Pompeu Bernardo Fontel, Guerra Luiza Soares, Guedes Lucas Soares de Souza Pinto, Brunini Julia Hoici, Delgado Lucas Monteiro, Poli de Figueiredo Sergio Mazzola, Formiga Fernanda Bellotti
Department of Colorectal Surgery, Heliopolis Hospital, São Paulo-SP, Brazil.
School of Medicine, University of São Caetano do Sul, São Paulo-SP, Brazil.
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2025 May;35(5):379-387. doi: 10.1089/lap.2025.0003. Epub 2025 Mar 28.
Minimally invasive surgery is the standard approach for colorectal cancers and requires an abdominal incision for specimen removal. Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) may improve outcomes, reducing trauma, and speeding postoperative recovery. This study compares both techniques regarding postoperative complications, operative outcomes, and recurrence. We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials for studies published up to November 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed with statistics. Statistical analyses were conducted using R Software version 4.4.1 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Four randomized controlled trials involving 439 patients with colorectal cancer were included, with 212 (48.2%) undergoing NOSE and 227 (51.7%) undergoing conventional laparoscopic specimen extraction. NOSE significantly reduced postoperative pain (visual analog scale score: mean difference [MD] -1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.5 to -1.1; = .01), time to pass flatus (MD -0.8; 95% CI -1.1 to -0.6; < .01), and surgical site infection rates (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.03-0.69; = .015) but was associated with a longer operative time (MD 11.1 minutes; 95% CI 1.5-20.6; = .02). No significant differences were observed between the groups in bowel leaks, lymph nodes harvested, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay duration, or local recurrence rates. NOSE was associated with reduced postoperative pain, faster time to pass flatus, and lower infection rates but required longer operative time than conventional laparoscopic specimen extraction. Other outcomes, including complications, operative characteristics, and recurrence, showed no significant differences between the techniques.
微创手术是结直肠癌的标准治疗方法,需要通过腹部切口取出标本。经自然腔道标本取出术(NOSE)可能会改善治疗效果,减少创伤,并加速术后恢复。本研究比较了这两种技术在术后并发症、手术效果和复发方面的差异。我们在PubMed、Scopus和Cochrane临床试验中心注册库中检索了截至2024年11月发表的研究。使用随机效应模型汇总了比值比(OR)和平均差(MD)及其95%置信区间(CI),并通过统计学方法评估异质性。使用R软件版本4.4.1(R统计计算基金会)进行统计分析。纳入了四项涉及439例结直肠癌患者的随机对照试验,其中212例(48.2%)接受了NOSE,227例(51.7%)接受了传统腹腔镜标本取出术。NOSE显著减轻了术后疼痛(视觉模拟评分:平均差[MD] -1.8;95%置信区间[CI] -2.5至-1.1;P =.01)、排气时间(MD -0.8;95% CI -1..1至-0.6;P <.01)和手术部位感染率(OR 0.15;95% CI 0.03 - 0.69;P =.015),但与手术时间延长有关(MD 11.1分钟;95% CI 1.5 - 20.6;P =.02)。两组在肠漏、清扫淋巴结数量、术中失血、住院时间或局部复发率方面未观察到显著差异。与传统腹腔镜标本取出术相比,NOSE可减轻术后疼痛、加快排气时间并降低感染率,但手术时间更长。包括并发症、手术特征和复发在内的其他结果在两种技术之间无显著差异。