Colorectal resection via natural orifice specimen extraction versus conventional laparoscopic extraction: a meta-analysis with meta-regression

Bowel endometriosis: Surgical customization is demanding

Bowel endometriosis is the most common form of severe deep endometriosis. Surgery is an option in case of infertility and/or chronic pain or in the presence of a stenotic lesion. Clinical examination and preoperative imaging must provide an identity card of the lesion so that customized surgery can be proposed. The primary objective of this tailor-made surgery will always be to preserve the organ. The surgeon then has three options: shaving, discoid resection and segmental resection. The more extensive the resection, the greater the risk of severe short- and long-term complications. Surgery must therefore be adapted to the patient's specific situation and needs. Moreover, personalized care must extend beyond surgery. It must begin before the operation, preparing the patient for the operation like an athlete before a race, and continue afterwards by adapting the follow-up to the surgery performed.

Totally intracorporeal colorectal anastomosis (TICA) versus classical mini-laparotomy for specimen extraction, after segmental bowel resection for deep endometriosis: a single-center experience

PURPOSE

The surgical approach to bowel endometriosis is still unclear. The aim of the study is to compare TICA to conventional specimen extractions and extra-abdominal insertion of the anvil in terms of both complications and functional outcomes.

METHODS

This is a single-center, observational, retrospective study conducted enrolling symptomatic women underwent laparoscopic excision of deep endometriosis with segmental bowel resection between September 2019 and June 2022. Women who underwent TICA were compared to classical technique (CT) in terms of intra- and postoperative complications, moreover, functional outcomes relating to the pelvic organs were assessed using validated questionnaires [Knowles-Eccersley-Scott-Symptom (KESS) questionnaire and Gastro-Intestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI)] for bowel function. Pain symptoms were assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores.

RESULTS

The sample included 64 women. TICA was performed on 31.2% (n = 20) of the women, whereas CT was used on 68.8% (n = 44). None of the patients experienced rectovaginal, vesicovaginal, ureteral or vesical fistula, or ureteral stenosis and uroperitoneum, and in no cases was it necessary to reoperate. Regarding the two surgical approaches, no significant difference was observed in terms of complications. As concerns pain symptoms at 6-month follow-up evaluations on stratified data, except for dysuria, all VAS scales reported showed significant reductions between median values, for both surgery interventions. As well, significant improvements were further observed in KESS scores and overall GIQLI. Only the GIQLI evaluation was significantly smaller in the TICA group compared to CT after the 6-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find any significant differences in terms of intra- or post-operative complications compared TICA and CT, but only a slight improvement in the Gastro-Intestinal Quality of Life Index in patients who underwent the CT compared to the TICA technique.

Comparative long-term outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is currently widely used in left-sided colorectal cancer. Some clinical comparative studies have been conducted, providing evidence of its safety and oncological benefits. However, these studies are typically characterized by small sample sizes and short postoperative follow-up periods. Consequently, in this research, the authors adopt the propensity score matching method to undertake a large-scale retrospective comparative study on NOSES colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer, with the goal of further augmenting the body of evidence-based medical support for NOSES.

METHODS

This retrospective study involved patients who underwent NOSES colectomy and conventional laparoscopic (CL) colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer between January 2014 and April 2021. In the NOSES group, specimens were extracted through the anus with the help of a Cai tube (homemade invention: ZL201410168748.2). The patients were matched at a ratio of 1:1 according to age, sex, BMI, tumor diameter, tumor location (descending and splenic flexure colon/ sigmoid colon/ middle and upper rectum), tumor height from anal verge, ASA grade, previous abdominal surgery, clinical pathologic stage, preoperative CEA. After matching, 132 patients in the NOSES group and 132 patients in the CL group were eligible for analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with CL group, NOSES group was associated with decreased postoperative maximum pain score (2.6±0.7 vs. 4.7±1.7, P=0.000), less additional analgesia required (6.8 vs. 34.8%, P=0.000), faster time to passage of flatus (2.3±0.6 days vs. 3.3±0.7 days, P=0.000), less wound infection (0.0 vs. 6.1%, P=0.007), and longer operative time (212.5±45.8 min vs. 178.0±43.4 min, P=0.000). No significant differences were observed in estimated blood loss, time to resume regular diet, postoperative hospital stay, conversion to open surgery or conventional minilaparotomy, total morbidity, readmission, mortality, pathologic outcomes, and Wexner incontinence score between groups. After a median follow-up of 63.0 months, the 5-year overall survival rates were 88.3 versus 85.0% (P=0.487), disease-free survival rates were 82.9 versus 83.6% (P=0.824), and the local recurrence rates were 4.4 versus 4.0% (P=0.667) in the NOSES and CL groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that NOSES colectomy using a Cai tube for left-sided colorectal cancer is a safe and feasible option with better cosmetic results, less pain, faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, and comparable long-term clinical and oncologic outcomes to CL colectomy.

Transvaginal Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction (NOSE) in Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery With New Insights on Technique and Patient Selection

BACKGROUND

Following laparoscopic colorectal surgery, transabdominal specimen extraction requires a mini-laparotomy or Pfannenstiel incision, associated with increased postoperative pain and wound complications. The vagina has several unique properties that make natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) ideal. We report our experience with transvaginal NOSE for colorectal cancer surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A transvaginal sizer allows the posterior vagina to be incised under tension. A transverse or cruciate incision is made, followed by the insertion of a double-ring wound protector. The external ring is opened against the perineum to shorten the length of the conduit for specimen delivery. Vaginotomy closure is performed via laparoscopy using a barbed suture.

RESULTS

Seventeen consecutive female patients underwent elective colorectal cancer surgery with attempted transvaginal NOSE. Median age and body mass index was 67 (range: 50 to 82) years and 26.5 (range: 19.7 to 35.8) kg/m 2 , respectively. Fourteen patients (82%) underwent left-sided resections and 3 (18%) underwent right-sided resections. Median operating time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay was 245 (range: 155 to 360) minutes, 30 (range: 10 to 500) mL, and 3 (range: 2 to 9) days, respectively. Transvaginal extraction was unsuccessful in 1 (6%) patient. Two (12%) patients experienced early postoperative morbidity, neither attributable to the extraction procedure. Median tumor circumferential diameter was 3.3 (range: 2.2 to 7.0) cm. Median follow-up duration was 17 (range: 8 to 27) months. There was no instance of sexual dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

Transvaginal NOSE for colorectal cancer surgery is feasible and safe in selected patients. Overall specimen diameter, inclusive of tumor and mesentery, relative to pelvic outlet and conduit diameter is the most important consideration for transvaginal NOSE.

Same-day discharge (SDD) vs standard enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for major colorectal surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are well-established, resulting in improved outcomes and shorter length of hospital stay (LOS). Same-day discharge (SDD), or "hyper-ERAS", is a natural progression of ERAS. This systematic review aims to compare the safety and efficacy of SDD against conventional ERAS in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (394793). A systematic search was performed in major databases to identify relevant articles, and a narrative systematic review was performed. Primary outcomes were readmission rates and length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were operative time and blood loss, postoperative pain, morbidity, nausea or vomiting, and patient satisfaction. Risks of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included, with five single-arm and eight comparative studies, of which one was a randomised controlled trial. This comprised a total of 38,854 patients (SDD: 1622; ERAS: 37,232). Of the 1622 patients on the SDD pathway, 1590 patients (98%) were successfully discharged within 24 h of surgery. While most studies had an overall low risk of bias, there was considerable variability in inclusion criteria, types of surgery or anaesthesia, and discharge criteria. SDD resulted in a significantly reduced postoperative LOS, without increasing risk of 30-day readmission. Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity rates were comparable between both groups. Operative duration was shorter in the SDD group. Patient-reported satisfaction was high in the SDD cohort.

CONCLUSION

SDD protocols appear to be safe and feasible in selected patients undergoing major colorectal operations. Randomised controlled trials are necessary to further substantiate these findings.

Thoracolaparoscopic radical resection of esophagogastric junction cancers with a NOSE-like approach to extract large specimens

To investigate the efficacy and safety of combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic radical resection of esophagogastric junction cancers using a natural orifice specimen extraction-like approach for extraction of large surgical specimens. Patients who had esophagogastric junction cancers treated with thoracolaparoscopic resection using the natural orifice specimen extraction-like approach for specimen extraction were retrospectively enrolled. A 5-cm transverse incision on the abdominal wall at the middle of the superior pubic symphysis was made for surgical specimen extraction. The clinical, surgical, complications, and follow-up data were analyzed. A total of 162 patients were enrolled, and the surgery was successful in all patients (100%). The total surgical duration ranged 165 to 270 minutes, with blood loss 20 to 150 mL, hospital stay 8 to 22 days, first flatus time 2 to 7 days, extubation time of drainage tubes 1 to 26 days, first oral feeding time 5 to 10 days, number of lymph nodes resected 15 to 39, postoperative ambulation time 1 to 2 days, and postoperative residual rate of cancerous cells at the surgical margins 0. Postoperative complications occurred in 14 (8.6%), including anastomotic leakage in 4 (2.5%), anastomotic stenosis in 3 (1.9%), hydrothorax in 4 (2.5%), and incision infection in 3 (1.9%). At follow-up (mean 12 months), all patients were alive, and the transverse incision was a linear scar concealed in the suprapubic pubic hair area. The combined laparoscopic and thoracoscopic surgery for radical resection of carcinomas at the esophagogastric junction is safe and effective, and a transverse incision at the suprapubic symphysis for specimen extraction results in improved minimal invasiveness and cosmesis.

The Nuts and Bolts of Implementing a Modified ERAS Protocol for Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: Group Practice vs. Solo Practice

AIM: The ERAS protocol consists of multiple items that aim to improve the outcomes of patients receiving surgery. Adhering to the protocol is difficult. We wondered whether surgeons practicing the ERAS protocol in a group would improve patient outcomes. Methods: All patients who underwent colorectal resection for benign disease or malignancy from November 2017 to December 2018 were collected and reviewed retrospectively. According to the physician’s ward round strategy, the patients were categorized into two groups, either by solo practice or group practice. Results: This study enrolled 724 patients and divided them into two groups according to the practice method: group practice (n = 256) and solo practice (n = 468). The group practice cohort had less postoperative morbidity (14.0% vs. 21.4%, p = 0.048) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (mean: 6.6 ± 3.2 vs. 8.6 ± 5.5, p < 0.05) than the solo practice cohort. Group practice (p < 0.001), natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) procedure (p < 0.001), and blood loss >50 mL (p = 0.039) significantly affected discharge within 5 days postoperatively in multivariate analyses. Conclusions: Group practice based on a modified ERAS protocol shortens postoperative hospital stays with fewer morbidities compared with solo practice in which patients receive elective minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

Laparoscopic natural orifice specimen extraction, a minimally invasive surgical technique for mid-rectal cancers: Retrospective single-center analysis and single-surgeon experience of selected patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and short-term outcomes of middle rectal resection followed by transanal specimen extraction.

METHODS

Forty-four patients with small mid-rectal tumors underwent laparoscopic rectal resection followed by transanal specimen extraction.

RESULTS

The procedure was successful in all patients without intraoperative conversion or additional access. The mean operation time was 182.7 minutes (range, 130-255 minutes), the mean blood loss was 26.5 mL (range, 5-120 mL), the mean postoperative exhaust time was 31.3 hours (range, 16-60 hours), and the mean length of hospital stay was 9.5 days (range, 8-19 days). One patient developed anastomotic leakage, which was treated by intravenous antibiotics and daily pelvic cavity flushes through the abdominal drainage tube. No infection-related complications or anal incontinence were observed. The mean tumor size was 2.1 cm (range, 1.6-3.2 cm), the mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 16.5 (range, 6-31), and the mean follow-up time was 8.5 months (range, 2-16 months). By the last follow-up, no signs of recurrence had been found in any patient.

CONCLUSION

The combination of standard laparoscopic proctectomy and transanal specimen extraction could become a well-established strategy for selected patients.

Thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with a cervical or abdominal incision to extract specimen

Surgery is the only curative approach for resectable esophageal cancer. This retrospective study was to investigate the immediate effect and operative complications of conventional and modified thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy with a cervical or abdominal incision to extract specimen for the treatment of patients with esophageal cancer. Eighty-one patients were enrolled, among which 55 patients underwent conventional McKeown thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy (conventional MTE) and 26 patients underwent modified MTE with a cerivical incision (modified MTE). The clinical, surgical, and postoperative data were analyzed. No significant (P > .05) difference was detected in the clinical data between two groups. The surgical procedure was successful in all patients (100%). The surgical time was significantly (P = .018) shorter in the conventional MTE group than in the modified MTE group (280 min vs 317 min). However, no significant (P > .05) difference was found in blood loss (200 mL vs 180 mL), intensive care unit (ICU) stay (31.3 ± 11.3 vs 25.2 ± 6.4 hours), first flatus after surgery (2.9 ± 1.9 vs 3.3 ± 1.6 days), postoperative hospital stay (12.9 ± 5.6 vs 12.6 ± 3.3 days), total number of lymph nodes dissected (27.9 ± 4.1 vs 26.7 ± 5.7), types of carcinoma, and pathological classification. No significant (P > .05) differences were detected in postoperative complications between the two groups. Assessment of postoperative pain using the visual analogue scale (VAS) score showed a significant (P < .05) difference in the VAS score at day 2 (4.81 ± 1.70 vs 3.87 ± 1.14) and day 3 (5.10 ± 0.83 vs 4.61 ± 1.12) between the conventional and modified MTE groups. The modified McKeown thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy with only one cervical incision is more minimally invasive, more cosmetic, and less painful than the conventional approach.

Outcomes after natural orifice extraction vs conventional specimen extraction surgery for colorectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) via the anus or vagina replaces conventional transabdominal specimen retrieval via the transabdominal route through a limited mid-line laparotomy or Pfannenstiel incision. Reducing the number of laparoscopic ports further decreases operative abdominal wall trauma. These techniques reduce the surgical wound size as well as the risk of incision-related morbidity.

AIM

To compare short-term outcomes following 3-port NOSE surgery with a matched cohort of conventional non-NOSE colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective 3-port laparoscopic colorectal NOSE surgery between February to October 2021 were identified. Selection criteria for NOSE surgery was adapted from the 2019 International Consensus on Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery for colorectal cancer. Patients with clinical T4 or N2 tumors on staging computed tomography were also excluded. The propensity score-matched cohort was identified amongst patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery from January 2019 to December 2020. Matching was performed in the ratio of 1:4 based on age, gender, type of resection, and p - tumor node metastasis staging.

RESULTS

Over the eight-month study duration, 14 consecutive cases (nine female, five male) of elective 3-port laparoscopic surgery with NOSE were performed for colorectal cancer. Median age and body mass index were 70 (range 43-82) years and 24.1 (range 20.0-31.7) kg/m² respectively. Six patients underwent transanal NOSE and eight had transvaginal NOSE. Median operative time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative length of stay were 208 (range 165-365) min, 30 (range 10-150) mL and 3 (range 2-6) d respectively. Two (14%) suffered minor postoperative compilations not attributable to the NOSE procedure. Median follow-up duration was 12 (range 8-15) mo. No instances of mortality, local or distant disease recurrence were recorded in this cohort. Compared to the conventional surgery cohort of 56 patients, the 3-port NOSE cohort had significantly quicker mean return of bowel function (2.6 vs 1.2 d, P < 0.001), reduced postoperative pain and patient-controlled analgesia use, and decreased length of hospital stay (6.4 vs 3.4 d, P < 0.001). There were no statistical differences in surgical duration and perioperative complication rates between the NOSE and non-NOSE cohorts.

CONCLUSION

3-port laparoscopic colorectal surgery with NOSE is a feasible technique, augmenting the minimally invasive nature of surgery and producing good outcomes. Appropriate patient selection and expertise in conventional laparoscopy are required.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment of rectal cancer: a propensity-score matching study

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has been increasingly applied in radical surgery of abdominal and pelvic organs, but it is still in the exploratory stage. There is insufficient evidence to prove its efficacy.

METHODS

From January 2013 to June 2017, a total of 351 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer were eventually included in this study. Patients who underwent NOSES were assigned to the NOSES group, while patients undergoing conventional laparoscopic assisted resection were assigned as to the LAP group. Propensity score matching was used to align clinicopathological features between the two groups.

RESULTS

From the perioperative data and postoperative follow-up results of both groups, patients in the NOSES group had less intraoperative bleeding (47.0 ± 60.4 ml vs 87.1 ± 101.2 ml, P = 0.011), shorter postoperative gastrointestinal recovery (50.7 ± 27.3 h vs 58.6 ± 28.5 h, P = 0.040), less postoperative analgesic use (36.8% vs 52.8%, P = 0.019), lower postoperative pain scores (P < 0.001), lower rate of postoperative complications (5.7% vs 15.5%, P = 0.020), more satisfaction with body image (P = 0.001) and cosmesis (P < 0.001) postoperatively. The NOSES group had a higher quality of life. Moreover, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

NOSES could be a safe and reliable technique for radical resection of rectal cancer, with better short-term outcomes than conventional laparoscopy, while long-term survival is not significantly different from that of conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Safety and oncological outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for right hemicolectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is a new technique and uses natural orifice as the delivery route for specimen extraction to avoid supererogatory incision, and the safety and oncological outcomes of NOSES for right hemicolectomy are still inconclusive, so a meta-analysis was performed to compare these to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). Related literature comparing NOSES with CLS for right hemicolectomy, whether randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or retrospective studies, were systematically searched. A random-effect model or fixed-effect model was used based on the I² value. A total of six studies (all retrospective trials) involving 609 participants were included. Compared with CLS, NOSES was more preponderant than CLS in terms of surgical morbidity [odds ratio (OR) = 0.31; P = 0.0002], length of hospital stay [weighted mean difference (WMD) =  - 1.52; P = 0.006], time to first flatus (WMD =  - 0.82; P = 0.0008) and liquid intake (WMD =  - 1.40; P < 0.00001), pain score of POD1 (WMD =  - 1.99; P < 0.00001) and POD3 (WMD =  - 1.15; P = 0.02), and cosmetic result (WMD = 1.84; P < 0.00001), while operative time of NOSES was prolonged (WMD = 18.29; P = 0.04). The number of dissected lymph nodes, recurrence, and 3-year overall survival (3-year OS) in NOSES group were comparable to the CLS group. Despite the lack of enough evidence, NOSES for right hemicolectomy has demonstrated comparable safety and oncological outcomes as CLS with less postoperative morbidity and pain, better cosmetic effect, and rapider recovery.

Transrectal natural orifice specimen extraction in left hemicolectomy for tumours around the splenic flexure: Old wine in new bottles

AIM

Laparoscopic anterior resection with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) has favourable short-term outcomes. However, NOSE is rarely adopted for left hemicolectomy procedures. This study aimed to review the feasibility, safety and short-term outcomes of transrectal NOSE in patients undergoing laparoscopic left hemicolectomy.

METHOD

All consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic left hemicolectomy surgery with transrectal NOSE in a single institution between January 2018 and December 2020 were reviewed. Transrectal NOSE was performed with an enterotomy at the upper rectum. The specimen was brought out via a transanal endoscopic microsurgery scope inserted through the anus. A supplementary video demonstrates this technique. Surgical outcomes, including complications, postoperative short-term recovery and the level of pain intensity, are presented.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were reviewed. There were no immediate postoperative complications and no wound infections in these patients. The average time to tolerate a soft diet was 3.6 days, and the average postoperative hospital stay was 4.5 days. The average score on the numerical rating scale of postoperative pain was 3.0 on postoperative day 1. The median follow-up time was 23.5 months.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic left hemicolectomy with transrectal NOSE is a safe and feasible procedure that leads to early postoperative recovery and a short hospital stay.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) is a technique that involves collecting a specimen for extraction through a natural opening avoiding a mini-laparotomy incision. The aim of this study was to compare NOSE and transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic (LAP) colorectal cancer surgery for postoperative outcomes and oncological safety.

Method

A systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases from inception till October 2020. Articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria (studies comparing LAP and NOSE colorectal surgeries reporting at least one of the outcomes) and analysed. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, pathological results (resection margins and lymph node collection), and oncological outcomes. Secondary outcomes included operating time, blood losses, use of analgesics, functional recovery, duration of hospital stay, and cosmetic results. Fixed and random-effect models were used to measure the pooled estimates.

Results

Nineteen studies involving a total of 3432 participants were analysed (3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 16 retrospective non-randomized studies). Pooled results showed significantly reduced postoperative complications (OR 0.54; 95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 0.67; P < 0.00001). Pathological outcomes of NOSE were comparable to LAP with no significant difference noted in terms of resection margins (P > 0.05) and lymph node collection (weighted mean difference (WMD) −0.47; 95 per cent c.i. −0.94 to 0; P = 0.05). Pooled analysis demonstrated comparable long-term outcomes in terms of cancer recurrence (OR 0.94; 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 1.39; P = 0.75), 5-year disease-free survival (HR 0.97; 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 1.29; P = 0.83), and overall survival (HR 0.93, 95 per cent c.i. 0.58 to −1.51; P = 0.78). Finally, the NOSE group had decreased use of additional analgesia after surgery and earlier resumption of oral intake when compared with LAP (respectively OR 0.28; 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.37; P < 0.00001 and WMD −0.35; 95 per cent c.i. −0.54 to −0.15; P = 0.0005).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis showed that in comparison with LAP, NOSE decreases severe postoperative morbidity while improving postoperative recovery without compromising oncological safety, but it is limited by the small number of RCTs performed in this field.

The influence of diabetes on postoperative complications following colorectal surgery

Background

Diabetes mellitus has been commonly associated with poor surgical outcomes. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the impact of diabetes on postoperative complications following colorectal surgery.

Methods

Medline, Embase and China National Knowledge Infrastructure electronic databases were reviewed from inception until May 9th 2020. Meta-analysis of proportions and comparative meta-analysis were conducted. Studies that involved patients with diabetes mellitus having colorectal surgery, with the inclusion of patients without a history of diabetes as a control, were selected. The outcomes measured were postoperative complications.

Results

Fifty-five studies with a total of 666,886 patients comprising 93,173 patients with diabetes and 573,713 patients without diabetes were included. Anastomotic leak (OR 2.407; 95% CI 1.837–3.155; p < 0.001), surgical site infections (OR 1.979; 95% CI 1.636–2.394; p < 0.001), urinary complications (OR 1.687; 95% CI 1.210–2.353; p = 0.002), and hospital readmissions (OR 1.406; 95% CI 1.349–1.466; p < 0.001) were found to be significantly higher amongst patients with diabetes following colorectal surgery. The incidence of septicemia, intra-abdominal infections, mechanical failure of wound healing comprising wound dehiscence and disruption, pulmonary complications, reoperation, and 30-day mortality were not significantly increased.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis and systematic review found a higher incidence of postoperative complications including anastomotic leaks and a higher re-admission rate. Risk profiling for diabetes prior to surgery and perioperative optimization for patients with diabetes is critical to improve surgical outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10151-020-02373-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.