4.5 Article

Simultaneous vs. staged resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases: a metaanalysis

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE
卷 26, 期 2, 页码 191-199

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00384-010-1018-2

关键词

Simultaneous liver resection; Staged liver resection; Synchronous liver metastases; Colorectal cancer; Metaanalysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The optimal timing of surgical resection for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLMs) remains controversial. The aim of this metaanalysis was to compare outcomes between simultaneous resection and staged resection from all published comparative studies in the literature. Databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science, were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes following simultaneous resection with staged resection for SCLM. The metaanalysis was performed by RevMan 4.2. Fourteen comparative studies comprising 2,204 patients were identified. Patients undergoing simultaneous resection were found to have similar operative time (weighted mean difference [WMD], -34.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], -81.32-12.95, P = .16) and intraoperative blood loss (WMD, -161.33; 95% CI, -351.45-28.79, P = .10). Shorter hospital stay (WMD, -4.77; 95% CI, -7.26-2.28, P < .01) and lower morbidity rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.57-0.88, P = .002) were observed in simultaneous resection group. The survival rate in the simultaneous resection group did not statistically differ with that in the staged resection group at 1 year (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.51-1.16, P = .21), 3 years (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.85-1.47, P = .43), and 5 years (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.86-1.50, P = .37) postresection, respectively. Simultaneous resection is safe and efficient in the treatment of patients with SCLM while avoiding a second major operation. In appropriately selected patients, simultaneous resection might be considered as the preferred treatment. Since heterogeneity was detected, caution is needed in interpretation of the results. Better designed, adequately powered studies are required for addressing this issue.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据