Comparison of perineal morbidity between biologic mesh reconstruction and primary closure following extralevator abdominoperineal excision: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- PMID: 33409565
- DOI: 10.1007/s00384-020-03820-7
Comparison of perineal morbidity between biologic mesh reconstruction and primary closure following extralevator abdominoperineal excision: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Aim: Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) for rectal cancer leaves a greater perineal defect which might result in significant perineal morbidity, and how to effectively close perineal defects remains a challenge for surgeons. This study aimed to comparatively evaluate the perineal-related complications of biologic mesh reconstruction and primary closure following ELAPE.
Method: The electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched to screen out all eligible studies, which compared biologic mesh reconstruction with primary closure for perineal-related complications following ELAPE. Pooled data of perineal-related complications including overall wound complications, hernia, infection, dehiscence, chronic sinus, and chronic pain (12 months after surgery) were analyzed.
Results: A total of four studies (one randomized controlled trial and three cohort studies) involving 544 patients (346 biologic mesh vs 198 primary closure) were included. With a median follow-up of 18.5 months (range, 2-71.5 months). Analysis of the pooled data indicated that the perineal hernia rate was significantly lower in biologic mesh reconstruction as compared to primary closure (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.22-0.69; P = 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of total perineal wound complications rate (P = 0.70), as well as rates of perineal wound infection (P = 0.97), wound dehiscence (P = 0.43), chronic sinus (P = 0.28), and chronic pain (12 months after surgery; P = 0.75).
Conclusion: Biologic mesh reconstruction after extralevator abdominoperineal excision appears to have a lower hernia rate, with no differences in perineal wound complications.
Keywords: Biologic mesh; Extralevator abdominoperineal excision; Meta-analysis; Perineal complications; Primary closure.
References
-
- Holm T, Ljung A, Häggmark T, Jurell G, Lagergren J (2007) Extended abdominoperineal resection with gluteus maximus flap reconstruction of the pelvic floor for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 94:232–238 - DOI
-
- West NP, Anderin C, Smith KJ, Holm T, Quirke P (2010) Multicentre experience with extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:588–599 - DOI
-
- Negoi I, Hostiuc S, Paun S, Negoi RI, Beuran M (2016) Extralevator vs conventional abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg 212:511–526 - DOI
-
- Han JG, Wang ZJ, Wei GH, Gao ZG, Yang Y, Zhao BC (2012) Randomized clinical trial of conventional versus cylindrical abdominoperineal resection for locally advanced lower rectal cancer. Am J Surg 204:274–282 - DOI
-
- Lehtonen T, Räsänen M, Carpelan-Holmström M, Lepistö A (2019) Oncological outcomes before and after the extralevator abdominoperineal excision era in rectal cancer patients treated with abdominoperineal excision in a single centre, high volume unit. Color Dis 21:183–190 - DOI