Safety and long-term prognosis of simultaneous versus staged resection in synchronous colorectal cancer with liver metastasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The optimal time point for surgical resection of synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLMs) is still controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated the safety and long-term prognoses of simultaneous and staged resection of SCLM to provide a reference for clinical selection. METHODS: A systematic literature search for studies published by October 2022 was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library. The evaluated outcome parameters were total, gastrointestinal and hepatic complications, as well as perioperative mortality, intraoperative blood loss, total hospital stay, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 22 nonrandomised and one randomised study comprising 4862 patients. The patients undergoing simultaneous resection of SCLM had similar total (OR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.66-1.19], P = 0.409), gastrointestinal (OR = 1.19, 95% CI [0.89-1.59], P = 0.241) and hepatic (OR = 1.04, 95% CI [0.83-1.31], P = 0.734) complications, as well as perioperative mortality (OR = 1.79, 95% CI [0.88-3.64], P = 0.108), 5-year DFS (HR = 1.26, 95% CI [0.96-1.66], P = 0.098) and 5-year OS (HR = 1.13, 95% CI [0.95-1.34], P = 0.164). Lower intraoperative blood loss (SMD = - 0.39, 95% CI [- 0.60 to - 0.18], P < 0.001) and shorter total hospital stay (WMD = - 5.43, 95% CI [- 7.29 to - 3.58], P < 0.001) were observed in the simultaneous-resection group versus the staged group. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous resection is safe and effective for SCLM patients. The long-term prognosis is equivalent to that of the traditional staged resection. Correct selection of resectable SCLM patients for the simultaneous resection of the primary tumour and liver metastases can be the first choice. Owing to the potential heterogeneity, more RCTs should be included to verify our conclusions.

The natural orifice specimen extraction surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of efficacy and long-term oncological outcomes.

PURPOSE: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has gradually become established in treating colorectal cancer. This meta-analysis assesses NOSES in the treatment of colorectal cancer compared with conventional laparoscopy (CL) and determines the effect of long-term prognosis. METHODS: Various medical databases were searched up to May 2021. We included retrospective and randomized trials on the treatment of colorectal cancer with NOSES. Pooled weighted/standardized mean differences (WMD/SMD), odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using either fixed- or random-effects models. STATA was conducted for the meta-analysis. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 16 studies comprising 2266 patients. Compared with CL, NOSES had more benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.47, 95%CI [0.35,0.64]; Z = 4.91, P < 0.001), incision-related complications (OR = 0.15, 95%CI [0.07,0.31]; Z = 4.97, P < 0.001), time to first flatus (SMD = -0.58, 95%CI [-0.68,-0.48]; Z = 11.21, P < 0.001), hospital stay (WMD = -1.03, 95%CI [-1.55,-0.51]; Z = 3.86, P < 0.001), cosmetic scores (WMD = 1.37, 95%CI [0.59,2.14]; Z = 3.47, P = 0.001), the visual analogue scale on postoperative day 1（WMD = -1.46, 95%CI [-2.39,-0.52]; Z = 3.06, P = 0.002), additional analgesics usage (OR = 0.33, 95%CI [0.26, 0.43]; Z = 8.43, P < 0.001), whereas the operative time of NOSES was prolonged (WMD = 13.09, 95%CI [7.07,19.11]; Z = 4.26, P < 0.001). Postoperative anastomotic complications, intra-abdominal infection, pelvic floor function, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph node dissection, 3-year disease-free and overall survival in the NOSES group were comparable with those in the CL group. CONCLUSIONS: NOSES is a safe and reliable surgical procedure for the treatment of colorectal cancer and provides good long-term oncological outcomes. Large-scale multicenter studies are required to confirm its clinical benefits.