Abstract:LERH with D3 lymphadenectomy for colon cancer is a technically feasible and safe procedure, yielding comparable short-term oncologic outcomes to those of open surgery.
“…No heterogeneity was found between the studies for overall survival, which ranged from 67% to 91%, and for disease‐free survival ( I 2 = 0). Meta‐analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups [HR = 1.20 (95% CI: 0.94–1.53); P = 0.14) in terms of overall survival. Four of the selected studies reported disease‐free survival.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meta‐analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups [HR = 1.20 (95% CI: 0.94–1.53); P = 0.14) in terms of overall survival. Four of the selected studies reported disease‐free survival. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups [HR = 1.17 (95% CI: 0.95–1.44); P = 0.14] (Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The long-term outcome was reported in seven studies [7,26,27,[29][30][31][32], two of which were multicentric. The median age of the patient was early to mid-60s with the exception of the study by Storli et al [30], in which the patients were in their early 70s.…”
Section: Selection and Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seven studies [6,[26][27][28][29][30]32] reported 30-day mortality. No significant difference was found between the open and laparoscopic techniques [OR = 2.16 (95% CI: 0.73-6.41); P = 0.16] (open, 0.8%; laparoscopic, 0.3%; Table 4).…”
Section: Thirty-day Mortalitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anastomotic leakage rates were reported in six studies [6,26,27,29,30,32]. The definition was not clearly given in any, even though there was no statistical heterogeneity.…”
Based on the current evidence, the laparoscopic technique appears to be at least as safe as the open technique when used in performing ELTs for colonic cancer, with similar morbidity and oncological outcomes.
“…No heterogeneity was found between the studies for overall survival, which ranged from 67% to 91%, and for disease‐free survival ( I 2 = 0). Meta‐analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups [HR = 1.20 (95% CI: 0.94–1.53); P = 0.14) in terms of overall survival. Four of the selected studies reported disease‐free survival.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meta‐analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups [HR = 1.20 (95% CI: 0.94–1.53); P = 0.14) in terms of overall survival. Four of the selected studies reported disease‐free survival. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups [HR = 1.17 (95% CI: 0.95–1.44); P = 0.14] (Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The long-term outcome was reported in seven studies [7,26,27,[29][30][31][32], two of which were multicentric. The median age of the patient was early to mid-60s with the exception of the study by Storli et al [30], in which the patients were in their early 70s.…”
Section: Selection and Quality Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seven studies [6,[26][27][28][29][30]32] reported 30-day mortality. No significant difference was found between the open and laparoscopic techniques [OR = 2.16 (95% CI: 0.73-6.41); P = 0.16] (open, 0.8%; laparoscopic, 0.3%; Table 4).…”
Section: Thirty-day Mortalitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anastomotic leakage rates were reported in six studies [6,26,27,29,30,32]. The definition was not clearly given in any, even though there was no statistical heterogeneity.…”
Based on the current evidence, the laparoscopic technique appears to be at least as safe as the open technique when used in performing ELTs for colonic cancer, with similar morbidity and oncological outcomes.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.