Alcohol-Containing Versus Aqueous-Based Solutions for Skin Preparation in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The use of optimal skin antiseptic agents for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) is of critical importance, especially during abdominal surgical procedures. Alcohol-based chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) and aqueous-based povidone-iodine (PVI) are the two most common skin antiseptics used nowadays. The objective of this article is to evaluate the effectiveness of alcohol-based CHG versus aqueous-based PVI used for skin preparation before abdominal surgery to reduce SSIs. METHODS: Standard medical databases such as MEDLINE, Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Library were searched to find randomized, controlled trials comparing alcohol-based CHG skin preparation versus aqueous-based PVI in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. The combined outcomes of SSIs were calculated using odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. All data were analyzed using Review Manager Software 5.4, and the meta-analysis was performed with a random effect model analysis. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies, all randomized, controlled trials, were included (n = 12,072 participants), recruiting adult patients undergoing abdominal surgery. In the random effect model analysis, the use of alcohol-based CHG in patients undergoing abdominal surgery was associated with a reduced risk of SSI compared to aqueous-based PVI (odds ratio: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [0.74, 0.96], z = 2.61, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol-based CHG may be more effective for preventing the risk of SSI compared to aqueous-based PVI agents in abdominal surgery. The conclusion of this meta-analysis may add a guiding value to reinforce current clinical practice guidelines.

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Efficacy of Radioactive Iodine Monotherapy versus Radioactive Iodine Therapy and Adjunctive Lithium for the Treatment of Hyperthyroidism.

Background: The objective of this article is to evaluate the outcomes in patients undergoing radioactive iodine (RAI) with adjunctive lithium (Li) therapy versus (vs.) RAI therapy alone for the treatment of hyperthyroidism.Methods: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken to analyze clinical trials comparing RAI with adjunctive Li therapy vs. RAI therapy alone for the treatment of hyperthyroidism.Results: Six randomized-controlled trials (RCT) involving 755 patients were analyzed. RAI with adjunctive Li was associated with a significantly higher cure rate for hyperthyroidism when compared to RAI alone. Furthermore, a significantly higher cure rate for hyperthyroidism at 12 months was achieved with RAI and adjunctive Li. Adjuvant Li with RAI for ≤ 7 days showed significantly higher cure rate compared to RAI alone, whereas > 7 days of adjuvant Li with RAI did not show any difference in cure rate compared to RAI alone. RAI with adjunctive Li was associated with a significantly higher cure rate for patients with Graves' disease compared to RAI alone. There was no significant difference between RAI with adjunctive Li and RAI alone for toxic nodular thyroid disorder (toxic nodule and toxic multinodular goiter) and thyroid volume >40 grams and ≤40 grams.Conclusions: RAI with adjunctive Li therapy demonstrated superiority over RAI therapy alone with regards to both curing hyperthyroidism and, reduced time till cure, with a limited side effect profile. A large multicenter RCT is required, and if this confirms the data from these smaller trials, then this could change current practice.

Milligan-Morgan (Open) Versus Ferguson Haemorrhoidectomy (Closed): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Published Randomized, Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to systematically analyse the randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Ferguson or closed haemorrhoidectomy (CH) versus open haemorrhoidectomy (OH) or Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy in the management of haemorrhoidal disease (HD). METHODS: RCTs on the effectiveness of CH and OH in the management of HD were analysed systematically using RevMan(®), and combined outcome was expressed as odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference. RESULTS: Eleven CRTs encompassing 1326 patients were analysed systematically. There was significant heterogeneity among included trials. Therefore, in the random effects model, CH was associated with a reduced post-operative pain (SMD, -0.36; 95 % CI, -0.64, -0.07; z = 2.45; p = 0.01), faster wound healing (OR, 0.08; 95 % CI, 0.02, 0.24; z = 4.33; p < 0.0001), lesser risk of post-operative bleeding (OR, 0.50; 95 % CI, 0.27, 0.91; z = 2.27; p < 0.02) and prolonged duration of operation (SMD, 6.10; 95 % CI, 3.21, 8.98; z = 4.13; p < 0.0001). But the variables such as pain on defecation (SMD, -0.33; 95 % CI, -0.68, 0.03; z = 1.82; p = 0.07), length of hospital stay, post-operative complications, HD recurrence and risk of surgical site infection were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: CH has clinically measurable advantages over OH in terms of reduced post-operative pain, lower risk of post-operative bleeding and faster wound healing.

Needlescopic versus laparoscopic appendectomy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Needlescopic appendectomies (NA) have been performed since the 1990s. We sought to systematically analyze trials comparing NA with laparoscopic appendectomies (LA) in the management of appendicitis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature. We compared and analyzed clinical trials on NA and LA to generate summative data expressed as standardized mean differences (SMD). RESULTS: Of 5 retrieved trials from the electronic database 2 trials involving 412 patients met our inclusion criteria. In the fixed-effects models, NA took longer than LA, and this time difference was statistically significant: SMD 0.20 min, 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.40, p = 0.030, z(1) = 2.09. In both fixed-and random-effects models, the difference in total hospital stay and in perioperative complications between the NA and LA groups were nonsignificant. Furthermore, in both fixed-and random-effects models, NA was associated with a higher conversion rate to open appendectomy than LA. There was no heterogeneity between the trials (Q = 0.34, p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Needlescopic appendectomy can be a safe and effective procedure for the management of appendicitis. It is comparable to LA in terms of hospital stay and perioperative complications. However, NA is associated with a longer duration of surgery and a higher conversion rate, indicating technical challenges of the procedure. Before recommending routine use of the needlescopic technique for appendectomy, a major multicentre randomized controlled trial is necessary.

Role of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of chronic right upper quadrant pain due to biliary dyskinesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes and feasibility of performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients with longstanding right upper quadrant pain secondary to biliary dyskinesia. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature including published randomized, controlled trials, non-randomized trials and comparative trials of any type, reporting outcomes of LC in the management of chronic right upper quadrant pain in patients with biliary dyskinesia, using the principles of meta-analysis on RevMan 5.3 statistical software, was undertaken. RESULTS: Thirteen studies including 740 patients evaluating the symptomatic improvement following LC in patients with biliary dyskinesia presenting as chronic right upper quadrant pain were included. There were 542 patients in LC group and 198 patients in Non-LC group. Successful complete resolution of symptoms was more likely to be achieved in LC group [risk ratio (RR), 0.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.09-0.50, P=0.00001]. In addition, the risk of failure to resolve symptoms (risk ratio, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.05-0.39, P=0.00001) was lower in LC group. CONCLUSIONS: LC may be considered as an acceptable surgical intervention in patients with biliary dyskinesia presenting with chronic right upper quadrant pain. Currently there is insufficient evidence to recommend the routine use of LC in every patient with biliary dyskinesia. Paucity of high power randomised, controlled trials is the major reason for this lack of evidence which should be addressed soon and until then current study may be used to provide the basis for offering LC in selected group of patients.

Use of health-related quality of life tools in hepatobiliary surgery.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this article is to review the literature and discuss the various tools used in hepatobiliary surgery for the measurement of health related quality of life (HR-QOL) and highlight various outcome variables that affect the HR-QOL among patients with common hepatobiliary disorders. DATA SOURCES: We reviewed HR-QOL articles published in the last 20 years on different hepatobiliary curative or palliative procedures in all languages. RESULTS: HR-QOL is a questionnaire tool which is utilized to assess the changes in the health status of patients after a hepatobiliary intervention. These surveys are of increasingly importance, as health care providers are challenged to justify treatment approaches and rationale for any surgical intervention. These HR-QOL tools are very helpful for the evaluation of subjective outcome of common hepatobiliary procedures like gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) for cholecystectomy, functional assessment in cancer therapy (FACT) for liver resection, short form 36 (SF-36) for liver transplantation, and quality of life questionnaire for patients with pancreatic cancer (QLQ-PAN). CONCLUSIONS: Use of validated and reliable health instruments in hepatobiliary surgery is directed at measuring the impact in a reproducible and valid fashion. Curative or palliative procedures should be offered to the patients of hepatobiliary disorders after the assessment by HR-QOL tools. Because the impairments of function that may occur after different operations vary considerably, an operation-specific assessment of HR-QOL for each type of surgical procedure is becoming an essential principle to follow in a successful healthcare system.

Endovascular management of subclavian artery injury due to Hickman line insertion in a patient with coagulopathy.

Vascular injuries after insertion of a Hickman line in neck are not uncommon. We present a case report of a patient of acute myeloid leukaemia with coagulopathy, who underwent right Hickman line insertion by a radiologist. She sustained a life threatening right subclavian artery injury which was managed by deploying endovascular covered stent. We recommend open surgical technique for Hickman line insertion under these circumstances after correction of coagulopathy.

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials only exploring the role of single incision laparoscopic surgery versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for colorectal resections.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this article is to evaluate the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) versus conventional multi-incision laparoscopic surgery (MILS) for colorectal resections. METHODS: The data retrieved from the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing SILS versus MILS for colorectal resections was analysed using the principles of meta-analysis. The combined outcome of dichotomous data was represented as risk ratio (RR) and continuous data was shown as standardized mean difference (SMD). RESULTS: Five RCTs on 525 patients reported the colorectal resections by SILS versus MILS technique. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the operation time (SMD, 0.20; 95% CI, -0.11 to 0.52; z=1.28; P=0.20), length of in-patient stay (SMD, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.51 to 0.14; z=1.10; P=0.27) and lymph node harvesting (SMD, 0.09; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.33; z=0.76; P=0.45) were comparable between both techniques. Furthermore, post-operative complications (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.65-1.54; z=0.02; P=0.99), post-operative mortality, surgical site infection rate (RR, 3.00; 95% CI, 0.13-70.92; z=0.68; P=0.50), anastomotic leak rate (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.11-1.63; z=1.24; P=0.21), conversion rate (P=0.13) and re-operation rate (P=0.43) were also statistically similar following SILS and MILS. CONCLUSIONS: SILS failed to demonstrate any superiority over MILS for colorectal resections in all post-operative surgical outcomes.

Improving the mucosal visualization at gastroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials reporting the role of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this article is to study the role of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine in improving the mucosal visualization during oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (OGD). METHODS: The data retrieved from the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the role of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine during OGD was analysed using the principles of meta-analysis. The summated outcome of continuous variables was expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) and dichotomous data was presented in odds ratio (OR). RESULTS: Three RCTs on 654 patients reported OGD with and without pre-procedure oral administration of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine evaluating visibility as good or excellent in number during the procedure. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the use of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine was associated with improved (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28, 0.68; z=3.65; P=0.0003) mucosal visibility. Four RCTs on 364 patients reported OGD with and without pre-procedure oral administration of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine evaluating visibility score in study group. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the use of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine was associated with improved (SMD, -1.66; 95% CI, -1.93, -1.40; z=12.25; P=0.00001) mucosal visibility score compared to no-Simethicone group. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of current study on 1,099 patients successfully demonstrate that the pre-procedure oral administration of Simethicone ± N-acetylcysteine improves mucosal visualization and mucosal visualization score during OGD.

Applicability of Glasgow Aneurysm Score and Hardman Index to elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study aimed to explore the role of Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS) and Hardman Index (HI) in predicting outcome after elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: All 71 patients who underwent elective EVAR in a single centre over 9 years were reviewed. Clinical data were used to classify patients into the three standard GAS tertiles and to score patients according to the HI. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients scored > or = 77 according to GAS. Actual and predicted mortality in this group were 3.9% and 9.3%. Seventeen patients scored between 69 and 77 with actual and predicted mortality of 0% and 4.1%. Three patients scored less than 69 with actual and predicted mortality of 0% and 2.4%. Ten patients scored > or = 3 on the HI with actual and predicted mortality of 10% and 100%, respectively. Twenty-four patients scored 2 with actual and predicted mortality of 4.2% and 55%. Twenty-seven patients scored 1 with actual and predicted mortality of 0% and 28%, respectively. Ten patients scored 0 with actual and predicted mortality of 0% and 16%, respectively. The chi(2) test showed extremely significant p value of 0.0001 in case of HI, and p value of 0.0800 for GAS, slightly less significant, probably due to the small sample size. CONCLUSION: Contrary to their role in ruptured and open aortic aneurysm repair, GAS and HI overestimate both mortality and morbidity following EVAR and are poor predictors of outcome.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer in UK: current status and future perspectives.

The aim of this study is to review the literature and report the various minimally invasive methods used to treat gastric cancer in the UK and compare it with worldwide practice. Published randomised studies, non-randomised studies and case series reporting the use of minimal invasive approach to treat gastric cancer were retrieved from the search of standard medical electronic databases and their outcomes were highlighted suggesting their effectiveness. Several randomised, controlled trials and meta-analyses have proven the clinical and oncological safety of the laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Similarly, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR (endoscopic mucosal resection) and ESD (endoscopic sub-mucosal dissection) have also been proven feasible and safe to treat gastric cancer of various stages in prospective and retrospective comparative studies. However, UK based studies on minimally invasive surgery to treat gastric cancer is scarce and the paucity of trials led to uncertain outcomes. Laparoscopic gastrectomy, robot-assisted gastrectomy, EMR and ESD are feasible procedures in terms of clinical and oncological safety but mainly being practiced in Asian countries with high prevalence of stomach cancer. The UK based practice is still small and limited but the introduction of MIGOCS and STOMACH trial might help to widen the application of this technique.

A critical appraisal of the cost effectiveness of laparoscopic colorectal surgery for oncological and non-oncological resections.

The aim of this study was to critically appraise the cost effectiveness of the laparoscopic colorectal (LCRS) surgery using published randomised, control trials (RCTs). Published RCTs comparing the cost effectiveness of LCRS with conventional open surgery were selected from the search of standard electronic databases and the extracted data were analysed using the statistical software RevMan 5.3. Seven RCTs on 2197 patients reported the cost effectiveness of the LCRS. There was significant heterogeneity (τ 2 = 161,772.25, χ 2 = 166.69, df = 6, p = 0.00001, I 2 = 96%) among included randomised, controlled trials. In the random effects model analysis (MD 320.37, 95% CI -38.21, 678.95, z = 1.75, p < 0.08), the LCRS was costing £320.37 more than open colorectal resection but it failed to reach the statistical significance indicating that LCRS is as much cost effective as the open approach. LCRS is a cost effective intervention and should be offered routinely to all patients requiring colorectal resections provided the resources and expertise are available.

A systematic review of clinical effectiveness of wound edge protector devices in reducing surgical site infections in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

This article highlights the clinical effectiveness of wound edge protector devices (WEPD) in preventing the post-operative surgical site infections (SSI) in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. Using the principles of meta-analysis and systematic review as recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration, the data from selected randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) were analysed to generate summated outcome and presented in the form of odds ratio (OR). Eighteen RCTs on 3808 reported the effectiveness of WEPD in patients undergoing abdominal surgery. The use of WEPD was associated with the reduced incidence of overall SSI (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.43-0.81; z = 3.30; p < 0.001) and superficial SSI (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.18-0.95; z = 2.09; p < 0.04). In addition, WEPD also successfully reduced the risk of SSI in clean-contaminated wounds (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.46-0.98; z = 2.06; p < 0.04) as well as in contaminated wounds (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.12-0.49; z = 3.96; p < 0.0001). WEPD seems to be an effective intervention to reduce the risk of post-operative SSI in patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Preperitoneal Mesh Repair of Inguinal Hernia: an Integrated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Published Randomized Controlled Trials.

The objective of this article is to systematically analyse the randomized, controlled trials comparing open (OPPR) versus laparoscopic (LPPR) preperitoneal mesh repair of inguinal hernia. Randomized, controlled trials comparing OPPR versus LPPR of inguinal hernia were analysed systematically using RevMan®, and combined outcomes were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD). Ten randomized trials evaluating 1286 patients were retrieved from the electronic databases. There were 606 patients in the OPPR repair group and 680 patients in the LPPR group. There was significant heterogeneity among trials (p < 0.0001). Therefore, in the random effects model, LPPR was associated with longer operative time and relatively lesser postoperative pain in the case of the trans-abdominal preperitoneal approach. Statistically, both OPPR and LPPR were equivalent in terms of developing chronic groin pain, recurrence and postoperative complications. OPPR of inguinal hernia is associated with shorter operative time and comparable with LPPR (both total extraperitoneal and trans-abdominal preperitoneal approaches) in terms of risk of chronic groin pain, recurrence and complications.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials comparing purse-string vs conventional linear closure of the wound following ileostomy (stoma) closure.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to systematically analyse the randomized, controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of purse-string closure (PSC) of an ileostomy wound with conventional linear closure (CLC). METHODS: Randomized, controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of purse-string closure vs conventional linear closure (CLC) of ileostomy wound in patients undergoing ileostomy closure were analysed using RevMan®, and the combined outcomes were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD). RESULTS: Three randomized, controlled trials, recruiting 206 patients, were retrieved from medical electronic databases. There were 105 patients in the PSC group and 101 patients in the CLC group. There was no heterogeneity among included trials. Duration of operation (SMD: -0.18; 95% CI: -0.45, 0.09; z = 1.28; P < 0.20) and length of hospital stay (SMD: 0.01; 95% CI: -0.26, 0.28; z = 0.07; P < 0.95) was statistically similar following both approaches of ileostomy wound closure. The risk of surgical site infection (OR, 0.10; 95% CI: 0.03, 0.33; z = 3.78; P < 0.0001) was significantly reduced when ileostomy wound was closed using PSC technique. CONCLUSION: PSC technique for ileostomy wound is associated with a reduced risk of surgical site infection apparently without influencing the duration of operation and length of hospital stay.

Use of transanal minimally invasive surgery for endoscopic resection of rectal tumour: a technical note.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this article is to report and discuss a case of lower rectal cancer undergoing endoscopic transanal resection of tumour (ETART) using a transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) approach. METHODS: A technical note on a case report. An innovative approach for ETART using TAMIS. RESULTS: This is the first-ever case report of lower rectal cancer treated by ETART using a TAMIS approach. The procedure was completed successfully without any operative or peri-operative complication. Peri-operative flexible sigmoidoscopy confirmed a wide and patent rectal lumen. CONCLUSION: Use of a TAMIS approach for ETART to remove lower rectal cancer for palliation can be technically very effective compared with conventional ETART, due to the potential advantages of avoiding contaminant fluid spillage, easy access, better visualization compared with conventional ETART, and being user-friendly. The results from larger cohorts of patients undergoing TAMIS ETART are required before recommending the routine use of this technique. However, until then, this approach may be considered as an alternative to conventional ETART.

Improving the view during flexible sigmoidoscopy: a systematic review of published randomized, controlled trials comparing the use of oral bowel preparation versus enema bowel preparation.

To systematically analyse the published randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of oral bowel preparation (OBP) versus enema bowel preparation (EBP) for diagnostic or screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. Published RCTs, comparing the use of OBP versus EBP, were analysed using RevMan(®), and the combined outcomes were expressed as odds ratios (OR). Eight RCTs evaluating 2457 patients were retrieved from the standard electronic databases. There was significant heterogeneity among included trials. The compliance of the patients (p = 0.32) and the acceptability of both bowel preparation regimens (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.67, 2.99; z = 0.92; p = 0.36) were similar in both groups. In addition, the incidence of adverse reactions (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.54, 1.41; z = 0.57; p = 0.57), the risk of incomplete procedure due to poor bowel preparation (p = 0.18) and the incidence of poor bowel preparation (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.63, 2.33; z = 0.59; p = 0.56) were also similar in both groups. EBP and OBP were equally effective for bowel preparation in patients undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy. Although this study failed to demonstrate the superiority of EBP, at least equivalent efficacy for bowel cleansing may be extrapolated.

Factors influencing the diagnostic accuracy and management in acute surgical patients.

AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy (DA) in acute surgical patients admitted to a District General Hospital. METHODS: The case notes of all acute surgical patients admitted under the surgical team for a period of two weeks were reviewed for the data pertaining to the admission diagnoses, relevant investigations and final diagnoses confirmed by either surgery or various other diagnostic modalities. The diagnostic pathway was recorded from the source of referral [general practitioner (GP), A and E, in-patient] to the correct final diagnosis by the surgical team. RESULTS: Forty-one patients (23 males) with acute surgical admissions during two weeks of study period were evaluated. The mean age of study group was 61.05 ± 23.24 years. There were 111 patient-doctor encounters. Final correct diagnosis was achieved in 85.4% patients. The DA was 46%, 44%, 50%, 33%, 61%, 61%, and 75% by GP, A and E, in-patient referral, surgical foundation year-1, surgical senior house officer (SHO), surgical registrar, and surgical consultant respectively. The percentage of clinical consensus diagnosis was 12%. Surgery was performed in 48.8% of patients. Sixty-seven percent of GP-referred patients, 31% of A and E-referred, and 25% of the in-patient referrals underwent surgery. Surgical SHO made the most contributions to the primary diagnostic pathway. CONCLUSION: Approximately 85% of acute surgical patients can be diagnosed accurately along the diagnostic pathway. Patients referred by a GP are more likely to require surgery as compared to other referral sources. Surgical consultant was more likely to make correct surgical diagnosis, however it is the surgical SHO that contributes the most correct diagnoses along the diagnostic pathway.

Systematic review of oncological outcomes following laparoscopic vs open total mesorectal excision.

AIM: To systematically analyze the randomized trials comparing the oncological and clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) vs open total mesorectal excision (OTME) in the management of rectal cancer. METHODS: Published randomized, controlled trials comparing the oncological and clinical effectiveness of LTME vs OTME in the management of rectal cancer were retrieved from the standard electronic medical databases. The data of included randomized, controlled trials was extracted and then analyzed according to the principles of meta-analysis using RevMan(®) statistical software. The combined outcome of the binary variables was expressed as odds ratio (OR) and the combined outcome of the continuous variables was presented in the form of standardized mean difference (SMD). RESULTS: Data from eleven randomized, controlled trials on 2143 patients were retrieved from the electronic databases. There was a trend towards the higher risk of surgical site infection (OR = 0.66; 95%CI: 0.44-1.00; z = 1.94; P < 0.05), higher risk of incomplete total mesorectal resection (OR = 0.62; 95%CI: 0.43-0.91; z = 2.49; P < 0.01) and prolonged length of hospital stay (SMD, -1.59; 95%CI: -0.86--0.25; z = 4.22; P < 0.00001) following OTME. However, the oncological outcomes like number of harvested lymph nodes, tumour recurrence and risk of positive resection margins were statistically similar in both groups. In addition, the clinical outcomes such as operative complications, anastomotic leak and all-cause mortality were comparable between both approaches of mesorectal excision. CONCLUSION: LTME appears to have clinically and oncologically measurable advantages over OTME in patients with primary rectal cancer in both short term and long term follow ups.