-
International Journal of Colorectal... Aug 2021The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of right hemicolectomy with CME performed with laparoscopic and open surgery. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of right hemicolectomy with CME performed with laparoscopic and open surgery.
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, Google Scholar and the ClinicalTrials.gov register were searched. Primary outcome was the overall number of harvested lymph nodes. Secondary outcomes were short and long-term course variables. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate risk ratios.
RESULTS
Twenty-one studies were identified with 5038 patients enrolled. The difference in number of harvested lymph nodes was not statistically significant (MD 0.68, - 0.41-1.76, P = 0.22). The only RCT shows a significant advantage in favour of laparoscopy (MD 3.30, 95% CI - 0.20-6.40, P = 0.04). The analysis of CCTs showed an advantage in favour of the laparoscopic group, but the result was not statically significantly (MD - 0.55, 95% CI - 0.57-1.67, P = 0.33). The overall incidence of local recurrence was not different between the groups, while systemic recurrence at 5 years was lower in laparoscopic group. Laparoscopy showed better short-term outcomes including overall complications, lower estimated blood loss, lower wound infections and shorter hospital stay, despite a longer operative time. The rate of anastomotic and chyle leak was similar in the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite the several limitations of this study, we found that the median number of lymph node harvested in the laparoscopic group is not different compared to open surgery. Laparoscopy was associated with a lower incidence of systemic recurrence.
Topics: China; Colectomy; Colonic Neoplasms; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Lymph Node Excision; Mesocolon; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Operative Time; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33644837
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-03891-0 -
American Journal of Obstetrics and... Feb 2024This study aimed to assess the effects on oncologic outcomes of intrauterine manipulator use during laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to assess the effects on oncologic outcomes of intrauterine manipulator use during laparoscopic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic literature search was performed by an expert librarian in multiple electronic databases from inception to January 31, 2023.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
We included all studies in the English language that compared oncologic outcomes (recurrence-free, cause-specific, or overall survival) between endometrial cancer patients who underwent total laparoscopic or robotic hysterectomy for endometrial cancer with vs without the use of an intrauterine manipulator. Studies comparing only peritoneal cytology status or lymphovascular space invasion were summarized for completeness. No selection criteria were applied to the study design.
METHODS
Four reviewers independently reviewed studies for inclusion, assessed their risk of bias, and extracted data. Pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were estimated for oncologic outcomes using the random effect model. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I tests. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot and Egger test.
RESULTS
Out of 350 identified references, we included 2 randomized controlled trials and 12 observational studies for a total of 14 studies and 5,019 patients. The use of an intrauterine manipulator during hysterectomy for endometrial cancer was associated with a pooled hazard ratio for recurrence of 1.52 (95% confidence interval, 0.99-2.33; P=.05; I=31%; chi square P value=.22). Pooled hazard ratio for recurrence was 1.48 (95% confidence interval, 0.25-8.76; P=.62; I=67%; chi square P value=.08) when only randomized controlled trials were considered. Pooled hazard ratio for overall survival was 1.07 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-1.76; P=0.79; I=44%; chi square P value=.17). The rate of positive peritoneal cytology or lymphovascular space invasion did not differ using an intrauterine manipulator.
CONCLUSION
Intrauterine manipulator use during hysterectomy for endometrial cancer was neither significantly associated with recurrence-free and overall survival nor with positive peritoneal cytology or lymphovascular space invasion, but further prospective studies are needed.
Topics: Female; Humans; Endometrial Neoplasms; Hysterectomy; Laparoscopy; Peritoneum; Recurrence
PubMed: 37704174
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.09.004 -
Cancers Jan 2023As colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) have a poor prognosis, new treatment options are currently being investigated for CRC patients.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
As colorectal cancer (CRC) patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) have a poor prognosis, new treatment options are currently being investigated for CRC patients. Specific biomarkers in the primary tumor could serve as a prediction tool to estimate the risk of distant metastatic spread. This would help identify patients eligible for early treatment.
AIM
To give an overview of previously studied DNA and RNA alterations in the primary tumor correlated to colorectal PM and investigate which gene mutations should be further studied.
METHODS
A systematic review of all published studies reporting genomic analyses on the primary tissue of CRC tumors in relation to PM was undertaken according to PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
Overall, 32 studies with 18,906 patients were included. mutations were analyzed in 17 articles, of which 10 found a significant association with PM. For all other reported genes, no association with PM was found. Two analyses with broader cancer panels did not reveal any new biomarkers.
CONCLUSION
An association of specific biomarkers in the primary tumors of CRC patients with metastatic spread into peritoneum could not be proven. The role of mutations should be further investigated. In addition, studies searching for potential novel biomarkers are still required.
PubMed: 36672497
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15020549 -
International Journal of Colorectal... May 2021Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has introduced a promising surgical approach for treatment of right colon cancer. However, benefits of CME are still a matter of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has introduced a promising surgical approach for treatment of right colon cancer. However, benefits of CME are still a matter of debate. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess safety and long-term outcomes of CME versus conventional right hemicolectomy (CRH).
METHODS
We systematically searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase for retrieving studies comparing CME with CRH in right colon cancer. After data extraction from the included studies, meta-analysis was performed to compare postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, 30-day mortality, number of lymph node yield, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS
Eight studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1871 patients enrolled. No difference was observed in postoperative complications (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.88-1.47, p = 0.34). CME was associated with significantly higher number of lymph nodes retrieved (MD 9.17, CI 4.67-13.68, p < 0.001). CME also improved 3-year OS (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.17-2.11, p = 0.003), 5-year OS (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.89, p = 0.02), and 5-year DFS (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.29-3.07, p = 0.002). A sub-group analysis for patients with stage III colon cancer showed no significant impact of CME on 3-year and 5-year OS (OR 2.47, 95% CI 0.86-7.06, p = 0.09; OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.78-1.94, p = 0.38).
CONCLUSION
Although with limited evidence, CME shows similar postoperative complication rates and an improved survival outcome compared with CRH.
Topics: Colectomy; Colonic Neoplasms; Humans; Laparoscopy; Lymph Node Excision; Mesocolon; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33170319
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-020-03797-3 -
Surgical Oncology Aug 2023Currently, gastric cancer is the sixth most prevalent cancer in the world. The recommended treatment for advanced disease is gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Currently, gastric cancer is the sixth most prevalent cancer in the world. The recommended treatment for advanced disease is gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. However, there is no consensus regarding the performance of an omentectomy as part of the treatment. The procedure is considered by some authors to be essential for the elimination of a micrometastasis since cells in the peritoneum prefer growing in milky spots in the omentum. On the other hand, retrospective studies demonstrated that there is the possibility that omentum preservation may not impact patients' overall survival. Therefore, the objective of this review was to quantify the effect of performing an omentectomy to determine whether it is necessary. Medline (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov and LILACS were searched up to September 2022. Selection was restricted to comparative studies in patients with advanced GC (≥T2). The certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADEPro and the risk of bias with ROBINS-I and RoB 2.0. Five cohort studies, and one randomized controlled trial (RCT) were included. The meta-analysis found that there were no significant differences between the procedures for overall survival, relapse-free survival, and peritoneal recurrence. Furthermore, in perioperative outcomes, a significant difference was only found in intraoperative bleeding, which was lower in patients who had their omentum preserved. Therefore, omentum preservation in patients with advanced gastric cancer has been shown to have no inferior results than resection in long-term outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Cohort Studies; Gastrectomy; Omentum; Stomach Neoplasms
PubMed: 37348196
DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2023.101963 -
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Jul 2023Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) represents the cornerstone of surgical management for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) and involves peritonectomy procedures aimed at complete... (Review)
Review
Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) represents the cornerstone of surgical management for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) and involves peritonectomy procedures aimed at complete peritoneal tumour resection. Frequently, CRS is combined with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The combination of CRS + HIPEC is now considered the standard of care in patients with colorectal and ovarian PC. However, the role of this multi-modality treatment approach in patients with PC of neuroendocrine tumour origin (NET-PC) is less well understood. This systematic review provides a summary of available evidence on management strategies for patients with NET-PC. A systematic literature search was performed using Ovid Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies reporting outcomes for patients with NET-PC undergoing surgical treatment. Eligible studies were assessed for methodological quality and design and evaluated for a method of surgical treatment, method of HIPEC delivery, oncological outcomes, and treatment-related morbidity. Eight studies, including a total of 1240 patients with NET-PC, met predefined inclusion criteria and have been included in this review. In three of the included studies, CRS alone was performed for patients with NET-PC, while five studies reported outcomes with combined treatment using CRS plus HIPEC. All studies were performed at tertiary peritoneal malignancy centres. Only one study directly compared outcomes in patients with NET-PC undergoing CRS plus HIPEC compared with CRS in isolation, with no significant difference in overall survival reported. Carefully selected patients with NET-PC may benefit from aggressive surgical treatment in the form of CRS +/- HIPEC. These procedures are best undertaken at centres with expertise in the management of both neuroendocrine tumours and peritoneal malignancy, as both are conditions that require tertiary-level care. The additional benefit of the HIPEC component in this group of patients remains unclear and warrants further investigation in clinical trials. Overall, the quality of data on this subject is restricted by the low number of studies and the variability in treatment methods employed. A multi-national data registry for patients with NET-PC may offer the opportunity to better define treatment algorithms. Translational research efforts in parallel should focus on developing a better biological understanding of NET-PC, with a view to identifying more effective intraperitoneal cytocidal agents.
Topics: Humans; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Hyperthermia, Induced; Combined Modality Therapy; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy
PubMed: 37504326
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol30070466 -
International Journal of Molecular... Feb 2022Mesothelioma is a rare tumor, frequently associated with asbestos exposure, arising from pleura and peritoneum. Traditionally, diagnosis and treatment have been...
Mesothelioma is a rare tumor, frequently associated with asbestos exposure, arising from pleura and peritoneum. Traditionally, diagnosis and treatment have been difficult in a clinical setting. The treatment is based on a trimodal approach involving surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. The introduction of chemotherapy improved the overall survival. However, the regimen of pemetrexed/cisplatin doublet has not been changed as a standard treatment since 2004. Novel combinations of ipilimumab and nivolumab have only been approved for clinical use in late 2020. The aim of this review was to systematically summarize findings on novel treatment options in mesothelioma. We searched available medical databases online, such as PubMed and Clinicaltrials.gov, to systematically review the literature on novel approaches in immunotherapy, vaccines, and Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy in mesothelioma. We manually screened 1127 articles on PubMed and 450 trials on ClinicalTrials.gov, and 24 papers and 12 clinical trials published in the last ten years were included in this review. Immunotherapy that was swiftly introduced to treat other thoracic malignancies was slow to reach desirable survival endpoints in mesothelioma, possibly due to limited patient numbers. Novel treatment approaches, such as CAR-T cell therapy, are being investigated. As the incidence of mesothelioma is still rising globally, novel treatment options based on a better understanding of the tumor microenvironment and the genetic drivers that modulate it are needed to support future precision-based therapies.
Topics: Animals; Cell- and Tissue-Based Therapy; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Immunotherapy; Mesothelioma; Receptors, Chimeric Antigen; T-Lymphocytes; Tumor Microenvironment
PubMed: 35216091
DOI: 10.3390/ijms23041975 -
European Journal of Surgical Oncology :... Apr 2021Conventional colectomy, and the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) D2 Lymphadenectomy (LND2), are currently considered standard of care for... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Conventional colectomy, and the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) D2 Lymphadenectomy (LND2), are currently considered standard of care for surgical management of colon cancer. Colectomy with complete mesocolic excision (CME) and JSCCR D3 Lymphadenectomy (LND3) are more radical alternative approaches and provide a greater degree of lymph nodal clearance. However, controversy exists over the long-term benefits of CME/LND3 over non-CME colectomies (NCME)/LND2. In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the surgical, pathological, and oncological outcomes of CME/LND3 with NCME/LND2. Embase, Medline and CENTRAL databases were searched from inception until May 15, 2020, in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if they compared curative intent CME/LND3 with NCME/LND2. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and odds ratios (OR) were estimated for continuous and dichotomous outcomes respectively. Out of 1310 unique citations, 106 underwent full-text review, and 30 were included for analysis. In total, 21,695 patients underwent resection for colon cancer. 11,625 received CME/LND3, and 10,070 underwent NCME/LND2. No significant differences were found in post-operative morbidity and mortality. Both overall and disease-free survival favored CME/LND3 (5-year OS: OR = 1.29; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.64, p = 0.03; 5-year DFS: OR = 1.61; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.28; p = 0.007). This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to demonstrate that CME/LND3 has superior long-term survival outcomes compared to NCME/LND2.
Topics: Colectomy; Colonic Neoplasms; Disease-Free Survival; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Mesocolon; Postoperative Complications; Survival Rate
PubMed: 32951936
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.09.007 -
Clinical & Experimental Metastasis Aug 2022For peritoneal metastases (PM), there are few curative treatment options, and they are only available for a select patient group. Recently, new therapies have been... (Review)
Review
For peritoneal metastases (PM), there are few curative treatment options, and they are only available for a select patient group. Recently, new therapies have been developed to deliver intraperitoneal chemotherapy for a prolonged period, suitable for a larger patient group. These drug delivery systems (DDSs) seem promising in the experimental setting. Many types of DDSs have been explored in a variety of animal models, using different cytostatics. This review aimed to provide an overview of animal studies using DDSs containing cytostatics for the treatment of gastro-intestinal PM and identify the most promising therapeutic combinations. The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and Systematic Review Center for Laboratory Animal Experimentation (SYRCLE) guidelines. The 35 studies included revealed similar results: using a cytostatic-loaded DDS to treat PM resulted in a higher median survival time (MST) and a lower intraperitoneal tumor load compared to no treatment or treatment with a 'free' cytostatic or an unloaded DDS. In 65% of the studies, the MST was significantly longer and in 24% the tumor load was significantly lower in the animals treated with cytostatic-loaded DDS. The large variety of experimental setups made it impossible to identify the most promising DDS-cytostatic combination. In most studies, the risk of bias was unclear due to poor reporting. Future studies should focus more on improving the clinical relevance of the experiments, standardizing the experimental study setup, and improving their methodological quality and reporting.
Topics: Animals; Cytostatic Agents; Drug Delivery Systems; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Peritoneal Neoplasms; Peritoneum
PubMed: 35737252
DOI: 10.1007/s10585-022-10173-8 -
International Urogynecology Journal Aug 2021While approximately 225,000 pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgeries are performed annually in the US, there is no consensus on the optimal route for pelvic support for the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS
While approximately 225,000 pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgeries are performed annually in the US, there is no consensus on the optimal route for pelvic support for the initial treatment of uterovaginal prolapse (UVP). Our objective is to compare the outcomes of abdominal sacrocolpopexy (ASC) to vaginal pelvic support (VPS) with either uterosacral ligament suspension (USLS) or sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF) in combination with hysterectomy for treating apical prolapse.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed through March 2021. Studies comparing ASC with VPS for treatment of UVP were included in the review. The primary outcome was the rate of overall anatomic prolapse failure per studies' definition. Secondary outcomes included evaluating isolated recurrent vaginal wall prolapse, postoperative POP-Q points, total vaginal length (TVL), and Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) scores. Random effect analyses were generated utilizing R 4.0.2.
RESULTS
Out of 4225 total studies, 4 met our inclusion criteria, including 226 patients in the ASC group and 199 patients in the VPS group. ASC was not found to be associated with a higher rate of vaginal wall prolapse recurrence (OR = 0.6; 95% CI = 0.2-2.4; P = 0.33). There was no significant difference between groups for anterior or apical vaginal wall prolapse recurrence (P = 0.58 and P = 0.97, respectively). ASC was associated with significantly longer TVL (mean difference [MD]: 1.01; 95% CI = 0.33-1.70; P = 0.02) and better POP-Q Ba scores [MD = -0.23; 95% CI = -0.37; -0.10; P = 0.01].
CONCLUSIONS
ASC and vaginal pelvic support (either USLS or SSF) have comparable anatomical outcomes. However, weak evidence of a difference in TVL and Ba was found. The strength of the evidence in this study is based on the small number of observational studies. A large, randomized trial is highly warranted.
Topics: Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Hysterectomy; Hysterectomy, Vaginal; Ligaments; Observational Studies as Topic; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Peritoneum; Treatment Outcome; Uterine Prolapse
PubMed: 34050771
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-021-04861-4