Laparoscopia vs. laparotomia nelle resezioni per cancro colorettale. Metanalisi dei principali trial

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is in the critical analysis of the results of the lap and open surgery in the colorectal carcinoma, through the meta-analysis of the principal trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic search of the comparative studies has been made among lap and open surgery in the colorectal carcinoma, using PubMed and Cochrane Library. Among these, have been selected perspective studies containing the description of the surgical techniques, the perioperative results and the oncological long term results. Statistic analysis has been performed with the program NCSS (Kaysville 2006, Utah). RESULTS: From the revision of the literature, 7 perspective studies have checked fit to a meta-analysis, for a total of 3580 patients. Among the operative outcomes, has been observed, with statistically significant, a reduction of the blood loss and of the morbidity, an earlier resumption to passing flatus and to normal diet, a reduction of the postoperative hospitalization for the lap; shorter operative time is releaved for the open surgery. Statistically significant differences have emerged neither on the other surgical outcomes (included mortality) nor on relapset of illness (regional or metastasis), crab-correlated mortality, long term survival. CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic can be considered a valid alternative to the traditional open surgery in the therapy of the colorectal carcinoma: the advantages consist in smaller trauma and reduction of morbidity and postoperative stay. The oncological results are the same of the open surgery.