J Cancer 2011; 2:425-434. doi:10.7150/jca.2.425
A Meta-Analysis of the Short- and Long-Term Results of Randomized Controlled Trials That Compared Laparoscopy-Assisted and Conventional Open Surgery for Colorectal Cancer
1. Department of Surgery, Osaka City Sumiyoshi Hospital
2. Department of Surgery, Osaka City General Hospital
3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine
Ohtani H, Tamamori Y, Arimoto Y, Nishiguchi Y, Maeda K, Hirakawa K. A Meta-Analysis of the Short- and Long-Term Results of Randomized Controlled Trials That Compared Laparoscopy-Assisted and Conventional Open Surgery for Colorectal Cancer. J Cancer 2011; 2:425-434. doi:10.7150/jca.2.425. Available from http://www.jcancer.org/v02p0425.htm
Purpose: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the short- and long-term results of laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCRS) and conventional open surgery (OCRS) for colorectal cancer (CRC).
Methods: We searched relevant papers published between January 1990 and May 2011. We analyzed the outcomes of each type of surgery over the short- and long-term periods.
Results: In the short-term period, we found no significant differences in overall perioperative complications and anastomotic leakage between LCRS and OCRS groups. We found no significant differences in overall, distant, local and wound-site recurrence, overall mortality, 3 and 5 year disease-free survival rate, and cancer-related mortality between the 2 groups.
Conclusions: LCRS has the benefits of reducing intraoperative blood loss, earlier resumption of oral intake, and shorter duration of hospital stay in the short-term. The long-term outcomes of LCRS seem to be similar to those of OCRS.
Keywords: meta-analysis, laparoscopy-assisted colorectal surgery, colorectal cancer