Loading…
Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Objectives The survival benefits, oncological adequacy, effectiveness, and safety of laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LTC) were compared with that of open transverse colectomy (OTC) using a meta-analysis. Methods EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched for the...
Saved in:
| Published in: | World journal of surgery 2018-09, Vol.42 (9), p.3008-3014 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4888-5cd0bb5377b05a7e519128c3c2e5ffc5ae432b24b7f66e64ca787c48eff0e9943 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4888-5cd0bb5377b05a7e519128c3c2e5ffc5ae432b24b7f66e64ca787c48eff0e9943 |
| container_end_page | 3014 |
| container_issue | 9 |
| container_start_page | 3008 |
| container_title | World journal of surgery |
| container_volume | 42 |
| creator | Gavriilidis, Paschalis Katsanos, Konstantinos |
| description | Objectives
The survival benefits, oncological adequacy, effectiveness, and safety of laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LTC) were compared with that of open transverse colectomy (OTC) using a meta-analysis.
Methods
EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched for the last 20 years. Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the inverse variance hazard ratio method.
Results
No survival benefits were detected between the two LTC and OTC cohorts. OTC showed shorter operative time by 38 min compared to LTC [mean difference (MD) = 38(15.23–60.77),
p
= 0.001]. However, LTC was associated with earlier postoperative recovery. The time to flatus and time to oral intake for LTC were MD = −1.12(−1.68 to −0.55,
p
= 0.001) and MD = −1.57(−2.38 to −0.76,
p
= 0.001), respectively. In addition, LTC was associated with a shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days [MD = −4.64(−7.52 to −1.75),
p
= 0.002].
Conclusions
Compared to OTC, LTC provides similar survival benefits, earlier postoperative recovery, and shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00268-018-4570-5 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2012916197</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2012916197</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4888-5cd0bb5377b05a7e519128c3c2e5ffc5ae432b24b7f66e64ca787c48eff0e9943</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkF1rFDEYhYModq3-AG9kwBtvxr5JJl_erYttLSsFu-plyGTfkSnz1WSmZf59s06tIIhXCeE5h5OHkNcU3lMAdRIBmNQ5UJ0XQkEunpAVLTjLGWf8KVkBl0W6U35EXsR4DUCVBPmcHDEjGDdgVmS3dYMLffT9UPvsO4Y4xexywC7bBdfF2_SA2aZv0I99O3_I1tnVHEds3Zjwr3hb413mun32BUeXrzvXzLGOL8mzyjURXz2cx-Tb6afd5jzfXp593qy3uS-01rnweyhLwZUqQTiFghrKtOeeoagqLxymv5SsKFUlJcrCO6VVimJVARpT8GPybukdQn8zYRxtW0ePTeM67KdoGVBmqKRGJfTtX-h1P4W09xclCs2ZPFB0oXxSEgNWdgh168JsKdiDcrsot0m5PSi3ImXePDRPZYv7x8RvxwkwC3BXNzj_v9H-uLj6eAraCJ2ybMnGFOt-Yvgz-9-L7gF4y5v3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2015483267</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>Gavriilidis, Paschalis ; Katsanos, Konstantinos</creator><creatorcontrib>Gavriilidis, Paschalis ; Katsanos, Konstantinos</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives
The survival benefits, oncological adequacy, effectiveness, and safety of laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LTC) were compared with that of open transverse colectomy (OTC) using a meta-analysis.
Methods
EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched for the last 20 years. Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the inverse variance hazard ratio method.
Results
No survival benefits were detected between the two LTC and OTC cohorts. OTC showed shorter operative time by 38 min compared to LTC [mean difference (MD) = 38(15.23–60.77),
p
= 0.001]. However, LTC was associated with earlier postoperative recovery. The time to flatus and time to oral intake for LTC were MD = −1.12(−1.68 to −0.55,
p
= 0.001) and MD = −1.57(−2.38 to −0.76,
p
= 0.001), respectively. In addition, LTC was associated with a shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days [MD = −4.64(−7.52 to −1.75),
p
= 0.002].
Conclusions
Compared to OTC, LTC provides similar survival benefits, earlier postoperative recovery, and shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0364-2313</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-2323</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00268-018-4570-5</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29523909</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cham: Springer International Publishing</publisher><subject>Abdominal Surgery ; Adequacy ; Cardiac Surgery ; Colectomy - methods ; Colon, Transverse ; Colonic Neoplasms - surgery ; Disease-Free Survival ; Eating ; General Surgery ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Length of Stay ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Meta-analysis ; Operative Time ; Postoperative Period ; Recovery ; Recovery of Function ; Scientific papers ; Scientific Review ; Search engines ; Surgery ; Survival ; Survival Rate ; Systematic review ; Thoracic Surgery ; Vascular Surgery</subject><ispartof>World journal of surgery, 2018-09, Vol.42 (9), p.3008-3014</ispartof><rights>Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2018</rights><rights>2018 The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Société Internationale de Chirurgie</rights><rights>World Journal of Surgery is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4888-5cd0bb5377b05a7e519128c3c2e5ffc5ae432b24b7f66e64ca787c48eff0e9943</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4888-5cd0bb5377b05a7e519128c3c2e5ffc5ae432b24b7f66e64ca787c48eff0e9943</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7773-2291</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29523909$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gavriilidis, Paschalis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Katsanos, Konstantinos</creatorcontrib><title>Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><title>World journal of surgery</title><addtitle>World J Surg</addtitle><addtitle>World J Surg</addtitle><description>Objectives
The survival benefits, oncological adequacy, effectiveness, and safety of laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LTC) were compared with that of open transverse colectomy (OTC) using a meta-analysis.
Methods
EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched for the last 20 years. Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the inverse variance hazard ratio method.
Results
No survival benefits were detected between the two LTC and OTC cohorts. OTC showed shorter operative time by 38 min compared to LTC [mean difference (MD) = 38(15.23–60.77),
p
= 0.001]. However, LTC was associated with earlier postoperative recovery. The time to flatus and time to oral intake for LTC were MD = −1.12(−1.68 to −0.55,
p
= 0.001) and MD = −1.57(−2.38 to −0.76,
p
= 0.001), respectively. In addition, LTC was associated with a shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days [MD = −4.64(−7.52 to −1.75),
p
= 0.002].
Conclusions
Compared to OTC, LTC provides similar survival benefits, earlier postoperative recovery, and shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days.</description><subject>Abdominal Surgery</subject><subject>Adequacy</subject><subject>Cardiac Surgery</subject><subject>Colectomy - methods</subject><subject>Colon, Transverse</subject><subject>Colonic Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Disease-Free Survival</subject><subject>Eating</subject><subject>General Surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Postoperative Period</subject><subject>Recovery</subject><subject>Recovery of Function</subject><subject>Scientific papers</subject><subject>Scientific Review</subject><subject>Search engines</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Survival</subject><subject>Survival Rate</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Thoracic Surgery</subject><subject>Vascular Surgery</subject><issn>0364-2313</issn><issn>1432-2323</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkF1rFDEYhYModq3-AG9kwBtvxr5JJl_erYttLSsFu-plyGTfkSnz1WSmZf59s06tIIhXCeE5h5OHkNcU3lMAdRIBmNQ5UJ0XQkEunpAVLTjLGWf8KVkBl0W6U35EXsR4DUCVBPmcHDEjGDdgVmS3dYMLffT9UPvsO4Y4xexywC7bBdfF2_SA2aZv0I99O3_I1tnVHEds3Zjwr3hb413mun32BUeXrzvXzLGOL8mzyjURXz2cx-Tb6afd5jzfXp593qy3uS-01rnweyhLwZUqQTiFghrKtOeeoagqLxymv5SsKFUlJcrCO6VVimJVARpT8GPybukdQn8zYRxtW0ePTeM67KdoGVBmqKRGJfTtX-h1P4W09xclCs2ZPFB0oXxSEgNWdgh168JsKdiDcrsot0m5PSi3ImXePDRPZYv7x8RvxwkwC3BXNzj_v9H-uLj6eAraCJ2ybMnGFOt-Yvgz-9-L7gF4y5v3</recordid><startdate>201809</startdate><enddate>201809</enddate><creator>Gavriilidis, Paschalis</creator><creator>Katsanos, Konstantinos</creator><general>Springer International Publishing</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7773-2291</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201809</creationdate><title>Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</title><author>Gavriilidis, Paschalis ; Katsanos, Konstantinos</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4888-5cd0bb5377b05a7e519128c3c2e5ffc5ae432b24b7f66e64ca787c48eff0e9943</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Surgery</topic><topic>Adequacy</topic><topic>Cardiac Surgery</topic><topic>Colectomy - methods</topic><topic>Colon, Transverse</topic><topic>Colonic Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Disease-Free Survival</topic><topic>Eating</topic><topic>General Surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Postoperative Period</topic><topic>Recovery</topic><topic>Recovery of Function</topic><topic>Scientific papers</topic><topic>Scientific Review</topic><topic>Search engines</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Survival</topic><topic>Survival Rate</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Thoracic Surgery</topic><topic>Vascular Surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gavriilidis, Paschalis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Katsanos, Konstantinos</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Proquest Health and Medical Complete</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>World journal of surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gavriilidis, Paschalis</au><au>Katsanos, Konstantinos</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis</atitle><jtitle>World journal of surgery</jtitle><stitle>World J Surg</stitle><addtitle>World J Surg</addtitle><date>2018-09</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>3008</spage><epage>3014</epage><pages>3008-3014</pages><issn>0364-2313</issn><eissn>1432-2323</eissn><abstract>Objectives
The survival benefits, oncological adequacy, effectiveness, and safety of laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LTC) were compared with that of open transverse colectomy (OTC) using a meta-analysis.
Methods
EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched for the last 20 years. Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the inverse variance hazard ratio method.
Results
No survival benefits were detected between the two LTC and OTC cohorts. OTC showed shorter operative time by 38 min compared to LTC [mean difference (MD) = 38(15.23–60.77),
p
= 0.001]. However, LTC was associated with earlier postoperative recovery. The time to flatus and time to oral intake for LTC were MD = −1.12(−1.68 to −0.55,
p
= 0.001) and MD = −1.57(−2.38 to −0.76,
p
= 0.001), respectively. In addition, LTC was associated with a shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days [MD = −4.64(−7.52 to −1.75),
p
= 0.002].
Conclusions
Compared to OTC, LTC provides similar survival benefits, earlier postoperative recovery, and shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days.</abstract><cop>Cham</cop><pub>Springer International Publishing</pub><pmid>29523909</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00268-018-4570-5</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7773-2291</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0364-2313 |
| ispartof | World journal of surgery, 2018-09, Vol.42 (9), p.3008-3014 |
| issn | 0364-2313 1432-2323 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2012916197 |
| source | Springer Link |
| subjects | Abdominal Surgery Adequacy Cardiac Surgery Colectomy - methods Colon, Transverse Colonic Neoplasms - surgery Disease-Free Survival Eating General Surgery Humans Laparoscopy Length of Stay Medicine Medicine & Public Health Meta-analysis Operative Time Postoperative Period Recovery Recovery of Function Scientific papers Scientific Review Search engines Surgery Survival Survival Rate Systematic review Thoracic Surgery Vascular Surgery |
| title | Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T00%3A29%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Laparoscopic%20Versus%20Open%20Transverse%20Colectomy:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-Analysis&rft.jtitle=World%20journal%20of%20surgery&rft.au=Gavriilidis,%20Paschalis&rft.date=2018-09&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=3008&rft.epage=3014&rft.pages=3008-3014&rft.issn=0364-2313&rft.eissn=1432-2323&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00268-018-4570-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2012916197%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4888-5cd0bb5377b05a7e519128c3c2e5ffc5ae432b24b7f66e64ca787c48eff0e9943%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2015483267&rft_id=info:pmid/29523909&rfr_iscdi=true |