Pelvic lateral lymph node dissection

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:很少有可用的研究比较可行性,功效,与腹腔镜盆腔外侧淋巴结清扫术(LPLND)相比,机器人盆腔外侧淋巴结清扫术在晚期直肠癌中的安全性。这项荟萃分析旨在比较机器人和LPLND的围手术期结果。
    方法:我们对PubMed,Embase,和WebofScience数据库。提取围手术期参数并汇集用于分析。这项荟萃分析提供了异质性和预测间隔的分析。
    结果:纳入了5项研究:567名患者分为266名机器人和301名LPLND。机器人组的总体手术时间长于腹腔镜组(均值差异=67.11,95%CI[30.80,103.42],p<0.001),但盆腔外侧淋巴清扫时间的差异无统计学意义(均值差异=-1.212,95%CI[-11.594,9.171],p=0.819)。机器人的总体并发症少于腹腔镜组(OR=1.589,95%CI[1.009,2.503],p=0.046),尤其是关于尿潴留(OR=2.23,95%CI[1.277,3.894],p=0.005)。机器人手术获取的盆腔外侧淋巴结多于腹腔镜手术(均值差异=-1.992,95%CI[-2.421,1.563],p<0.001)。
    结论:在本荟萃分析中,机器人盆腔外侧淋巴结清扫术与获取更多的盆腔外侧淋巴结和更低的整体并发症相关,与LPLND相比,尤其是尿潴留。需要进一步的研究来加强这些发现。
    BACKGROUND: There are few available studies that compare the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of robotic pelvic lateral lymph node dissection compared to laparoscopic pelvic lateral lymph node dissection (LPLND) in advanced rectal cancer. This meta-analysis aims to compare perioperative outcomes between robotic and LPLND.
    METHODS: We performed a systemic literature review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Perioperative parameters were extracted and pooled for analysis. This meta-analysis provided an analysis of heterogeneity and prediction intervals.
    RESULTS: Five studies were included: 567 patients divided between 266 robotic and 301 LPLND. Overall operation time was longer in the robotic group than laparoscopic group (difference in means = 67.11, 95% CI [30.80, 103.42], p < 0.001) but the difference in the pelvic lateral lymph dissection time was not statistically significant (difference in means =  - 1.212, 95% CI [ - 11.594, 9.171], p = 0.819). There were fewer overall complications in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (OR = 1.589, 95% CI [1.009, 2.503], p = 0.046), especially with respect to urinary retention (OR = 2.23, 95% CI [1.277, 3.894], p = 0.005). More pelvic lateral lymph nodes were harvested by robotic surgery than by laparoscopy (differences in means =  - 1.992, 95% CI [ - 2.421, 1.563], p < 0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, robotic pelvic lateral lymph node dissection was associated with more pelvic lateral lymph nodes harvested and lower overall complications, especially urinary retention when compared to LPLND. Further studies are needed to reinforce these findings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Locally advanced rectal cancer often requires an extended resection beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (bTME) to obtain clear resection margins. We classified three types of bTME rectal cancer following local disease diffusion: radial (adjacent pelvic organs), lateral (pelvic lateral lymph nodes) and longitudinal (below 3.5 cm from the anal verge, submitted to intersphincteric resection). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the application of robotic surgery to the three types of bTME regarding the short and long-term oncological outcomes. Secondary aim was to identify survival prognostic factors for bTME rectal cancers. A total of 137 patients who underwent robotic-assisted bTME procedures between 2008 and 2018 were extracted from a prospectively collected database. Patient-related, operative and pathological factors were assessed. Morbidity was moderately high with 66% of patients reporting postoperative complications. Median follow up was 47 months (IQR, 31.5-66.5). Local recurrence rate was 15.3% with a statistical difference between the three types of bTME (p = 0.041). Disease progression/distant metastasis rate was 33.6%. Overall survival was significantly different (p = 0.023) with 1- and 3-years rates of: 77.8% and 55.0% (radial; n = 19); 96.6% and 84.8% (lateral; n = 30); 97.7% and 86.9% (longitudinal; n = 88). No statistical difference was observed for disease-free survival (p = 0.897). Local recurrence-free survival was significantly different between the groups (p = 0.031). Multivariate analysis showed that (y)pT (p = 0.028; HR (95% CI) 5.133 (1.192-22.097)), (y)pN (p = 0.014; HR (95% CI) 2.835 (1.240-6.482)) and type of bTME were associated to OS whilst (y)pT (p = 0.072) and type of bTME were not associated to LRFS.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号