Advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic access for pelvic exenteration in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (a meta-analysis and a systematic review)

AIM: pelvic exenteration is a surgical procedure for locally advanced pelvic organ cancer in order to achieve optimal resection margins. The expediency of performing such operations with laparoscopic access is controversial. A meta-analysis was done to evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic pelvic exenterations for rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: a systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA practices and recommendations. Literature search was carried out in the electronic medical literature databases PubMed and eLibrary. According to a meta-analysis of 4 original studies, the results of treatment of 220 patients who underwent laparoscopic exenteration and 311 patients who underwent open surgery were evaluated. RESULTS: significant differences were obtained in the reduction of intraoperative blood loss by 427 ml, 95% CI, p = 0.0004, and postoperative hospital stay by 2 days, 95% CI, p = 0.003 in the laparoscopic group. Comparable data were obtained for the operation time, p = 0.45, for the positive margin of resection (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.19–3.93; p = 0.84), for the postoperative morbidity (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.23–1.86; p = 0.34) and for surgical site infections (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.18–1.64; p = 0.29). CONCLUSION: laparoscopic exenterations are comparable in operation time to open procedure, reduce intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay days.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Koloproktologia
Published
2025-08-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.33878/2073-7556-2025-24-3-194-200
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic access for pelvic exenteration in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (a meta-analysis and a systematic review)

A. A. Balkarov, Yu. A. Shelygin, Е. Г. Рыбаков, Mariya Likhter et al.
1 links
Koloproktologia
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
article

Advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic access for pelvic exenteration in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (a meta-analysis and a systematic review)

A. A. Balkarov, Yu. A. Shelygin, Е. Г. Рыбаков, Mariya Likhter, С. В. Чернышов
article en

Abstract

AIM: pelvic exenteration is a surgical procedure for locally advanced pelvic organ cancer in order to achieve optimal resection margins. The expediency of performing such operations with laparoscopic access is controversial. A meta-analysis was done to evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic pelvic exenterations for rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: a systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA practices and recommendations. Literature search was carried out in the electronic medical literature databases PubMed and eLibrary. According to a meta-analysis of 4 original studies, the results of treatment of 220 patients who underwent laparoscopic exenteration and 311 patients who underwent open surgery were evaluated. RESULTS: significant differences were obtained in the reduction of intraoperative blood loss by 427 ml, 95% CI, p = 0.0004, and postoperative hospital stay by 2 days, 95% CI, p = 0.003 in the laparoscopic group. Comparable data were obtained for the operation time, p = 0.45, for the positive margin of resection (OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.19–3.93; p = 0.84), for the postoperative morbidity (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.23–1.86; p = 0.34) and for surgical site infections (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.18–1.64; p = 0.29). CONCLUSION: laparoscopic exenterations are comparable in operation time to open procedure, reduce intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay days.

KoloproktologiaVol. 24(3)
State Scientific Center of Coloproctology (RU), Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.