Pawar Ajinkya, Warikoo Vikas, Salunke Abhijeet, Sharma Mohit, Pandya Shashank, Bhardwaj Amol, Ks Sandeep, Aaron Jebin
Department of Surgical Oncology, GCRI, Ahmedabad, India.
Pleura Peritoneum. 2024 Mar 13;9(1):1-13. doi: 10.1515/pp-2023-0017. eCollection 2024 Mar.
Minimal Access Surgery (MAS) has shown better peri-operative outcomes with equivalent oncological outcomes in gastrointestinal and thoracic oncology. Open CRS (O-CRS) procedure accompanies inevitable and significant surgical morbidity in patients. The aim of the review article is to compare outcomes of M-CRS and HIPEC/EPIC with open procedure in peritoneal surface malignancies.
Comprehensive search of databases was done and total 2,807 articles were found (2793-PubMed and 14-Cochrane review). PRISMA flow chart was prepared and 14 articles were selected. Meta-analysis was performed according to PRISMA guidelines using random-effects model (DerSimonian Laird) and fixed effect model. Publication bias was tested with Funnel plot and Egger's regression test. Quality of studies was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa scale.
Patients in both groups [total (732), M-CRS(319), O-CRS(413)] were similar in demographic characteristics. Peri-operative outcomes were significantly better in M-CRS group in terms of blood loss SMD=-2.379, p<0.001 (95 % CI -2.952 to -1.805), blood transfusion RR=0.598, p=0.011 (95 % CI 0.402 to 0.889), bowel recovery SMD=-0.843, p=0.01 (95 % CI -1.487 to -0.2), hospital stay SMD=-2.348, p<0.001 (95 % CI -3.178 to -1.519) and total morbidity RR=0.538, p<0.001 (95 % CI 0.395 to 0.731). Duration of surgery SMD=-0.0643 (95 % CI -0.993 to 0.865, p=0.892) and CC0 score RR=1.064 (95 % CI 0.992 to 1.140, p=0.083) had no significant difference. Limited studies which evaluated survival showed similar outcomes. This meta-analysis shows that M-CRS and HIPEC/EPIC is feasible and has better peri-operative outcomes compared to open procedure in patients with limited peritoneal carcinoma index (PCI) peritoneal surface malignancies. Survival outcomes were not calculated. Further studies are warranted in this regard.
微创外科手术(MAS)在胃肠和胸科肿瘤学领域已显示出更好的围手术期结果以及相当的肿瘤学结果。开放性细胞减灭术(O-CRS)手术会给患者带来不可避免的显著手术并发症。这篇综述文章的目的是比较微创细胞减灭术(M-CRS)和热灌注化疗/术中腹腔内化疗(HIPEC/EPIC)与开放性手术治疗腹膜表面恶性肿瘤的结果。
对数据库进行了全面检索,共找到2807篇文章(2793篇来自PubMed,14篇来自Cochrane综述)。绘制了PRISMA流程图,并筛选出14篇文章。根据PRISMA指南,使用随机效应模型(DerSimonian Laird)和固定效应模型进行荟萃分析。通过漏斗图和Egger回归检验来检测发表偏倚。研究质量通过纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表进行评估。
两组患者[总计732例,M-CRS组319例,O-CRS组413例]在人口统计学特征方面相似。在失血方面,M-CRS组的围手术期结果显著更好,标准化均数差(SMD)=-2.379,p<0.001(95%置信区间-2.952至-1.805);输血相对危险度(RR)=0.598,p=0.011(95%置信区间0.402至0.889);肠道恢复SMD=-0.843,p=0.01(95%置信区间-1.487至-0.2);住院时间SMD=-2.348,p<0.001(95%置信区间-3.178至-1.519);总并发症发生率RR=0.538,p<0.001(95%置信区间0.395至0.731)。手术时间SMD=-0.0643(95%置信区间-0.993至0.865,p=0.892),CC0评分RR=1.064(95%置信区间0.992至1.140,p=0.083)无显著差异。有限的评估生存情况的研究显示结果相似。这项荟萃分析表明,对于腹膜癌指数(PCI)有限的腹膜表面恶性肿瘤患者,M-CRS和HIPEC/EPIC是可行的,并且与开放性手术相比具有更好的围手术期结果。未计算生存结果。在这方面需要进一步的研究。