Systematic review of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer
- PMID: 16845692
- DOI: 10.1002/bjs.5430
Systematic review of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer
Abstract
Background: This study compares the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic surgery (LS) and open surgery (OS) for colorectal cancer.
Methods: An electronic search of the literature was undertaken to identify primary studies and systematic reviews. Information on the efficacy and safety of LS versus OS was analysed. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine long-term outcomes.
Results: A systematic review published in 2000 and 12 more recent randomized clinical trials were identified. Compared with OS, LS reduced blood loss and pain, and resulted in a faster return of bowel function and earlier resumption of normal diet. Hospital stay was up to 2 days shorter after LS. No significant differences between the techniques were noted in the incidence of complications or postoperative mortality. The time required to complete LS was significantly longer (0.5-1.0 h more). No significant differences were found between the two procedures in terms of overall mortality, cancer-related mortality or disease recurrence.
Conclusion: LS takes longer than OS but offers several short-term benefits. However, complication rates are similar for both procedures and no differences were found in long-term outcomes.
Comment in
-
Systematic review of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer (Br J Surg 2006; 93: 921-928).Br J Surg. 2006 Nov;93(11):1434-5. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5647. Br J Surg. 2006. PMID: 17058300 No abstract available.
-
Systematic review of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer (Br J Surg 2006; 93; 921-928).Br J Surg. 2007 Feb;94(2):250; author reply 250. doi: 10.1002/bjs.5769. Br J Surg. 2007. PMID: 17256818 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
