Extended versus limited mesenteric excision in bowel resection for Crohn's disease: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
B F Pompeu, P Marcolin, F I L C B Marques, G A da Rocha Soares, A L C E Silva, B D'Andrea Pigossi, S M P de Figueiredo, F B Formiga
{"title":"Extended versus limited mesenteric excision in bowel resection for Crohn's disease: a meta-analysis and systematic review.","authors":"B F Pompeu, P Marcolin, F I L C B Marques, G A da Rocha Soares, A L C E Silva, B D'Andrea Pigossi, S M P de Figueiredo, F B Formiga","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-03108-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is ongoing debate regarding the benefits of extended mesenteric excision (EME) versus limited mesenteric excision (LME) in intestinal resection for Crohn's disease (CD). Some studies suggest that EME may reduce surgical recurrence, which is defined as the need for reoperation due to disease complications or insufficient response to therapy, when compared with LME. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare postoperative complications, surgical recurrence, and endoscopic recurrence in patients undergoing EME versus LME for CD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MEDLINE, Cochrane, the Central Register of Clinical Trials, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched for studies published through April 2024. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran's Q test and I<sup>2</sup> statistics, with p-values < 0.10 and I<sup>2</sup> > 25% considered significant. Statistical analyses were performed using R software, version 4.4.1.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One randomized controlled trial (RCT) and five observational studies were included, totaling 4498 patients, of whom 1059 (23.5%) underwent EME and 3439 (76.5%) LME. EME was associated with a lower surgical recurrence rate (5% versus 15%; OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.12-0.84; p = 0.021; I<sup>2</sup> = 47%). No significant differences were observed between EME and LME for overall complications, Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 events, bleeding requiring transfusion, anastomotic leaks, intraabdominal abscesses, surgical site infections (SSIs), reoperations, readmissions, ileus, endoscopic recurrences, operative times, or hospital stays.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>EME was associated with a significant reduction in surgical recurrence compared with LME, without differences in endoscopic recurrence or postoperative complication rates.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"29 1","pages":"80"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11891095/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-03108-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is ongoing debate regarding the benefits of extended mesenteric excision (EME) versus limited mesenteric excision (LME) in intestinal resection for Crohn's disease (CD). Some studies suggest that EME may reduce surgical recurrence, which is defined as the need for reoperation due to disease complications or insufficient response to therapy, when compared with LME. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare postoperative complications, surgical recurrence, and endoscopic recurrence in patients undergoing EME versus LME for CD.

Methods: MEDLINE, Cochrane, the Central Register of Clinical Trials, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched for studies published through April 2024. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed with Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics, with p-values < 0.10 and I2 > 25% considered significant. Statistical analyses were performed using R software, version 4.4.1.

Results: One randomized controlled trial (RCT) and five observational studies were included, totaling 4498 patients, of whom 1059 (23.5%) underwent EME and 3439 (76.5%) LME. EME was associated with a lower surgical recurrence rate (5% versus 15%; OR 0.31; 95% CI 0.12-0.84; p = 0.021; I2 = 47%). No significant differences were observed between EME and LME for overall complications, Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 events, bleeding requiring transfusion, anastomotic leaks, intraabdominal abscesses, surgical site infections (SSIs), reoperations, readmissions, ileus, endoscopic recurrences, operative times, or hospital stays.

Conclusions: EME was associated with a significant reduction in surgical recurrence compared with LME, without differences in endoscopic recurrence or postoperative complication rates.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Techniques in Coloproctology
Techniques in Coloproctology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-SURGERY
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
176
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work. Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信