Meta-analysis of histopathological outcomes of laparoscopic assisted rectal resection (LARR) vs open rectal resection (ORR) for carcinoma

Abstract Background We conducted a meta-analysis of the randomized evidence to determine the relative merits of histopathological outcomes of laparoscopic assisted (LARR) versus open rectal resection (ORR) for rectal cancer. Data sources A search of PubMed and other electronic databases comparing LARR and ORR between Jan 2000 and June 2016 was performed. Histopathological variables analyzed included; location of rectal tumors; complete and incomplete TME; positive and negative circumferential resection margins (+/-CRM); positive distal resected margins (+DRM); distance of tumor from DRM; number of lymph nodes harvested; resected specimen length; tumor size and perforated rectum. Results Fourteen RCTs totaling 3843 patients (LARR = 2096, ORR = 1747) were analyzed. Comparable effects were noted for all these histopathological variables except for the variable perforated rectum which favored ORR. Conclusions LARR compares favorably to ORR for rectal cancer treatment. However, there is significantly higher risk of rectal perforation during LARR compared to ORR.