Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Magistro, Carmelo
• Bertoglio, Camillo Leonardo
• Giani, Alessandro
• Mazzola, Michele
• Rubicondo, Carolina
• Maspero, Marianna
• Carnevali, Pietro
• Origi, Matteo
• Ferrari, Giovanni

Titel

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision versus conventional resection for right-sided colon cancer: a propensity score matching analysis of short-term outcomes

Ist Teil von

• Surgical endoscopy, 2022-05, Vol.36 (5), p.3049-3058

Ort / Verlag

New York: Springer US

Erscheinungsjahr

2022

Quelle

2022 ECC(Springer)

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Background Complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right-sided colon cancer (RCC) is a demanding operation, especially when performed laparoscopically. The potential impact of CME in increasing postoperative complications is still unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic CME compared with laparoscopic non-complete mesocolic excision (NCME) during colectomy for RCC. Methods Data from a prospectively collected database of patients who underwent laparoscopic right and extended right colectomy at our institution between January 2008 and February 2020 were retrieved and analyzed. Short-term outcomes of patients undergoing CME and NCME were compared. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics between groups. Results A total of 663 consecutive patients underwent resection of RCC in the study period. Among these, 500 met the inclusion criteria and after PSM a total of 372 patients were correctly matched, 186 in each group. A similar rate of overall postoperative complications was found between the CME and NCME groups (21.5% and 18.3%, p  = 0.436). No difference was found in terms of conversion rate, severe complications, reoperations, readmissions, and mortality. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the CME group (22 versus 19, p  = 0.003), with a lower rate of inadequate sampling (7.0% and 15.1%, p  = 0.013). Conclusion Laparoscopic CME for RCC is technically feasible and safe. It does not seem to be associated with a higher rate of complications or mortality compared with the “traditional” approach, but it allows better nodal sampling.