Meta‐analysis of health‐related quality of life after minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer. BJS 2017; 104: 1131-1140.
Published: 20th June 2017
Authors: J. H. Kauppila, S. Xie, A. Johar, S. R. Markar, P. Lagergren
The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to compare health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between minimally invasive and open oesophagectomy for cancer at different postoperative time points.
A search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies that compared open with minimally invasive oesophagectomy. A random‐effects meta‐analysis was conducted for studies that measured HRQoL scores using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ‐C30 and QLQ‐OES18 questionnaires. Mean differences (MDs) greater than 10 in scores were considered clinically relevant. Pooled effects of MDs with 95 per cent confidence intervals were estimated to assess statistical significance.
Nine studies were included in the qualitative analysis, involving 1157 patients who had minimally invasive surgery and 907 patients who underwent open surgery. Minimally invasive surgery resulted in better scores for global quality of life (MD 11·61, 95 per cent c.i. 3·84 to 19·39), physical function (MD 11·88, 3·92 to 19·84), fatigue (MD −13·18, −17·59 to −8·76) and pain (MD −15·85, −20·45 to −11·24) compared with open surgery at 3 months after surgery. At 6 and 12 months, no significant differences remained.
Patients report better global quality of life, physical function, fatigue and pain 3 months after minimally invasive surgery compared with open surgery. No such differences remain at longer follow‐up of 6 and 12 months.Full text
You may also be interested in
Authors: M. T. Adil, V. Jain, F. Rashid, O. Al‐taan, D. Whitelaw, P. Jambulingam et al.
Notes: Bariatric surgery improves physical function
Authors: B.‐H. Min, M. Hong, J. H. Lee, P.‐L. Rhee, T. S. Sohn, S. Kim et al.
Predictive value of abdominal CT in evaluating internal herniation after bariatric laparoscopic Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass.
Authors: J. C. Ederveen, M. M. G. van Berckel, S. W. Nienhuijs, R. J. P. Weber, J. Nederend
Notes: Important tool for correct diagnosis
Nomogram to predict lymph node metastasis in patients with early oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Authors: H. Zheng, H. Tang, H. Wang, Y. Fang, Y. Shen, M. Feng et al.
Notes: Selecting patients for surgery or endoscopic treatment
Authors: M. Kanda, D. Shimizu, H. Tanaka, C. Tanaka, D. Kobayashi, M. Hayashi et al.
Notes: Potential target for therapy
Development and validation of a difficulty score to predict intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resection.
Authors: M. C. Halls, G. Berardi, F. Cipriani, L. Barkhatov, P. Lainas, S. Harris et al.
Notes: Helps improve selection for laparoscopic liver resection
Authors: D. Zeng, R. Zhou, Y. Yu, Y. Luo, J. Zhang, H. Sun et al.
Notes: Immunoscore predicts prognosis in gastric cancer
Reappraisal of classification of distal cholangiocarcinoma based on tumour depth. BJS 2018; 105: 867-875.
Authors: H. Aoyama, T. Ebata, M. Hattori, M. Takano, H. Yamamoto, M. Inoue et al.
Notes: Better for T staging
Authors: S. D. Nelen, K. Bosscha, V. E. P. P. Lemmens, H. H. Hartgrink, R. H. A. Verhoeven, J. H. W. de Wilt et al.
Notes: Age does not matter
Prediction of major complications after hepatectomy using liver stiffness values determined by magnetic resonance elastography.
Authors: N. Sato, A. Kenjo, T. Kimura, R. Okada, T. Ishigame, Y. Kofunato et al.
Notes: liver stiffness predicts complications
Nationwide trends in the incidence and outcome of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumour in the imatinib era. BJS 2018; 105: 1020-1027.
Authors: W. T. A. van der Graaf, R. Tielen, J. J. Bonenkamp, V. Lemmens, R. H. A. Verhoeven, J. H. W. de Wilt et al.
Notes: Surgery improves survival