%0 Journal Article %A Yingchi Yang %A Huihui Wang %A Kaixin Zhao %A Xiangyu Chu %A Kai Pang %A Yun Yang %A Jun Li %A Hongwei Yao %A Lan Jin %A Zhongtao Zhang %T Comparison of surgical quality and long-term outcome between hybrid trans-anal total meso-rectal excision and laparoscopic total meso-rectal excision: a systematic review and meta-analysis %D 2020 %R 10.1101/2020.04.29.20085829 %J medRxiv %P 2020.04.29.20085829 %X BACKGROUND Laparoscopy-assisted trans-anal TME (ta-TME), or hybrid ta-TME, inherited the advantages of both trans-anal surgery and trans-abdominal surgery, and is gaining increasing acceptance from colorectal surgeons worldwide. This research aims to make a comprehensive comparison between hybrid ta-TME surgery and traditional laparoscopic TME (la-TME) surgery regarding surgical quality and long-term survival.METHODS Cochrane Library, EMbase, Web of Science and PubMed were searched for studies comparing hybrid ta-TME with traditional la-TME. Indicators for surgical quality and long-term prognosis were extracted and pooled. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 index and was significant when p < 0.1 and I2 > 50%. Publication bias was estimated by Egger’s test, where p<0.1 was considered statistically significant.RESULTS 13 studies with 992 patients were included in meta-analysis, of which 467 were in hybrid ta-TME cohorts, and 525 were in traditional la-TME cohorts. Compared with traditional la-TME, hybrid ta-TME has lower rate of positive circumferential margin (RR=0.454, 95%CI 0.240~0.862, p=0.016) and lower conversion rate (RR=0.336, 95%CI 0.134~0.844, p=0.020). On rate of positive distal resection margin, completeness/near-completeness of meso-rectum, overall complications, anal leakage, ileus, urinary dysfunction, 2-year DFS and 2-year OS, there were no significant difference between the two techniques.CONCLUSIONS Hybrid ta-TME is significantly superior to traditional la-TME in ensuring CRM safety and lowering intra-operative conversion rate, and is meanwhile not inferior on other major outcome indicators concerning surgical quality and long-term survival. To further understand this new surgical technique, we need high-quality RCTs, as well as previous researchers’ updates with results of prolonged follow-up.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialProtocol of this systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020169185).Funding StatementThis work was funded by Beijing Municipal Education Commission (IDHT20170516).Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll research data are available via reasonable request by email to corresponding author. %U https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2020/05/05/2020.04.29.20085829.full.pdf