Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background: To explore the perioperative outcomes, safety, and effectiveness of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) versus open esophagectomy (OE). Materials and Methods: Randomized controlled comparing MIE versus OE were searched from PubMed and other electronic data-bases between January 1991 a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Memon, Muhammed A., Mohamad Yunus, Rossita
Format: Article
Published: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:http://eprints.um.edu.my/27581/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.um.eprints.27581
record_format eprints
spelling my.um.eprints.275812022-06-09T08:03:32Z http://eprints.um.edu.my/27581/ Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Memon, Muhammed A. Mohamad Yunus, Rossita RD Surgery Background: To explore the perioperative outcomes, safety, and effectiveness of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) versus open esophagectomy (OE). Materials and Methods: Randomized controlled comparing MIE versus OE were searched from PubMed and other electronic data-bases between January 1991 and March 2019. Thirteen outcome variables were analyzed. Random effects model was used to calculate the effect size. The meta-analysis was prepared in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Results: Four randomized controlled trials totaling 569 patients were analyzed. For MIE, there was a significantly reduction of 67% in the odds of pulmonary complications. For operating time, MIE was nonsignificantly 29 minutes longer. MIE was associated with nonsignificantly less blood loss of 443.98 mL. There was nonsignificant 60% reduction in the odds of total complications and 51% reduction in the odds of medical complications favoring MIE group. For delayed gastric emptying, there was a nonsignificant reduction of 75% in the odds ratio favoring the MIE group. For postoperative anastomotic leak, there was a nonsignificant increase of 48% in the odds ratio for MIE group. For gastric necrosis, chylothorax, reintervention and 30-day mortality, no difference was observed for both groups. There was a nonsignificant reduction in the length of hospital stay of 7.98 days and intensive care unit stay of 2.7 days favoring MIE. Conclusions: MIE seems to be superior to OE for only pulmonary complications. All the other perioperative variables were comparable however, the trend is favoring the MM. Therefore, the routine use of MIE presently may only be justifiable in high volume esophagogastric units. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-02 Article PeerReviewed Memon, Muhammed A. and Mohamad Yunus, Rossita (2021) Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 31 (1). pp. 85-95. ISSN 1530-4515,
institution Universiti Malaya
building UM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Malaya
content_source UM Research Repository
url_provider http://eprints.um.edu.my/
topic RD Surgery
spellingShingle RD Surgery
Memon, Muhammed A.
Mohamad Yunus, Rossita
Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
description Background: To explore the perioperative outcomes, safety, and effectiveness of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) versus open esophagectomy (OE). Materials and Methods: Randomized controlled comparing MIE versus OE were searched from PubMed and other electronic data-bases between January 1991 and March 2019. Thirteen outcome variables were analyzed. Random effects model was used to calculate the effect size. The meta-analysis was prepared in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Results: Four randomized controlled trials totaling 569 patients were analyzed. For MIE, there was a significantly reduction of 67% in the odds of pulmonary complications. For operating time, MIE was nonsignificantly 29 minutes longer. MIE was associated with nonsignificantly less blood loss of 443.98 mL. There was nonsignificant 60% reduction in the odds of total complications and 51% reduction in the odds of medical complications favoring MIE group. For delayed gastric emptying, there was a nonsignificant reduction of 75% in the odds ratio favoring the MIE group. For postoperative anastomotic leak, there was a nonsignificant increase of 48% in the odds ratio for MIE group. For gastric necrosis, chylothorax, reintervention and 30-day mortality, no difference was observed for both groups. There was a nonsignificant reduction in the length of hospital stay of 7.98 days and intensive care unit stay of 2.7 days favoring MIE. Conclusions: MIE seems to be superior to OE for only pulmonary complications. All the other perioperative variables were comparable however, the trend is favoring the MM. Therefore, the routine use of MIE presently may only be justifiable in high volume esophagogastric units.
format Article
author Memon, Muhammed A.
Mohamad Yunus, Rossita
author_facet Memon, Muhammed A.
Mohamad Yunus, Rossita
author_sort Memon, Muhammed A.
title Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
publishDate 2021
url http://eprints.um.edu.my/27581/
_version_ 1735570293490974720
score 13.18916