Meta-analysis of robotic-assisted NOSE versus traditional TWSR in colorectal cancer surgery: postoperative outcomes and efficacy

Abstract

Abstract Background This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSE) compared to traditional robotic transabdominal wall specimen retrieval surgery (TWSR) for colorectal cancer. Methods A systematic search was conducted in three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science and Embase) from inception to August 2023. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, the number of lymph nodes harvested, overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included the postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, the additional use of analgesics, the restoration of gastrointestinal function, blood loss, the mean operation time, and length of postoperative hospital stay. Results In this meta-analysis, a total of 717 patients from 6 observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the TWSR group, the NOSE group had greater benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications [odds ratios (OR) 0.55; 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.34 to 0.89; P = 0.01, I 2 = 0%)], the number of lymph nodes harvested [weighted mean differences (WMD) = 1.18; 95% CI = 0.15 to 2.21; P = 0.02, I 2 = 0%)], the rate of wound infection (OR 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.80; P = 0.02, I 2 = 0%), the passed flatus time (WMD = − 0.35 days; 95% CI = − 0.60 to − 0.10; P = 0.007, I 2 = 73%), the additional use of analgesics (OR 0.25; 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001, I 2 = 0%), the diet recovery time (WMD = − 0.56; 95% CI = − 1.00 to − 0.11; P = 0.01, I 2 = 78%) and the postoperative VAS score (WMD = − 1.23; 95% CI = − 1.63 to − 0.83; P < 0.001, I 2 = 65%). There were no significant differences in the blood loss (WMD = − 5.78 ml; 95% CI = − 17.57 to 6.00; P = 0.34, I 2 = 90%), mean operation time (WMD = 14.10 min; 95% CI = − 3.76 to 31.96; P = 0.12) (I 2 = 93%), length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = − 0.47 day; 95% CI = − 0.98 to 0.03; P = 0.07, I 2 = 51%), incidences of postoperative ileus (OR 1.0; 95% CI = 0.22 to 4.46; P = 1.00, I 2 = 0%), anastomotic leakage (OR 0.73; 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.60; P = 0.43, I 2 = 0%), and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.59; 95% CI = 0.47 to 5.40; P = 0.46, I 2 = 0%), or 3-year overall survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.60 to 1.94; P = 0.81)] or disease-free survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.54 to 1.63; P = 0.82, I 2 = 0%). Conclusion This meta-analysis showed that the NOSE group had better postoperative outcomes than did the TWSR group and that NOSE was a safe and viable alternative to TWSR. More large-sample reviews and further randomized trials are warranted.

Keywords

• Colorectal cancer
• NOSE
• TWSR
• Meta-analysis