Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and individual patient data comparing minimally invasive with open oesophagectomy for cancer

Author:

Müller-Stich B. P.1,Probst P.12ORCID,Nienhüser H.1,Fazeli S.1,Senft J.1,Kalkum E.2,Heger P.12,Warschkow R.3,Nickel F.1ORCID,Billeter A.T.1,Grimminger P. P.4,Gutschow C.5ORCID,Dabakuyo-Yonli T. S.6,Piessen G.7,Paireder M.8ORCID,Schoppmann S. F.8,van der Peet D. L.9,Cuesta M. A.9,van der Sluis P.10ORCID,van Hillegersberg R.10,Hölscher A. H.11,Diener M. K.1,Schmidt T.1

Affiliation:

1. Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Ruprecht Karl University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

2. The Study Center of the German Surgical Society (SDGC), Ruprecht Karl University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

3. Department of Surgery, Kantonsspital, St. Gallen, Switzerland

4. Department of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany

5. Department of Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

6. Epidemiology and Quality of Life Unit, INSERM 1231, Centre Georges François Leclerc, Dijon, France

7. Department of Digestive and Oncological Surgery, Claude Huriez University Hospital, Lille, France

8. Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

9. Gastrointestinal and Minimally Invasive Surgery, Vrije University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

10. Department of Surgical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands

11. Contilia Centre for Oesophageal Diseases, Elisabeth Hospital, Essen, Germany

Abstract

Abstract Background Minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) for oesophageal cancer may reduce surgical complications compared with open oesophagectomy. MIO is, however, technically challenging and may impair optimal oncological resection. The aim of the present study was to assess if MIO for cancer is beneficial. Methods A systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL was performed and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MIO with open oesophagectomy were included in a meta-analysis. Survival was analysed using individual patient data. Random-effects model was used for pooled estimates of perioperative effects. Results Among 3219 articles, six RCTs were identified including 822 patients. Three-year overall survival (56 (95 per cent c.i. 49 to 62) per cent for MIO versus 52 (95 per cent c.i. 44 to 60) per cent for open; P = 0.54) and disease-free survival (54 (95 per cent c.i. 47 to 61) per cent versus 50 (95 per cent c.i. 42 to 58) per cent; P = 0.38) were comparable. Overall complication rate was lower for MIO (odds ratio 0.33 (95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.53); P < 0.010) mainly due to fewer pulmonary complications (OR 0.44 (95 per cent c.i. 0.27 to 0.72); P < 0.010), including pneumonia (OR 0.41 (95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.77); P < 0.010). Conclusion MIO for cancer is associated with a lower risk of postoperative complications compared with open resection. Overall and disease-free survival are comparable for the two techniques.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Surgery

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3