Published online Dec 21, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i47.9119
Revised: August 10, 2013
Accepted: September 15, 2013
Published online: December 21, 2013
Processing time: 232 Days and 16.9 Hours
AIM: To evaluate the fast-track rehabilitation protocol and laparoscopic surgery (LFT) vs conventional care strategies and laparoscopic surgery (LCC).
METHODS: Studies and relevant literature comparing the effects of LFT and LCC for colorectal malignancy were identified in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE. The complications and re-admission after approximately 1 mo were assessed.
RESULTS: Six recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this meta-analysis, which related to 655 enrolled patients. These studies demonstrated that compared with LCC, LFT has fewer complications and a similar incidence of re-admission after approximately 1 mo. LFT had a pooled RR of 0.60 (95%CI: 0.46-0.79, P < 0.001) compared with a pooled RR of 0.69 (95%CI: 0.34-1.40, P > 0.5) for LCC.
CONCLUSION: LFT for colorectal malignancy is safe and efficacious. Larger prospective RCTs should be conducted to further compare the efficacy and safety of this approach.
Core tip: Fast-track rehabilitation in laparoscopic colorectal resection has become the most fashionable way to treat colorectal malignancy. Complications after fast-track rehabilitation protocol and laparoscopic surgery (LFT) and conventional care strategies and laparoscopic surgery (LCC) of colorectal resection have generally been discussed in China, as well as in other countries. This study clarified that compared with LCC, LFT has fewer complications and has a similar incidence of re-admission after approximately 1 mo.