SINGLE-INCISION LAPAROSCOPY VERSUS STANDARD LAPAROSCOPY FOR COLORECTAL SURGERY : A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53555/nnmhs.v9i7.1764Keywords:
Colorectal cancer, Colorectal surgery, LaparoscopyAbstract
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most prevalent malignancy worldwide. Only surgical resection is curative for colorectal cancer. Recent advances in surgical techniques, such as robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS), single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), etc., have benefited colorectal cancer patients tremendously. The aim: This study aims to compare single-incision laparoscopy and conventional laparoscopy for colorectal surgery. Methods: By comparing itself to the standards set by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020, this study was able to show that it met all of the requirements. So, the experts were able to make sure that the study was as up-to-date as it was possible to be. For this search approach, publications that came out between 2013 and 2023 were taken into account. Several different online reference sources, like Pubmed and SagePub, were used to do this. It was decided not to take into account review pieces, works that had already been published, or works that were only half done. Result: In the PubMed database, the results of our search brought up 201 articles, whereas the results of our search on SagePub brought up 119 articles. The results of the search conducted for the last year of 2013 yielded a total 54 articles for PubMed and 23 articles for SagePub. In the end, we compiled a total of 16 papers, 11 of which came from PubMed and 5 of which came from SagePub. We included six research that met the criteria. Conclusion: Previous studies have consistently shown that complications within 30 days postoperatively and incision size in patients with single port are better than patients with multiport. Perioperative outcome and long-term survival rates were similar between the two groups.
References
Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87–108.
Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, et al, Bray F, Ferlay J, et al. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68(6):394–424.
Kuipers EJ, Grady WM, Lieberman D, et al. Colorectal Cancer. Nat Rev Dis Prim. 2015;1(15):65–9.
Li N, Qiao H, Guo JF, Yang HY, Li XY, Li SL, et al. Preoperative hypoalbuminemia was associated with acute kidney injury in high-risk patients following non-cardiac surgery: A retrospective cohort study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2019;19(1):1–11.
Abu Gazala M, Wexner SD. Re-appraisal and consideration of minimally invasive surgery in colorectal cancer. Gastroenterol Rep. 2017 Feb;5(1):1–10.
Shinji S, Yamada T, Matsuda A, Sonoda H, Ohta R, Iwai T, et al. Recent Advances in the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer: A Review. J Nippon Med Sch. 2022 Jun;89(3):246–54.
Lim T, Tham HY, Yaow CYL, Tan IJ-W, Chan DKH, Farouk R, et al. Early surgery after bridge-to-surgery stenting for malignant bowel obstruction is associated with better oncological outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2021;1–11.
Farkas NG, Welman TJP, Ross T, Brown S, Smith JJ, Pawa N. Unusual causes of large bowel obstruction. Curr Probl Surg. 2019;56(2):49–90.
Hsu J, Sevak S. Management of malignant large-bowel obstruction. Dis Colon Rectum. 2019;62(9):1028–30.
Hirano Y, Hiranuma C, Hattori M, Douden K, Yamaguchi S. Long-term oncological outcomes of single-port laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. ANZ J Surg. 2019 Apr;89(4):408–11.
Carus T. Current advances in single-port laparoscopic surgery. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg. 2013 Oct;398(7):925–9.
Lee YS, Kim JH, Kim HJ, Lee SC, Kang BM, Kim CW, et al. Short-term Outcomes of Single-port Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Surgery for Colon Cancer: The SIMPLE Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial. Ann Surg. 2021 Feb;273(2):217–23.
Miyo M, Takemasa I, Ishihara H, Hata T, Mizushima T, Ohno Y, et al. Long-term Outcomes of Single-Site Laparoscopic Colectomy With Complete Mesocolic
Excision for Colon Cancer: Comparison With Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Colectomy Using Propensity Score Matching. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017 Jul;60(7):664–73.
Kang BM, Park SJ, Lee KY, Lee S-H. Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery Can Be Performed Safely and Appropriately for Colon Cancer: Short-Term Results of a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017 May;27(5):501–9.
Watanabe J, Ota M, Fujii S, Suwa H, Ishibe A, Endo I. Randomized clinical trial of single-incision versus multiport laparoscopic colectomy. Br J Surg. 2016 Sep;103(10):1276–81.
Bulut O, Aslak KK, Levic K, Nielsen CB, Rømer E, Sørensen S, et al. A randomized pilot study on single-port versus conventional laparoscopic rectal surgery: effects on postoperative pain and the stress response to surgery. Tech Coloproctol. 2015 Jan;19(1):11–22.
Morales-Conde S, Peeters A, Meyer YM, Antoniou SA, Del Agua IA, Arezzo A, et al. European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2019 Apr;33(4):996–1019.
Hoyuela C, Juvany M, Carvajal F. Single-incision laparoscopy versus standard laparoscopy for colorectal surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg. 2017 Jul;214(1):127–40.
Levic K, Bulut O. Single-incision laparoscopy versus standard laparoscopy for colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg.
2018;216(6):1233.
Bulut O, Aslak KK, Rosenstock S. Technique and short-term outcomes of singleport surgery for rectal cancer: a feasibility study of 25 patients. Scand J Surg SJS Off organ Finnish Surg Soc Scand Surg Soc. 2014 Mar;103(1):26–33.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of Advance Research in Medical & Health Science (ISSN: 2208-2425)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Licensing
Ninety Nine Publication publishes articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This licensing allows for any use of the work, provided the original author(s) and source are credited, thereby facilitating the free exchange and use of research for the advancement of knowledge.
Detailed Licensing Terms
Attribution (BY): Users must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. Users may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses them or their use.
No Additional Restrictions: Users may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
