Scholarlink

Purpose <p>Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) eliminates the abdominal extraction incision after minimally invasive (MIS) colorectal resection and offers favourable short-term recovery, but transanal extraction raises concerns regarding sphincter stretch and anorectal dysfunction. This review evaluated anorectal functional outcomes after transanal NOSE compared with transabdominal specimen extraction (TASE) in MIS colorectal cancer surgery.</p> Methods <p>MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to August 2024 for comparative studies reporting postoperative anorectal or pelvic floor functional outcomes following transanal NOSE versus TASE. The primary outcome was anorectal continence at the postoperative interval closest to 6 months.</p> Results <p>Ten retrospective cohort studies were included, of which seven (1362 patients) contributed quantitative data for meta-analysis. Three studies contributed to the pooled Wexner incontinence score analysis and four to the pooled Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form (PFDI-20) analysis. At the interval closest to 6 months, Wexner scores were numerically higher after transanal NOSE than TASE, but the difference was small and non-significant (MD 0.17, 95% CI − 0.01 to 0.35; <i>p</i> = 0.07). PFDI-20 scores did not differ between groups (MD − 0.02, 95% CI − 0.21 to 0.18; <i>p</i> = 0.86). Both estimates were robust in leave-one-out and overlap-adjusted analyses excluding potentially overlapping Harbin Medical University cohorts. Early differences appeared to diminish over time, with no clear separation beyond 12 months.</p> Conclusion <p>Transanal NOSE was associated with a small, non-significant trend toward higher early Wexner scores after MIS colorectal cancer surgery, while broader pelvic floor symptom burden appeared comparable to TASE. The difference was of uncertain clinical significance, was robust to sensitivity analyses, and longer-term data suggested no persistent functional disadvantage.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Anorectal function after transanal natural orifice specimen extraction for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月5日

查看全文
  • Megan Wern Ee Chua,
  • Ashley Shi Hui Lee,
  • Prasad Palanisamy,
  • Ian Jun Yan Wee,
  • Isaac Seow-En

摘要

Purpose

Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) eliminates the abdominal extraction incision after minimally invasive (MIS) colorectal resection and offers favourable short-term recovery, but transanal extraction raises concerns regarding sphincter stretch and anorectal dysfunction. This review evaluated anorectal functional outcomes after transanal NOSE compared with transabdominal specimen extraction (TASE) in MIS colorectal cancer surgery.

Methods

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to August 2024 for comparative studies reporting postoperative anorectal or pelvic floor functional outcomes following transanal NOSE versus TASE. The primary outcome was anorectal continence at the postoperative interval closest to 6 months.

Results

Ten retrospective cohort studies were included, of which seven (1362 patients) contributed quantitative data for meta-analysis. Three studies contributed to the pooled Wexner incontinence score analysis and four to the pooled Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory short form (PFDI-20) analysis. At the interval closest to 6 months, Wexner scores were numerically higher after transanal NOSE than TASE, but the difference was small and non-significant (MD 0.17, 95% CI − 0.01 to 0.35; p = 0.07). PFDI-20 scores did not differ between groups (MD − 0.02, 95% CI − 0.21 to 0.18; p = 0.86). Both estimates were robust in leave-one-out and overlap-adjusted analyses excluding potentially overlapping Harbin Medical University cohorts. Early differences appeared to diminish over time, with no clear separation beyond 12 months.

Conclusion

Transanal NOSE was associated with a small, non-significant trend toward higher early Wexner scores after MIS colorectal cancer surgery, while broader pelvic floor symptom burden appeared comparable to TASE. The difference was of uncertain clinical significance, was robust to sensitivity analyses, and longer-term data suggested no persistent functional disadvantage.