Suppr超能文献

根治性右半结肠切除术的淋巴结清扫术和完整结肠系膜切除术的定义和报告:系统评价。

Definition and reporting of lymphadenectomy and complete mesocolic excision for radical right colectomy: a systematic review.

机构信息

Minimally Invasive Unit, Department of Surgical Science, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.

Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2023 Feb;37(2):846-861. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09548-5. Epub 2022 Sep 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Several procedures have been proposed to reduce the rates of recurrence in patients with right-sided colon cancer. Different procedures for a radical right colectomy (RRC), including extended D3 lymphadenectomy, complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been associated with survival benefits by some authors, but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the variability in definition and reporting of RRC, which might be responsible for significant differences in outcome evaluation.

METHODS

PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review to identify the definitions of RRC. Primary aims were to identify surgical steps and different nomenclature for RRC. Secondary aims were description of heterogeneity and overlap among different RRC techniques.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Eight surgical steps were identified and recorded as specific to RRC: Central arterial ligation was described in 100% of the included studies; preservation of mesocolic integrity in 73% and dissection along the SMV plane in 67%. Other surgical steps were inconstantly reported. Six differently named techniques for RRC have been identified. There were 35 definitions for the 6 techniques and 40% of these were used to identify more than one technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The only universally adopted surgical step for RRC is central arterial ligation. There is great heterogeneity and consistent overlap among definitions of all RRC techniques. This is likely to jeopardise the interpretation of the outcomes of studies on the topic. Consistent use of definitions and reporting of procedures are needed to obtain reliable conclusions in future trials. PROSPERO CRD42021241650.

摘要

背景

已有多种方法被提出用于降低右半结肠癌患者的复发率。一些作者认为,根治性右半结肠切除术(RRC)的不同术式,包括扩大 D3 淋巴结清扫术、完整结肠系膜切除术和中央血管结扎术,与生存获益相关,但结果并不一致。本研究旨在评估 RRC 定义和报告的变异性,这可能是导致结局评估存在显著差异的原因。

方法

符合 PRISMA 指南的系统文献回顾,以确定 RRC 的定义。主要目的是确定 RRC 的手术步骤和不同命名法。次要目的是描述不同 RRC 技术之间的异质性和重叠。

结果

99 篇文章符合纳入标准。确定了 8 个手术步骤,并将其记录为 RRC 的特定步骤:中央动脉结扎术在纳入的研究中均有描述(100%);73%的研究中保留了结肠系膜完整性,67%的研究中沿肠系膜上静脉平面进行解剖。其他手术步骤的报道不一致。已确定 6 种不同命名的 RRC 技术。这 6 种技术有 35 种定义,其中 40%的定义用于识别一种以上的技术。

结论

RRC 的唯一普遍采用的手术步骤是中央动脉结扎术。所有 RRC 技术的定义存在很大的异质性和一致性重叠。这可能会影响对该主题研究结果的解释。为了在未来的试验中得出可靠的结论,需要一致使用定义和报告程序。PROSPERO CRD42021241650。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ebe3/9944740/f802381c3dc3/464_2022_9548_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验