Guo Yulin, Gao Yunhe, Chen Guijin, Li Chen, Dong Guanglong
Department of General Surgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Am Surg. 2018 Feb 1;84(2):192-200.
The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of simultaneous resections between the minimally invasive approach (MIA) and the open approach (OA) for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM). A systematic search was conducted in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE and Ovid databases (until May 5, 2016). Studies comparing the perioperative results and long-term outcomes for patients undergoing simultaneous CRC and SCRLM resections between the two approaches were evaluated. Six studies were identified, which included 164 minimally invasive and 213 open simultaneous resections of CRC and SCRLM. MIA was associated with lesser surgical blood loss (mean difference = -155.85 mL; 95% confidence interval: -305.64 to -6.06, P = 0.04) and shorter length of postoperative stay (mean difference = -3.16 days; 95% confidence interval: -4.00 to -2.31, P < 0.00001.). The other perioperative results, including operating time, operative blood transfusion, intestinal function recovery time, and postoperative complications, did not differ significantly. No significant difference in the disease-free survival and overall survival rates between the two approaches was observed. In conclusion, compared with the OA, the MIA for simultaneous CRC and SCRLM resections is safe and effective for the treatment of SCRLM with lesser surgical blood loss and shorter length of postoperative stay. The MIA may be an alternative to the OA for simultaneous CRC and SCRLM resections for appropriately selected patients with resectable SCRLM.
本荟萃分析的目的是比较微创方法(MIA)与开放方法(OA)对结直肠癌(CRC)合并同时性结直肠肝转移(SCRLM)患者进行同期切除的疗效和安全性。在Cochrane图书馆、PubMed、EMBASE和Ovid数据库中进行了系统检索(截至2016年5月5日)。评估了比较两种方法对同期进行CRC和SCRLM切除患者围手术期结果和长期结局的研究。共纳入6项研究,其中包括164例微创同期CRC和SCRLM切除术以及213例开放同期切除术。MIA与较少的手术失血量相关(平均差值=-155.85 mL;95%置信区间:-305.64至-6.06,P=0.04),且术后住院时间较短(平均差值=-3.16天;95%置信区间:-4.00至-2.31,P<0.00001)。其他围手术期结果,包括手术时间、术中输血、肠功能恢复时间和术后并发症,差异均无统计学意义。两种方法的无病生存率和总生存率差异均无统计学意义。总之,与OA相比,MIA用于同期CRC和SCRLM切除治疗SCRLM是安全有效的,手术失血量较少且术后住院时间较短。对于适当选择的可切除SCRLM患者,MIA可能是OA用于同期CRC和SCRLM切除的替代方法。