对新辅助化放疗后临床完全反应的直肠癌采用观察等待法进行挽救手术的生存结果:系统回顾和荟萃分析

IF 3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Annals of Coloproctology Pub Date : 2023-12-31 DOI:10.3393/ac.2022.01221.0174
Wenjie Lin, I. Wee, I. Seow-En, A. Chok, E. Tan
{"title":"对新辅助化放疗后临床完全反应的直肠癌采用观察等待法进行挽救手术的生存结果:系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Wenjie Lin, I. Wee, I. Seow-En, A. Chok, E. Tan","doi":"10.3393/ac.2022.01221.0174","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the outcomes of the watch-and-wait (WW) approach versus radical surgery (RS) in rectal cancers with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Methods: This study followed the PRISMA guidelines. Major databases were searched to identify relevant articles. WW and RS were compared through meta-analyses of pooled proportions. Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence, and distant metastasis rates. Pooled salvage surgery rates and outcomes were also collected. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed to assess the risk of bias.Results: Eleven studies including 1,112 rectal cancer patients showing cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation were included. Of these patients, 378 were treated nonoperatively with WW, 663 underwent RS, and 71 underwent local excision. The 2-year OS (risk ratio [RR], 0.95; P = 0.94), 5-year OS (RR, 2.59; P = 0.25), and distant metastasis rates (RR, 1.05; P = 0.80) showed no significant differences between WW and RS. Local recurrence was more frequent in the WW group (RR, 6.93; P < 0.001), and 78.4% of patients later underwent salvage surgery (R0 resection rate, 97.5%). The 2-year DFS (RR, 1.58; P = 0.05) and 5-year DFS (RR, 2.07; P = 0.02) were higher among RS cases. However, after adjustment for R0 salvage surgery, DFS showed no significant between-group difference (RR, 0.82; P = 0.41).Conclusion: Local recurrence rates are higher for WW than RS, but complete salvage surgery is often possible with similar long-term outcomes. WW is a viable strategy for rectal cancer with cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, but further research is required to improve patient selection.","PeriodicalId":8267,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Coloproctology","volume":"103 39","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survival outcomes of salvage surgery in the watch-and-wait approach for rectal cancer with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Wenjie Lin, I. Wee, I. Seow-En, A. Chok, E. Tan\",\"doi\":\"10.3393/ac.2022.01221.0174\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the outcomes of the watch-and-wait (WW) approach versus radical surgery (RS) in rectal cancers with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Methods: This study followed the PRISMA guidelines. Major databases were searched to identify relevant articles. WW and RS were compared through meta-analyses of pooled proportions. Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence, and distant metastasis rates. Pooled salvage surgery rates and outcomes were also collected. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed to assess the risk of bias.Results: Eleven studies including 1,112 rectal cancer patients showing cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation were included. Of these patients, 378 were treated nonoperatively with WW, 663 underwent RS, and 71 underwent local excision. The 2-year OS (risk ratio [RR], 0.95; P = 0.94), 5-year OS (RR, 2.59; P = 0.25), and distant metastasis rates (RR, 1.05; P = 0.80) showed no significant differences between WW and RS. Local recurrence was more frequent in the WW group (RR, 6.93; P < 0.001), and 78.4% of patients later underwent salvage surgery (R0 resection rate, 97.5%). The 2-year DFS (RR, 1.58; P = 0.05) and 5-year DFS (RR, 2.07; P = 0.02) were higher among RS cases. However, after adjustment for R0 salvage surgery, DFS showed no significant between-group difference (RR, 0.82; P = 0.41).Conclusion: Local recurrence rates are higher for WW than RS, but complete salvage surgery is often possible with similar long-term outcomes. WW is a viable strategy for rectal cancer with cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, but further research is required to improve patient selection.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8267,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Coloproctology\",\"volume\":\"103 39\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Coloproctology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2022.01221.0174\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2022.01221.0174","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本系统综述和荟萃分析比较了观察等待法(WW)与根治术(RS)在新辅助化放疗后临床完全反应(cCR)的直肠癌患者中的疗效:本研究遵循 PRISMA 指南。方法:本研究遵循 PRISMA 指南,对主要数据库进行了检索,以确定相关文章。通过汇总比例的荟萃分析对WW和RS进行比较。主要结果包括总生存期(OS)、无病生存期(DFS)、局部复发率和远处转移率。此外,还收集了汇总的挽救手术率和结果。采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估偏倚风险:共纳入了 11 项研究,包括 1,112 名在新辅助化疗后出现 cCR 的直肠癌患者。在这些患者中,378人接受了WW非手术治疗,663人接受了RS治疗,71人接受了局部切除术。2年OS(风险比[RR],0.95;P = 0.94)、5年OS(RR,2.59;P = 0.25)和远处转移率(RR,1.05;P = 0.80)在WW和RS之间无显著差异。WW组的局部复发率更高(RR,6.93;P<0.001),78.4%的患者后来接受了挽救手术(R0切除率为97.5%)。RS组患者的2年DFS(RR,1.58;P = 0.05)和5年DFS(RR,2.07;P = 0.02)更高。然而,在调整 R0 挽救手术后,DFS 在组间无显著差异(RR,0.82;P = 0.41):结论:WW局部复发率高于RS,但完全救治手术通常可以获得相似的长期疗效。对于新辅助化疗后出现 cCR 的直肠癌患者来说,WW 是一种可行的治疗策略,但还需要进一步的研究来改进患者的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Survival outcomes of salvage surgery in the watch-and-wait approach for rectal cancer with clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the outcomes of the watch-and-wait (WW) approach versus radical surgery (RS) in rectal cancers with clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.Methods: This study followed the PRISMA guidelines. Major databases were searched to identify relevant articles. WW and RS were compared through meta-analyses of pooled proportions. Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence, and distant metastasis rates. Pooled salvage surgery rates and outcomes were also collected. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed to assess the risk of bias.Results: Eleven studies including 1,112 rectal cancer patients showing cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation were included. Of these patients, 378 were treated nonoperatively with WW, 663 underwent RS, and 71 underwent local excision. The 2-year OS (risk ratio [RR], 0.95; P = 0.94), 5-year OS (RR, 2.59; P = 0.25), and distant metastasis rates (RR, 1.05; P = 0.80) showed no significant differences between WW and RS. Local recurrence was more frequent in the WW group (RR, 6.93; P < 0.001), and 78.4% of patients later underwent salvage surgery (R0 resection rate, 97.5%). The 2-year DFS (RR, 1.58; P = 0.05) and 5-year DFS (RR, 2.07; P = 0.02) were higher among RS cases. However, after adjustment for R0 salvage surgery, DFS showed no significant between-group difference (RR, 0.82; P = 0.41).Conclusion: Local recurrence rates are higher for WW than RS, but complete salvage surgery is often possible with similar long-term outcomes. WW is a viable strategy for rectal cancer with cCR after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, but further research is required to improve patient selection.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
73
期刊最新文献
Antibiotic use during the first episode of acute perianal sepsis: a still-open question. Technical approach in the management of perianal fistula: combining ovine extracellular matrix with endoanal ultrasound to review the surgical outcome. Comparison of colorectal cancer surgery patients in intensive care between rural and metropolitan hospitals in Australia: a national cohort study. Ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT) for high transsphincteric fistulas: a double-center retrospective study with long-term follow-up. Protective loop ileostomy or colostomy? A risk evaluation of all common complications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1