Zeng Hao, Lan Qilong, Li Fudi, Xu Dongbo, Lin Shuangming
Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, People's Republic of China.
Department of Gastroenterology and Anorectal Surgery, Longyan First Hospital, Fujian Medical University, 105, Jiuyi North Road, Longyan, Fujian, 364000, People's Republic of China.
Updates Surg. 2023 Dec;75(8):2085-2102. doi: 10.1007/s13304-023-01631-3. Epub 2023 Sep 16.
To perform a network meta-analysis of the literature to assess the short-term and long-term outcomes of three operations for left colon and rectal cancer. Electronic literature searches were performed in the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases up to August 2022. A Bayesian network meta-analysis using R software, ADDIS, and Review Manager 5.4 was conducted to compare outcomes of high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery(IMA),low ligation of the IMA with D2 dissection (LLD2), and low ligation of the IMA with D3 dissection (LLD3). Sensitivity analysis was applied to investigate the influence of each primary study on the final result of the meta-analysis. Asymmetry of data was estimated by using Egger's tests. Publication bias corrected by trimming and filling method. A total of 44 studies, 5 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 39 non-RCTs, were included in this meta-analysis. HL was associated with a higher risk of anastomotic leakage (HL vs. LLD2, OR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.13-3.25, P = 0.001; HL vs. LLD3, OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.35-2.01, P < 0.001), and required a longer postoperative hospital stay (HL vs. LLD3, SMD = 0.28, 95%CI 0.09-0.48, P = 0.01).However HL showed an advantage in terms of operation time(HL vs. LLD3, SMD = - 0.13, 95%CI - 0.26 to 0.01, P = 0.04). LLD3 is most likely to rank best in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes after surgery for left colon and rectal cancer. Caution should be taken in the risk of anastomotic leakage when treating colorectal cancer with LLD2. HL, LLD2 and LLD3 provide similar overall survival rates for left colon and rectal cancer.
进行文献的网络荟萃分析,以评估左半结肠癌和直肠癌三种手术的短期和长期结局。截至2022年8月,在PubMed、科学网、EMBASE和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库数据库中进行了电子文献检索。使用R软件、ADDIS和Review Manager 5.4进行贝叶斯网络荟萃分析,以比较肠系膜下动脉(IMA)高位结扎、IMA低位结扎联合D2淋巴结清扫(LLD2)和IMA低位结扎联合D3淋巴结清扫(LLD3)的结局。应用敏感性分析来研究每项主要研究对荟萃分析最终结果的影响。使用Egger检验估计数据的不对称性。采用修剪和填充法校正发表偏倚。本荟萃分析共纳入44项研究,其中5项随机临床试验(RCT)和39项非RCT。高位结扎与吻合口漏的风险较高相关(高位结扎与LLD2相比,OR = 1.35,95%CI 1.13 - 3.25,P = 0.001;高位结扎与LLD3相比,OR = 1.65,95%CI 1.35 - 2.01,P < 0.001),且术后住院时间更长(高位结扎与LLD3相比,SMD = 0.28,95%CI 0.09 - 0.48,P = 0.01)。然而,高位结扎在手术时间方面具有优势(高位结扎与LLD3相比,SMD = -0.13,95%CI -0.26至0.01,P = 0.04)。对于左半结肠癌和直肠癌手术后的短期和长期结局,LLD3最有可能排名最佳。采用LLD2治疗结直肠癌时,应注意吻合口漏的风险。高位结扎、LLD2和LLD3对左半结肠癌和直肠癌的总生存率相似。