgical Endoscopy",
issn = "0930-2794",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer

T2 - safe and effective? - a systematic review

AU - Lourenco, Tania

AU - Murray, Alison Catherine

AU - Grant, Adrian Maxwell

AU - McKinley, Aileen Joyce

AU - Krukowski, Zygmunt H

AU - Vale, Luke David

N1 - The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com

PY - 2008/5

Y1 - 2008/5

N2 - Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic and laparoscopically assisted surgery in comparison with open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer.Background Open resection is the standard method for surgical removal of primary colorectal tumours. However, there is significant morbidity associated with this procedure. Laparoscopic resection (LR) is technically more difficult but may overcome problems associated with open resections (OR).Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-and long-term data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LS with OR.Results Highly sensitive searches of nine databases identified 19 primary RCTs describing data from over 4,500 participants. Length of hospital stay is shorter, blood loss and pain are less, and return to usual activities is likely to be faster after LR than after OR, but duration of operation is longer. Lymph node retrieval, completeness of resection and quality of life do not appear to differ. No statistically significant differences were observed in rates of anastomotic leakage, abdominal wound breakdown, incisional hernia, wound and urinary tract infections, operative and 30-day mortality, and recurrences, nor in overall and disease-free survival up to three years.Conclusions LR is associated with a quicker recovery in terms of return to usual activities and length of hospital stay with no evidence of a difference in complications or long-term outcomes in comparison to OR, up to three years postoperatively.

AB - Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic and laparoscopically assisted surgery in comparison with open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer.Background Open resection is the standard method for surgical removal of primary colorectal tumours. However, there is significant morbidity associated with this procedure. Laparoscopic resection (LR) is technically more difficult but may overcome problems associated with open resections (OR).Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of short-and long-term data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LS with OR.Results Highly sensitive searches of nine databases identified 19 primary RCTs describing data from over 4,500 participants. Length of hospital stay is shorter, blood loss and pain are less, and return to usual activities is likely to be faster after LR than after OR, but duration of operation is longer. Lymph node retrieval, completeness of resection and quality of life do not appear to differ. No statistically significant differences were observed in rates of anastomotic leakage, abdominal wound breakdown, incisional hernia, wound and urinary tract infections, operative and 30-day mortality, and recurrences, nor in overall and disease-free survival up to three years.Conclusions LR is associated with a quicker recovery in terms of return to usual activities and length of hospital stay with no evidence of a difference in complications or long-term outcomes in comparison to OR, up to three years postoperatively.

KW - colorectal cancer

KW - laparoscopic surgery

KW - systematic review

KW - meta analysis

KW - prospective randomized-trial

KW - quality-of-life

KW - open colectomy

KW - colon-cancer

KW - assisted colectomy

KW - clinical-trial

KW - resection

KW - carcinoma

KW - outcomes

U2 - 10.1007/s00464-007-9686-x

DO - 10.1007/s00464-007-9686-x

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 1146

EP - 1160

JO - Surgical Endoscopy

JF - Surgical Endoscopy

SN - 0930-2794

IS - 5

ER -