• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

经肛门、机器人辅助、开放及腹腔镜直肠癌切除术的组织病理学结果:随机对照试验的贝叶斯网络Meta分析

Histopathological outcomes of transanal, robotic, open, and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

de'Angelis Nicola, Schena Carlo Alberto, Azzolina Danila, Carra Maria Clotilde, Khan Jim, Gronnier Caroline, Gaujoux Sébastien, Bianchi Paolo Pietro, Spinelli Antonino, Rouanet Philippe, Martínez-Pérez Aleix, Pessaux Patrick

机构信息

Unit of Robotic and Minimally Invasive Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Ferrara University Hospital Arcispedale Sant'Anna, via Aldo Moro 8, 44124, Ferrara, Cona), Italy; Department of Translational Medicine and LTTA Centre, University of Ferrara, 44121, Ferrara, Italy.

Unit of Robotic and Minimally Invasive Digestive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Ferrara University Hospital Arcispedale Sant'Anna, via Aldo Moro 8, 44124, Ferrara, Cona), Italy.

出版信息

Eur J Surg Oncol. 2025 Jan;51(1):109481. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109481. Epub 2024 Nov 18.

DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109481
PMID:39581810
Abstract

BACKGROUND

While total mesorectal excision is the gold standard for rectal cancer, the optimal surgical approach to achieve adequate oncological outcomes remains controversial. This network meta-analysis aims to compare the histopathological outcomes of robotic (R-RR), transanal (Ta-RR), laparoscopic (L-RR), and open (O-RR) resections for rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were screened from inception to June 2024. Of the 4186 articles screened, 27 RCTs were selected. Pairwise comparisons and Bayesian network meta-analyses applying random effects models were performed.

RESULTS

The 27 RCTs included a total of 8696 patients. Bayesian pairwise meta-analysis revealed significantly lower odds of non-complete mesorectal excision with Ta-RR (Odds Ratio, OR, 0.60; 95%CI, 0.33, 0.92; P = .02; I:11.7 %) and R-RR (OR, 0.68; 95%CI, 0.46, 0.94; P = .02; I:41.7 %) compared with laparoscopy. Moreover, lower odds of positive CRMs were observed in the Ta-RR group than in the L-RR group (OR, 0.36; 95%CI, 0.13, 0.91; P = .02; I:43.9 %). The R-RR was associated with more lymph nodes harvested compared with L-RR (Mean Difference, MD, 1.24; 95%CI, 0.10, 2.52; P = .03; I:77.3 %). Conversely, Ta-RR was associated with a significantly lower number of lymph nodes harvested compared with all other approaches. SUCRA plots revealed that Ta-RR had the highest probability of being the best approach to achieve a complete mesorectal excision and negative CRM, followed by R-RR, which ranked the best in lymph nodes retrieved.

CONCLUSION

When comparing the effectiveness of the available surgical approaches for rectal cancer resection, Ta-RR and R-RR are associated with better histopathological outcomes than L-RR.

摘要

背景

虽然全直肠系膜切除术是直肠癌的金标准,但实现充分肿瘤学结局的最佳手术方式仍存在争议。这项网状Meta分析旨在比较机器人手术(R-RR)、经肛门手术(Ta-RR)、腹腔镜手术(L-RR)和开放手术(O-RR)治疗直肠癌的组织病理学结局。

材料与方法

检索了自数据库建库至2024年6月的MEDLINE、Embase和Cochrane图书馆。在筛选的4186篇文章中,选择了27项随机对照试验。进行了成对比较和应用随机效应模型的贝叶斯网状Meta分析。

结果

27项随机对照试验共纳入8696例患者。贝叶斯成对Meta分析显示,与腹腔镜手术相比,Ta-RR(比值比,OR,0.60;95%置信区间,0.33,0.92;P = 0.02;I²:11.7%)和R-RR(OR,0.68;95%置信区间,0.46,0.94;P = 0.02;I²:41.7%)的直肠系膜切除不完全几率显著降低。此外,Ta-RR组的环周切缘阳性几率低于L-RR组(OR,0.36;95%置信区间,0.13,0.91;P = 0.02;I²:43.9%)。与L-RR相比,R-RR切除的淋巴结更多(平均差值,MD,1.24;95%置信区间,0.10,2.52;P = 0.03;I²:77.3%)。相反,与所有其他手术方式相比,Ta-RR切除的淋巴结数量显著更少。累积排序曲线下面积图显示,Ta-RR成为实现直肠系膜完全切除和环周切缘阴性的最佳手术方式的概率最高,其次是R-RR,其在获取淋巴结方面排名最佳。

结论

在比较现有直肠癌切除手术方式的有效性时,Ta-RR和R-RR的组织病理学结局优于L-RR。

相似文献

1
Histopathological outcomes of transanal, robotic, open, and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.经肛门、机器人辅助、开放及腹腔镜直肠癌切除术的组织病理学结果:随机对照试验的贝叶斯网络Meta分析
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2025 Jan;51(1):109481. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2024.109481. Epub 2024 Nov 18.
2
Comparing the perioperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes between robotic and transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies with a subgroup analysis for overweight patients.比较机器人手术与经肛门全直肠系膜切除术治疗直肠癌的围手术期、术后及肿瘤学结局:一项前瞻性研究的更新系统评价和荟萃分析,并对超重患者进行亚组分析。
J Robot Surg. 2025 Jun 8;19(1):276. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02460-9.
3
Pathologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic vs Open Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.腹腔镜与开腹直肠系膜切除术治疗直肠癌的病理结局:系统评价和荟萃分析。
JAMA Surg. 2017 Apr 19;152(4):e165665. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.5665.
4
Outcomes of transanal total mesorectal excision compared to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.经肛门全直肠系膜切除术与腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术的疗效比较:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Surgery. 2024 Feb;175(2):289-296. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.10.006. Epub 2023 Nov 23.
5
Surgical approach for rectal cancer: A network meta-analysis comparing open, laparoscopic, robotic and transanal TME approaches.直肠癌的手术入路:一项比较开腹、腹腔镜、机器人和经肛门全直肠系膜切除术的网络荟萃分析。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021 Feb;47(2):285-295. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.06.037. Epub 2020 Jul 26.
6
Open Versus Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Versus Transanal Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.经肛门直肠系膜切除术治疗直肠癌:开放手术、腹腔镜手术、机器人手术与经肛门手术的系统评价与网络荟萃分析。
Ann Surg. 2019 Jul;270(1):59-68. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003227.
7
Stoma Rate and Oncological Outcomes of Primary TaTME vs Completion TaTME in Patients With Early-Stage Rectal Cancer.早期直肠癌患者中,原发性经肛全直肠系膜切除术(TaTME)与完成性TaTME的造口率及肿瘤学结局
Dis Colon Rectum. 2025 Aug 1;68(8):962-971. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000003794. Epub 2025 May 5.
8
Impact of trans-anal versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision on the surgical and pathologic outcomes of patients with rectal cancer: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.经肛门与腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术对直肠癌患者手术和病理结局的影响:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023 Oct 20;408(1):413. doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-03147-1.
9
Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and perioperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision.经肛门全直肠系膜切除术(taTME)治疗直肠癌:与腹腔镜全直肠系膜切除术相比的肿瘤学及围手术期结局的系统评价和荟萃分析
BMC Cancer. 2016 Jul 4;16:380. doi: 10.1186/s12885-016-2428-5.
10
Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing robotic total mesorectal excision versus transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.比较机器人全直肠系膜切除术与经肛门全直肠系膜切除术治疗直肠癌的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Scand J Surg. 2025 Mar;114(1):73-83. doi: 10.1177/14574969241271784. Epub 2024 Sep 19.

引用本文的文献

1
Influence of computed tomography-based pelvimetric parameters and surgical approaches on surgical difficulty in mid‑low rectal cancer.基于计算机断层扫描的骨盆测量参数及手术方式对中低位直肠癌手术难度的影响
Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2025 Jul 4;20(2):165-172. doi: 10.20452/wiitm.2025.. eCollection 2025 Jul 8.
2
Robotic ventral rectopexy videos on youtube: reliability of quality and educational value assessment among raters with different degrees of surgical experience.YouTube 上的机器人腹直肌固定术视频:不同手术经验程度评估者之间质量可靠性及教育价值评估情况
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2025 Jul 5;40(1):152. doi: 10.1007/s00384-025-04936-4.
3
Guidance on the Surgical Management of Rectal Cancer: An Umbrella Review.
直肠癌手术管理指南:一项伞状综述
Life (Basel). 2025 Jun 13;15(6):955. doi: 10.3390/life15060955.
4
Serum calcium-based interpretable machine learning model for predicting anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer resection: A multi-center study.基于血清钙的直肠癌切除术后吻合口漏预测可解释机器学习模型:一项多中心研究
World J Gastroenterol. 2025 May 21;31(19):105283. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i19.105283.