1.
[Meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgery for palliative resection of the primary tumor in stage IV colorectal cancer].
Tan, SJ, Jiang, Y, Xi, QL, Meng, QY, Zhuang, QL, Han, YS, Wu, GH
Zhonghua wei chang wai ke za zhi = Chinese journal of gastrointestinal surgery. 2020;(6):589-596
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic versus open surgery for palliative resection of the primary tumor in stage IV colorectal cancer. Methods: The databases of CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCT) or clinical controlled trials (CCT) comparing laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for palliative resection of the primary tumor in stage IV colorectal cancer published from January 1991 to May 2019. Chinese search terms included "colorectum/colon/rectum" , "cancer/malignant tumor" , "laparoscopy" , "metastasis" , " IV" ; English search terms included "laparoscop*" , "colo*" , "rect*" , "cancer/tumor/carcinoma/neoplasm" , " IV" , "metasta*" . Inclusion criteria: (1) RCT or CCT, with or without allocation concealment or blinding; (2) patients with stage IV colorectal cancer that was diagnosed preoperatively and would receive resection of the primary tumor; (3) the primary tumor that was palliatively resected by laparoscopic or open procedure. Exclusion criteria: (1) no valid data available in the literature; (2) single study sample size ≤20; (3) subjects with colorectal benign disease; (4) metastatic resection or lymph node dissection was performed intraoperatively in an attempt to perform radical surgery; (5) duplicate publication of the literature. Two researchers independently evaluated the quality of the included studies. In case of disagreement, the evaluation was performed by discussion or a third researcher was invited to participate. The data were extracted from the included studies, and the Cochrane Collaboration RevMan 5.1.0 version software was used for this meta-analysis. Results: Four CCTs with a total of 864 patients were included in this study, including 216 patients in the laparoscopic group and 648 patients in the open group. Compared with the open group, except for longer operation time (WMD=37.60, 95% CI: 26.11 to 49.08, P<0.05), laparoscopic group had less intraoperative blood loss (WMD=-74.89, 95% CI: -144.78 to -5.00, P<0.05), earlier first flatus and food intake after surgery (WMD=-1.00, 95% CI: -1.12 to -0.87, P<0.05; WMD=-1.61, 95%CI: -2.16 to -1.06, P<0.05), shorter hospital stay (WMD=-2.01, 95% CI: -2.21 to -1.80, P<0.05) and lower morbidity of postoperative complication (OR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.77, P<0.05). However, no significant differences were found in time to start postoperative chemotherapy, postoperative chemotherapy rate, and mortality (P > all 0.05). Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery for palliative resection of the primary tumor is safe and feasible to enhance recovery after surgery by promoting postoperative bowel function recovery, shortening hospital stay and reducing postoperative complication in stage IV colorectal cancer.
2.
Stent placement versus surgical palliation for adults with malignant gastric outlet obstruction.
Upchurch, E, Ragusa, M, Cirocchi, R
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2018;(5):CD012506
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
BACKGROUND Malignant gastric outlet obstruction is the clinical and pathological consequence of cancerous disease causing a mechanical obstruction to gastric emptying. It usually occurs when malignancy is at an advanced stage; therefore, people have a limited life expectancy. It is of paramount importance to restore oral intake to improve quality of life for the person in a manner that has a minimal risk of complications and a short recovery period. OBJECTIVES To assess the benefits and harms of endoscopic stent placement versus surgical palliation for people with symptomatic malignant gastric outlet obstruction. SEARCH METHODS In May 2018 we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and Ovid CINAHL. We screened reference lists from included studies and review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials comparing stent placement with surgical palliation for people with gastric outlet obstruction secondary to malignant disease. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently extracted study data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for binary outcomes, mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes and the hazard ratio (HR) for time-to-event outcomes. We performed meta-analyses where meaningful. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS We identified three randomised controlled trials with 84 participants. Forty-one participants underwent surgical palliation and 43 participants underwent duodenal stent placement. There may have been little or no difference in the technical success of the procedure (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; low-quality evidence), or whether the time to resumption of oral intake was quicker for participants who had undergone duodenal stent placement (MD -3.07 days, 95% CI -4.76 to -1.39; low-quality evidence).Due to very low-quality evidence, we were uncertain whether surgical palliation improved all-cause mortality and median survival postintervention.The time to recurrence of obstructive symptoms may have increased slightly following duodenal stenting (RR 5.08, 95% CI 0.96 to 26.74; moderate-quality evidence).Due to very low-quality evidence, we were uncertain whether surgical palliation improved serious and minor adverse events. The heterogeneity for adverse events was moderately high (serious adverse events: Chi² = 1.71; minor adverse events: Chi² = 3.08), reflecting the differences in definitions used and therefore, may have impacted the outcomes. The need for reintervention may have increased following duodenal stenting (RR 4.71, 95% CI 1.36 to 16.30; very low-quality evidence).The length of hospital stay may have been shorter (by approximately 4 to 10 days) following stenting (MD -6.70 days, 95% CI -9.41 to -3.98; moderate-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The use of duodenal stent placement in malignant gastric outlet obstruction has the benefits of a quicker resumption of oral intake and a reduced inpatient hospital stay; however, this is balanced by an increase in the recurrence of symptoms and the need for further intervention.It is impossible to draw further conclusions on these and the other measured outcomes, primarily due to the low number of eligible studies and small number of participants which resulted in low-quality evidence. It was not possible to analyse the impact on quality of life each intervention had for these participants.