Laparoscopically assisted vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a meta-analysis

To perform a meta-analysis of trials randomizing patients with colon cancer to laparoscopically assisted or open colectomy to enhance the power in determining whether laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is oncologically safe.

The databases of the Barcelona, Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST), Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection (COLOR), and Conventional vs Laparoscopic-Assisted Surgery in Patients With Colorectal Cancer (CLASICC) trials were the data sources for the study.

Patients who had at least 3 years of complete follow-up data were selected.

Patients who had undergone curative surgery before March 1, 2000, were studied. Three-year disease-free survival and overall survival were the primary outcomes of this analysis.

Of 1765 patients, 229 were excluded, leaving 796 patients in the laparoscopically assisted arm and 740 patients in the open arm for analysis. Three-year disease-free survival rates in the laparoscopically assisted and open arms were 75.8% and 75.3%, respectively (95% confidence interval [CI] of the difference, -5% to 4%). The associated common hazard ratio (laparoscopically assisted vs open surgery with adjustment for sex, age, and stage) was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.80-1.22; P = .92). The 3-year overall survival rate after laparoscopic surgery was 82.2% and after open surgery was 83.5% (95% CI of the difference, -3% to 5%). The associated hazard ratio was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.83-1.37; P = .61). Disease-free and overall survival rates for stages I, II, and III evaluated separately did not differ between the 2 treatments.

Laparoscopically assisted colectomy for cancer is oncologically safe.