Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Evaluation of the clinical efficacy of preserving the left colic artery in laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis.

The aim of the present meta-analysis compared left colic artery (LCA) preservation with non-preservation in laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer in terms of feasibility, efficacy and safety. The PubMed, Ovid, Embase, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data databases were searched prior to June 2017 for studies comparing LCA preservation and non-preservation in laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. Two researchers screened the literature independently, extracted the data and evaluated the risk of bias. The study was performed using RevMan 5.3 software for meta-analysis. A total of 10 studies comparing LCA preservation and non-preservation in laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer were selected for this meta-analysis, with a combined study population of 1,471 patients. The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated that, when comparing LCA preservation with non-preservation in laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer, there were significant differences between the two groups in terms of operative time (P<0.01), estimated blood loss (P<0.01), percentage of neostomy (P<0.01), the number of retrieved lymph nodes (P<0.01), time to first postoperative exhaust (P<0.01) and amount of anastomotic leakage (P<0.01). However, there were no significant differences in postoperative hospital stay (P=0.28), incidence of recurrence (P=0.73) and incidence of metastasis (P=0.52). Therefore, compared with LCA non-preservation, patients in whom the LCA was preserved during laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer had a better prognosis. However, there was no difference in recurrence or metastasis between the two groups. Although the operative time and estimated blood loss were increased with LCA preservation, these may be reduced with improving proficiency of the operating surgeons. The conclusions of the present study require verification by larger samples and high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app