Short- and long-term outcomes after transverse versus extended colectomy for transverse colon cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis
Provide the surgeon with a tool to decide the best surgical approach to transverse colon cancer.
To compare the surgical and oncological outcomes between transverse colectomy and extended hemicolectomy for patients with tumours of the transverse colon.
A systematic search was performed in the electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE), using the following search terms and/or MeSH terms in all possible combinations: transverse, transversus, colectomy, hemicolectomy, segmental resection, transverse colon cancer. The last search was performed on 10 May 2018.
Two independent authors (Mi.M. and N.V.) analysed each article and performed the data extraction independently. In case of disagreement, a third investigator was consulted (Ma.M.). Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.
Data extraction and synthesis
Data regarding sample size, major clinical and demographic variables, oncologic outcomes and postoperative recovery and complications were extracted.
Main outcome measures
Main outcomes analysed were anastomotic leakage, early mortality, hospital stay, operative time, overall complications rate, wound infection, harvested nodes and disease-free survival.
No statistical differences were found between transverse colectomy and extended hemicolectomy in short- and long-term outcomes; our results revealed no differences in disease-free survival between the two surgical approaches. As expected, a statistically significant difference was found in favour of extended hemicolectomy in terms of number of harvested lymph nodes.
This systematic review with meta-analysis focus on the two major approaches to transverse colon cancer. The reviewed evidence suggests that a conservative approach to transverse colon cancer is feasible and safe and oncological outcomes are comparable between a conservative and an extended surgical procedure.
KeywordsTransverse colectomy Extended colectomy Transverse colon cancer
Milone M: conception, design, interpretation of the data and drafting of the article; Manigrasso M, Elmore U, Rondelli F, Maione F, Velotti N: acquisition, analysis and interpretation of the data; De Palma GD: interpretation of the data and critical revisions; De Palma GD: critical revisions and final approval.
- 4.Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D et al Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm. Accessed 2 Oct 2005
- 9.Matsuda T, Sumi Y, Yamashita K, Hasegawa H, Yamamoto M, Matsuda Y, Kanaji S, Oshikiri T, Nakamura T, Suzuki S, Kakeji Y (2018) Optimal surgery for mid-transverse colon cancer: laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy versus laparoscopic transverse colectomy. World J Surg 42:3398–3404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4612-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Sjo OH, Lunde OC, Nygaard K, Sandvik L, Nesbakken A (2008) Tumour location is a prognostic factor for survival in colonic cancer patients. Color Dis 10:33–40Google Scholar
- 16.Marchet A, Mocellin S, Ambrosi A et al (2007) Italian research Group for Gastric Cancer (IRGGC). The ratio between metastatic and examined lymph nodes (N ratio) is an independent prognostic factor in gastric cancer regardless of the type of lymphadenectomy: results from an Italian multicentric study in 1853 patients. Ann Surg 245(4):543–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar