Abdominoperineal Resection in Prone Versus Supine Position: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:0
|
作者
Pompeu, Bernardo Fontel [1 ,2 ]
Pasqualotto, Eric [3 ]
Pigossi, Beatriz D'Andrea [1 ]
Araujo, Matheus Reginato [1 ]
Delgado, Lucas Monteiro [4 ]
Guedes, Lucas Soares de Souza Pinto [2 ]
de Figueiredo, Sergio Mazzola Poli [5 ]
Formiga, Fernanda Bellotti [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Heliopolis Hosp, Dept Colorectal Surg, Rua Santo Antonio,50 Ctr Sao Caetano, BR-09521160 Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
[2] USCS Univ Sao Caetano Do Sul, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
[3] Univ Fed Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, SC, Brazil
[4] Fed Univ Minas Gerais UFMG, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
[5] Univ North Carolina, Dept Surg, Chapel Hill, NC USA
[6] Med Sci Coll Santa Casa Sao Paulo, Dept Colorectal Surg, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
关键词
abdominal perineal resection; ELAPE; prone position; lithotomy; rectal neoplasms; EXCISION ELAPE; RECTAL-CANCER; JACKKNIFE POSITION; EXTRALEVATOR; ADENOCARCINOMA; LITHOTOMY; OUTCOMES; QUALITY; IMPACT; APE;
D O I
10.1089/lap.2024.0372
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Abdominal perineal resection (APR) remains the gold standard for lower rectal cancer involving the anal sphincter. However, the optimal patient position remains unclear. While lithotomy or Lloyd-Davies are commonly used, APR and extra-levator abdominal perineal excision (ELAPE) in a prone jackknife position have been linked to better oncological outcomes. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, the Central Register of Clinical Trials, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies published up to February 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using I-2 statistics. Statistical analysis was performed with R Software version 4.4.1. Results: Two RCTs and 26 observational studies, including 4529 patients, were analyzed. Among them, 2249 (49.7%) underwent APR or ELAPE in the prone position and 2280 (50.3%) in the supine position. The prone position was associated with reduced surgical specimen perforation (5.3% versus 9.4%; OR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.39-0.78; P < .001), lower positive circumferential resection margins (CRMs) rates (9.8% versus 14.3%; OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.53-0.89; P < .001), and decreased intraoperative bleeding (mean difference: -63.7 mL; 95% CI: -104.5, -22.8; P < .01). No significant differences were observed in operative time, urinary retention, urinary injury, wound infections, perineal dehiscence, Clavien-Dindo >= 3, reoperation, local recurrence, distal recurrence, or overall survival. Conclusion: The prone position during APR is associated with reduced specimen perforation, lower positive CRM rates, and less intraoperative bleeding without significant differences in other clinical outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:224 / 239
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of the Abdominoperineal Resection in the Prone Position versus the Classic Lithotomy Position: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis
    Neto, J. B. Mesquita
    Macedo, F.
    Kim, S.
    Weaver, D.
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 26 : S106 - S107
  • [2] Oblique supine position versus prone position for percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wang, Hu
    Yang, Zhan
    Chang, Xueliang
    Wang, Yaxuan
    Li, Jingdong
    Han, Zhenwei
    VIDEOSURGERY AND OTHER MINIINVASIVE TECHNIQUES, 2023, 18 (02) : 244 - 253
  • [3] Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Patients in the Supine Versus Prone Position
    Liu, Liangren
    Zheng, Shuo
    Xu, Yong
    Wei, Qiang
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2010, 24 (12) : 1941 - 1946
  • [4] Comparison of Outcomes for Supine Versus Prone Position for ERCP: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Jayaraj, Mahendran
    Mashiana, Harmeet S.
    Mohan, Babu Pappu
    Shah, Syed R.
    Wahid, Shahid
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2017, 85 (05) : AB224 - AB224
  • [5] Prone Compared With Lithotomy for Abdominoperineal Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    McKechnie, Tyler
    Lee, Yung
    Springer, Jeremy E.
    Doumouras, Aristithes G.
    Hong, Dennis
    Eskicioglu, Cagla
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2019, 243 : 469 - 480
  • [6] Prone Versus Supine Position in Abdominoperineal Resection: Outcomes in the Laparoscopic Era
    Ferrari, Cecilia
    Martinez Sanchez, Carmen
    Bollo, Jesus
    Hernandez, Pilar
    Cambeiro, Lorena
    Codina, Claudia
    Targarona, Eduardo
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2021, 31 (04): : 382 - 389
  • [7] An updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of supine versus prone position for pediatric PCNL
    Fang, Honggang
    Zhu, Fuming
    Cui, Kongkong
    Liu, Xing
    Wu, Shengde
    Hua, Yi
    Lin, Tao
    He, Dawei
    Wei, Guanghui
    Zhang, Deying
    INTERNATIONAL UROLOGY AND NEPHROLOGY, 2025,
  • [8] Perioperative and oncological outcomes of abdominoperineal resection in the prone position vs the classic lithotomy position: A systematic review with meta-analysis
    Mesquita-Neto, Jose Wilson B.
    Mouzaihem, Hassan
    Macedo, Francisco Igor B.
    Heilbrun, Lance K.
    Weaver, Donald W.
    Kim, Steve
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 119 (07) : 979 - 986
  • [9] Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for Patients in the Supine Versus Prone Position Editorial Comment
    Assimos, Dean
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (03): : 936 - 936
  • [10] Effect of prone versus supine position in COVID-19 patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chua, Ee Xin
    Zahir, Syed Mohd Ikhmal Syed Mohd
    Ng, Ka Ting
    Teoh, Wan Yi
    Hasan, Mohd Shahnaz
    Ruslan, Shairil Rahayu Binti
    Abosamak, F. Mohammed
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 2021, 74