Oncological safety of laparoscopic versus open colorectal cancer surgery in obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer resection in the obese (OB) patients can be technically challenging. With the increasing adoption of laparoscopic surgery, the benefits remain uncertain. Hence, the aim of this study is to assess the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic compared to open colorectal cancer resection in the OB patients. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The outcome measures were 5-year disease-free survival, overall survival, circumferential resection margin and local and distant recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included, with a total number of 6779 participants, of whom 1785 (26.3%) were OB and 4994 (73.7%) were non-obese (NOB) participants. The OB patients had higher R1 resection (OB 6.9% versus NOB 3.1%; P = 0.011) and lower mean number of lymph nodes harvested, with standard mean difference of -0.29; P = 0.023, favouring the NOB patients. However, there was no statistical difference for local (OB 2.8% versus NOB 3.4%) or distant recurrence (OB 12.9% versus NOB 15.2%) rate between the two cohorts. There was no difference in 5-year disease-free survival (OB 81% versus NOB 77.4%; odds ratio 1.25, P = 0.215) and overall survival (OB 89.4% versus NOB 87.9%; odds ratio 1.16, P = 0.572). Lastly, the OB group had higher mean total blood loss, total operative time and length of hospital stay when compared to NOB patients. CONCLUSION: From a pooled non-randomized study, laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection is safe in OB patients with equivalent long-term outcomes compared to NOB patients. However, there is a higher morbidity rate with an increased demand on hospital resources for the OB cohort.