Back to Search
Start Over
Comparing minimally invasive surgical and open approaches to pelvic exenteration for locally advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancies - Systematic review and meta-analysis.
- Source :
-
European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology [Eur J Surg Oncol] 2023 Aug; Vol. 49 (8), pp. 1362-1373. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Apr 15. - Publication Year :
- 2023
-
Abstract
- Introduction: Pelvic exenteration (PE) is a complex multivisceral surgical procedure indicated for locally advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancies. It poses significant technical challenges which account for the high risk of morbidity and mortality associated with the procedure. Developments in minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches and enhanced peri-operative care have facilitated improved long term outcomes. However, the optimum approach to PE remains controversial.<br />Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines to identify studies comparing MIS (robotic or laparoscopic) approaches for PE versus the open approach for patients with locally advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancies. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed systematically and a meta-analysis was conducted.<br />Results: 11 studies were identified, including 2009 patients, of whom 264 (13.1%) underwent MIS PE approaches. The MIS group displayed comparable R0 resections (Risk Ratio [RR] 1.02, 95% Confidence Interval [95% CI] 0.98, 1.07, p = 0.35)) and Lymph node yield (Weighted Mean Difference [WMD] 1.42, 95% CI -0.58, 3.43, p = 0.16), and although MIS had a trend towards improved towards improved survival and recurrence outcomes, this did not reach statistical significance. MIS was associated with prolonged operating times (WMD 67.93, 95% CI 4.43, 131.42, p < 0.00001) however, this correlated with less intra-operative blood loss, and a shorter length of post-operative stay (WMD -3.89, 955 CI -6.53, -1.25, p < 0.00001). Readmission rates were higher with MIS (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.11, 4.02, p = 0.02), however, rates of pelvic abscess/sepsis were decreased (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.21, 0.95, p = 0.04), and there was no difference in overall, major, or specific morbidity and mortality.<br />Conclusion: MIS approaches are a safe and feasible option for PE, with no differences in survival or recurrence outcomes compared to the open approach. MIS also reduced the length of post-operative stay and decreased blood loss, offset by increased operating time.<br />Competing Interests: Declaration of interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.<br /> (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1532-2157
- Volume :
- 49
- Issue :
- 8
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 37087374
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2023.04.003