A systematic review of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal malignancies

Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures - Surgical
Record ID 32001000017
Authors' objectives:

1. To systematically review the literature to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopically-assisted resection of colorectal malignancies with open colectomy. 2. To assess the laparoscopic treatment of colorectal malignancies in relation to long-term survival rates and the risk of tumor implantation in the laparoscopic port sites.

Authors' results and conclusions: Little high-level evidence was available, with few randomized controlled trials. Laparoscopic resection of colorectal malignancy was more expensive and time consuming. Some evidence suggested that patients may be at higher risk for short-term immune suppression, but little evidence suggested high rates of port site recurrence. The new procedures advantages revolve around early operative recovery and reduced pain.
Authors' recomendations: The ASERNIP-S review group recommended a classification of 2: 'The safety and/or efficacy of the procedure cannot be determined at present due to an evidence base of incomplete and/or poor quality. Further research should be conducted to establish safety and/or efficacy'.
Authors' methods: Review
Project Status: Completed
Year Published: 2000
English language abstract: An English language summary is available
Publication Type: Not Assigned
Country: Australia
MeSH Terms
  • Colectomy
  • Colorectal Neoplasms
  • Laparoscopy
Organisation Name: Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical
Contact Address: ASERNIP-S PO Box 553, Stepney SA 5069 Australia Tel: +61 8 8363 7513; Fax: +61 8 8362 2077;
Contact Name: college.asernip@surgeons.org
Contact Email: college.asernip@surgeons.org
Copyright: Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures - Surgical
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.