-
Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery Sep 2016The craniovertebral junction (CVJ) is a complex region of the spine with unique anatomical and functional relationships. To alleviate symptoms associated with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECT
The craniovertebral junction (CVJ) is a complex region of the spine with unique anatomical and functional relationships. To alleviate symptoms associated with pathological processes involving the odontoid process, decompression is often required, including odontoidectomy. Accurate knowledge of the complication rates following the transoral and transnasal techniques is essential for both patients and surgeons.
METHODS
We conducted MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science database searches for studies reporting complications associated with the transoral and transnasal techniques for odontoidectomy. Case series presenting data for less than three patients were excluded. Rates of complication and clinical outcomes were calculated and subsequently analyzed using a fixed-effects model to assess statistical significance.
RESULTS
Of 1288 articles retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, twenty-six met inclusion criteria. Transoral and transnasal procedures resulted in the following respective complication rates: arterial injury 1.9% and 0.0%, intraoperative CSF leak 0.3% and 30.0%, postoperative CSF leak 0.8% and 5.2%, 30-day mortality 2.9% and 4.4%, medical complications 13.9% and 28.6%, meningitis 1.0% and 4.0%, pharyngeal wound dehiscence 1.7% (transnasal not reported), pneumonia 10.3% (transnasal not reported), prolonged or re-intubation 5.6% and 6.0%, reoperation 2.5% and 5.1%, sepsis 1.9% and 7.7%, tracheostomy 10.8% and 3.4%, velopharyngeal insufficiency 3.3% and 6.4% and wound infection 3.3% and 1.9%. None of these differences were statistically significant, except for postoperative tracheostomy, which was significantly higher after transoral odontoidectomy 8.4% (95% CI 4.9% -11.9%) compared to transnasal odontoidectomy 0.8% (95% CI -1.0% -2.9%). Neurologic outcome was improved in 90.0% and worse in 0.9% of patients after transoral compared to 94.0% and 0.0% after transnasal odontoidectomy (p=0.30).
CONCLUSIONS
This work presents a systematic review of complications reported for transoral or transnasal odontoidectomy across a heterogeneous group of surgeons and patients. Due to inconsistent reporting, statistical significance was only achieved for postoperative tracheostomy, which was significantly higher in the transoral group. This investigation sets the framework for further discussions regarding odontoidectomy approach options and their associated complications during the informed consent process.
Topics: Humans; Intraoperative Complications; Mouth; Natural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery; Odontoid Process; Postoperative Complications; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 27442001
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.07.019 -
Colorectal Disease : the Official... Oct 2021Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a surgical approach for treating mid to low rectal cancer as well as other colorectal diseases. Since the procedure is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a surgical approach for treating mid to low rectal cancer as well as other colorectal diseases. Since the procedure is difficult to master, perioperative complications of TaTME should be examined precisely, especially during the early implementation phase of this procedure. The primary aim of this review was to determine a pooled morbidity and anastomotic leakage (AL) rate after TaTME surgery, and the secondary aim was to show the completeness of reporting of complications among the included studies, as well as the correlation between completeness and reported incidence of complications.
METHOD
A systematic review of literature was conducted using Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases, searching for observational studies reporting on complications after TaTME. Studies published between 1 January 2010 and 15 October 2019 were included. Meta-analysis on the proportion of morbidity, AL and intraoperative complications was performed.
RESULTS
Forty-one studies (2446 TaTME cases), consisting of 27 noncomparative studies and 14 comparative studies, were included, after screening 1711 possible studies. The pooled rates of overall morbidity and AL were 30.0% (95% CI 26.4%-34.0%) and 6.8% (95% CI 5.2%-8.9%), respectively. Subgroup analysis showed that the morbidity rate in studies that reported 30-day results (35.5%; 95% CI 31.8%-39.4%) was significantly higher than the rate in studies that did not define the follow-up length for complications (23.4%; 95% CI 17.8%-30.1%; p = 0.003). The rates of intraoperative urethral injury, rectal injury, vaginal injury and bladder injury were 0.3% (95% CI 0.1%-1.7%), 0.4% (95% CI 0.1%-2.2%), 0.3% (95% CI 0.1%-0.8%) and 0.3% (95% CI 0.1%-1.7%), respectively.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis shows that pooled perioperative complication rates were within acceptable ranges. However, the significant difference in overall morbidity rate between the studies with 30-day results and the studies without a specified follow-up time, indicates a large under-reporting of complications in many studies.
Topics: Female; Humans; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34174138
DOI: 10.1111/codi.15792 -
Surgical Endoscopy Apr 2022Evidence and practice recommendations on the use of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer are conflicting. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Evidence and practice recommendations on the use of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) for rectal cancer are conflicting.
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to summarize best evidence and develop a rapid guideline using transparent, trustworthy, and standardized methodology.
METHODS
We developed a rapid guideline in accordance with GRADE, G-I-N, and AGREE II standards. The steering group consisted of general surgeons, members of the EAES Research Committee/Guidelines Subcommittee with expertise and experience in guideline development, advanced medical statistics and evidence synthesis, biostatisticians, and a guideline methodologist. The guideline panel consisted of four general surgeons practicing colorectal surgery, a radiologist with expertise in rectal cancer, a radiation oncologist, a pathologist, and a patient representative. We conducted a systematic review and the results of evidence synthesis by means of meta-analyses were summarized in evidence tables. Recommendations were authored and published through an online authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp), with the guideline panel making use of an evidence-to-decision framework and a Delphi process to arrive at consensus.
RESULTS
This rapid guideline provides a weak recommendation for the use of TaTME over laparoscopic or robotic TME for low rectal cancer when expertise is available. Furthermore, it details evidence gaps to be addressed by future research and discusses policy considerations. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries, and decision aids in user-friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/4494 .
CONCLUSIONS
This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed trustworthy recommendations on the use of TaTME for rectal cancer.
Topics: GRADE Approach; Humans; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; Proctectomy; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 35212821
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09090-4 -
Techniques in Coloproctology Aug 2021The aim of this study was to compare long-term oncological, functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes and quality of life after transanal or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to compare long-term oncological, functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) after transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME) for rectal cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were conducted on PubMed and Cochrane database. Non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) which compared TaTME with LaTME were included.
RESULTS
Ten non-randomized studies were identified, including a total of 638 patients (323 TaTME and 315 LaTME). Age, sex, body mass index, neoadjuvant treatment and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) staging of patients in the two groups were comparable in all included studies. The follow-up period was significantly shorter in the TaTME group than in the LaTME group. No significant differences in local (p = 0.71) and distant (p = 0.23) recurrence rate, 2-year disease-free (p = 0.86) and overall (p = 0.25) survival was found. Also, no significant differences in function outcomes and QoL, including the Wexner score (p = 0.48) or the International Prostate Syndrome Score (IPSS) (p = 0.64) were found. However, the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score was significantly higher in the TaTME group (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSIONS
TaTME and LaTME have similar long-term oncological and functional outcomes as well as QoL. The only exception is higher LARS scores after TaTME. The current data are based mainly on observational studies and further randomized controlled trials are required.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Postoperative Complications; Quality of Life; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Syndrome; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery
PubMed: 34002288
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-021-02420-z -
Surgical Endoscopy May 2023In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum, robot-assisted surgery should, theoretically, be superior due to articulated utensils, video enhancement, and tremor reduction, however, this has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to review the evidence reported to-date on experience of using robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery for treatment of rectal neoplasms.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search of Embase and PubMed from May to August 2021were performed. Studies including patients diagnosed with rectal neoplasia or benign polyps who underwent robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery were included. All studies were assessed for risk of bias through assessment tools. Main outcome measures were feasibility, excision quality, and complications.
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies with a total of 322 local excisions were included. The studies included were all retrospective, primarily case-reports, -series, and cohort studies. The median distance from the anal verge ranged from 3.5 to 10 cm and the median size was between 2.5 and 5.3 cm. Overall, 4.6% of the resections had a positive resection margin. The overall complication rate was at 9.5% with severe complications (Clavien-Dindo score III) at 0.9%.
CONCLUSION
Based on limited, retrospective data, with a high risk of bias, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery seems feasible and safe for local excisions in the rectum.
Topics: Humans; Robotics; Retrospective Studies; Feasibility Studies; Rectum; Rectal Neoplasms; Anal Canal; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Margins of Excision; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36707419
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09853-z -
Techniques in Coloproctology Nov 2021Resection of low rectal adenocarcinoma can be challenging in the narrow pelvis of male patients. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) appears to offer technical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic-assisted transabdominal total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision: which approach offers optimal short-term outcomes for mid-to-low rectal adenocarcinoma?
BACKGROUND
Resection of low rectal adenocarcinoma can be challenging in the narrow pelvis of male patients. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) appears to offer technical advantages for distal rectal tumours, and robotic-assisted transabdominal TME (rTME) was introduced in effort to improve operative precision and ergonomics. However, no study has comprehensively compared these approaches. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to compare postoperative short-term outcomes in rTME and TaTME.
METHODS
A systematic online search (1974-July 2020) of MEDLINE, Embase, web of science and google scholar was conducted for trials, prospective or retrospective studies involving rTME, or TaTME for rectal cancer. Outcome variables included: hospital stay; operation duration, blood loss; resection margins; proportion of histologically complete resected specimens; lymph nodes; overall complications; anastomotic leak, and 30-day mortality.
RESULTS
Sixty-two articles met the inclusion criteria, including 37 studies (3835 patients) assessing rTME resection, 23 studies (1326 patients) involving TaTME and 2 comparing both (165 patients). Operating time was longer in rTME (309.2 min, 95% CI 285.5-332.8) than in TaTME studies (256.2 min, 95% CI 231.5-280.9) (p = 0.002). rTME resected specimens had a larger distal resection margin (2.62 cm, 95% CI 2.35-2.88) than in TaTME studies (2.10 cm, 95% CI 1.83-2.36) (p = 0.007). Other outcome variables did not significantly differ between the two techniques.
CONCLUSIONS
rTME provides similar pathological and short-term outcomes to TaTME and both are reasonable surgical approaches for patients with mid-to-low rectal cancer. To definitively answer the question of the optimal TME technique, we suggest a prospective trial comparing both techniques assessing long-term survival as a primary outcome.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Postoperative Complications; Prospective Studies; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Retrospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34562160
DOI: 10.1007/s10151-021-02515-7 -
European Archives of... Aug 2015The purpose of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to compare the efficacy (and other postoperative outcomes) of... (Review)
Review
The purpose of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to compare the efficacy (and other postoperative outcomes) of nonabsorbable versus absorbable nasal packing after functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis. Studies were considered for inclusion if they were published in English language, were randomized clinical trials, and reported on outcomes following postoperative synechia. The primary outcome for meta-analysis was the incidence of postoperative synechia; pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using fixed-effects models. Five studies, involving 241 nasal cavities in each treatment group, were included in the systematic review. The prevalence of synechia ranged from 4.6 to 8.0 % in the absorbable groups and from 8.0 to 35.7 % in the nonabsorbable groups. Postoperative bleeding was lower in the absorbable groups, whereas there was no clear finding regarding postoperative pain. Postoperative edema was generally similar between groups. There were no consistent findings regarding bleeding and pain on packing removal. Two studies using the same type of packing material were included in the meta-analysis. The combined OR (0.33, 95 % CI 0.04-2.78) for postoperative synechia did not significantly favor (P = 0.308) absorbable packing over nonabsorbable packing. Although there is some evidence in the available literature that absorbable nasal packing may provide superior outcomes to nonabsorbable packing after FESS, the lack of homogeneity between studies makes definitive conclusions impossible. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to compare the efficacy of different types of absorbable nasal packing for preventing synechia after FESS.
Topics: Chronic Disease; Hemostasis, Surgical; Humans; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Rhinitis; Sinusitis; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24927828
DOI: 10.1007/s00405-014-3107-2 -
BMC Cancer Jul 2016Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is an emerging surgical technique for rectal cancer. However, the oncological and perioperative outcomes are controversial... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and perioperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision.
BACKGROUND
Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is an emerging surgical technique for rectal cancer. However, the oncological and perioperative outcomes are controversial when compared with conventional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME).
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane database. All original studies published in English that compared taTME with laTME were included for critical appraisal and meta-analysis. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
A total of seven studies including 573 patients (taTME group = 270; laTME group = 303) were included in our meta-analysis. Concerning the oncological outcomes, no differences were observed in harvested lymph nodes, distal resection margin (DRM) and positive DRM between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed a higher rate of achievement of complete grading of mesorectal quality (OR = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.02-3.01, P = 0.04), a longer circumferential resection margin (CRM) and less involvement of positive CRM (CRM: WMD = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.60-1.31, P <0.01; positive CRM: OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.17-0.86, P = 0.02). Concerning the perioperative outcomes, the results for hospital stay, intraoperative complications and readmission were comparable between the two groups. However, the taTME group showed shorter operation times (WMD = -23.45, 95% CI = -37.43 to -9.46, P <0.01), a lower rate of conversion (OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.11-0.81, P = 0.02) and a higher rate of mobilization of the splenic flexure (OR = 2.34, 95% CI = 0.99-5.54, P = 0.05). Although the incidence of anastomotic leakage, ileus and urinary morbidity showed no difference between the groups, a significantly lower rate of overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.45-0.95, P = 0.03) was observed in the taTME group.
CONCLUSIONS
In comparison with laTME, taTME seems to achieve comparable technical success with acceptable oncologic and perioperative outcomes. However, multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of taTME.
Topics: Anastomotic Leak; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Female; Humans; Intraoperative Complications; Length of Stay; Male; Operative Time; Postoperative Complications; Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27377924
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2428-5 -
International Journal of Colorectal... Jan 2020The introduction of transanal endoscopic or minimally invasive surgery has allowed organ preservation for rectal tumors with good oncological results. Data on functional...
PURPOSE
The introduction of transanal endoscopic or minimally invasive surgery has allowed organ preservation for rectal tumors with good oncological results. Data on functional and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes are scarce and controversial. This systematic review sought to synthesize fecal continence, QoL, and manometric outcomes after transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) or transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS).
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted searching for articles reporting on functional outcomes after TEM or TAMIS between January 1995 and June 2018. The evaluated outcome parameters were pre- and postoperative fecal continence (primary endpoint), QoL, and manometric results. Data were extracted using the same scales and measurement units as from the original study.
RESULTS
A total of 29 studies comprising 1297 patients were included. Fecal continence outcomes were evaluated in 23 (79%) studies with a wide variety of assessment tools and divergent results. Ten studies (34%) analyzed QoL changes, and manometric variables were assessed in 15 studies (51%). Most studies reported some deterioration in manometric scores without major QoL impairment. Due to the heterogeneity of the data, it was not possible to perform any pooled analysis or meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
These techniques do not seem to affect continence by themselves except in minor cases. The possibility of worsened function after TEM and TAMIS should not be underestimated. There is a need to homogenize or standardize functional and manometric outcomes assessment after TEM or TAMIS.
Topics: Fecal Incontinence; Humans; Manometry; Quality of Life; Rectal Neoplasms; Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31761962
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-019-03439-3 -
Injury Jun 2017Traumatic injuries to the lower gastrointestinal tract (rectum and anus) have been largely reported in the military setting with sparse publications from the civilian... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Traumatic injuries to the lower gastrointestinal tract (rectum and anus) have been largely reported in the military setting with sparse publications from the civilian setting. Additionally, there remains a lack of international consensus regarding definitive treatment pathways. This systematic review aimed to assess the current literature and propose a standardised treatment algorithm to aid management in the civilian setting.
METHODS
A systematic review of available literature from 1999 to 2016 that was performed. Primary endpoints were the assessment and surgical management of reported rectal and anal trauma.
RESULTS
Seven studies were included in this review, reporting on 1255 patients. 96.3% had rectal trauma and 3.7% had anal trauma. Gunshot wounds are the most common mechanism of injury (46.9%). The overwhelming majority of injuries occurred in males (>85%) and were associated with other pelvic injuries. Surgical management has substantially evolved over the last five decades, with no clear consensus on best management strategies.
CONCLUSION
There remains significant international discrepancy regarding the management of penetrating trauma to the rectum. Key management principals include the varying use of the direct primary closure, faecal diversion, pre-sacral drainage and/or distal rectal washout (rarely used). To date, there is sparse evidence regarding the management of penetrating anal trauma.
Topics: Algorithms; Anal Canal; Clinical Protocols; Digestive System Surgical Procedures; Drainage; Emergency Medicine; Fecal Incontinence; Humans; Peritoneal Lavage; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Proctoscopy; Rectum; Wounds, Penetrating
PubMed: 28292518
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.002