Meta-analysis of extralevator abdominoperineal excision and conventional abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer.
- Author:
Hong-yuan JIANG
1
;
Yan-bing ZHOU
;
Dong-feng ZHANG
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Humans; Perineum; surgery; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectal Neoplasms; surgery; Treatment Outcome
- From: Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2013;16(7):622-627
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVETo evaluate the perforation, circumferential resection margin (CRM) and postoperative perineal wound complications after extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) and conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal cancer by using systematic review method.
METHODSThe Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, CNKI and VIP database were searched for literatures in which ELAPE and APE were compared for the treatment of low rectal cancer. Meta-analysis was performed to deal with data extracted by Cochrane Systematic Reviews methods.
RESULTSSix studies met the inclusion criteria including one randomized control study and five non-randomized control studies with a total of 656 cases including 346 cases of ELAPE and 310 cases of APE. Meta-analysis showed a lower positive CRM rate (RR=0.48, 95%CI:0.36-0.65) and a lower local recurrence rate (RR=0.43, 95%CI:0.19-0.99) in ELAPE compared with APE. There were no significant differences in operative perforation rate (RR=0.45, 95%CI:0.15-1.37) and post-operative perineal wound complications rate (RR=1.20, 95%CI:0.57-2.50) between the two surgical procedures.
CONCLUSIONELAPE is associated with lower rates of positive CRM and local recurrence compared with APE.