Short- and Long-Term Oncological Outcome After Rectal Cancer Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Open Versus Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery

Abstract

BackgroundWhile several trials have compared laparoscopic to open surgery for colon cancer showing similar oncological results, oncological quality of laparoscopic versus open rectal resection is not well investigated. MethodsA systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials was conducted in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Embase. Qualitative and quantitative meta-analyses of short-term (rate of complete resections, number of harvested lymph nodes, circumferential resection margin positivity) and long-term (recurrence, disease-free and overall survival) oncologic results were conducted. ResultsFourteen randomized controlled trials were identified including 3528 patients. Patients in the open resection group had significantly more complete resections (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.51–0.97; p=0.03) and a higher number of resected lymph nodes (mean difference −0.92; 95% CI −1.08 to 0.75; p<0.001). No differences were detected in the frequency of positive circumferential resection margins (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.62–1.10; p=0.18). Furthermore, no significant differences of long-term oncologic outcome parameters after 5 years including locoregional recurrence (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.44–2.05; p=0.89), disease-free survival (OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.84–1.58; p=0.36), and overall survival (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.76–1.41; p=0.82) were found. Most trials exhibited a relevant risk of bias and several studies provided no information on the surgical expertise of the participating surgeons. ConclusionDifferences in oncologic outcome between laparoscopic and open rectal surgery for rectal cancer were detected for the complete resection rate and the number of resected lymph nodes in favor of the open approach. No statistically significant differences were found in oncologic long-term outcome parameters.