A systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus conventional open proctectomy for locally advanced colon cancer

Locally advanced colon cancer is considered a relative contraindication for minimally invasive proctectomy (MIP), and minimally invasive versus conventional open proctectomy (COP) for locally advanced colon cancer has not been studied. We have searched the Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medicine (Baltimore) 2024-03, Vol.103 (11), p.e37474
Main Authors: Peng, Zhang, Ya, Lu, Yichi, Zhang, Dong, Lin, Dechun, Zhang
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Locally advanced colon cancer is considered a relative contraindication for minimally invasive proctectomy (MIP), and minimally invasive versus conventional open proctectomy (COP) for locally advanced colon cancer has not been studied. We have searched the Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science for articles on minimally invasive (robotic and laparoscopic) and COP. We calculated pooled standard mean difference (SMD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The protocol for this review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023407029). There are 10132 participants including 21 articles. Compared with COP, patients who underwent MIP had less operation time (SMD 0.48; CI 0.32 to 0.65; I2 = 0%, P = .000), estimated blood loss (MD -1.23; CI -1.90 to -0.56; I2 = 95%, P 
ISSN:0025-7974
1536-5964
1536-5964
DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000037474