Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Currently submitted to: Interactive Journal of Medical Research

Date Submitted: Nov 3, 2026
Open Peer Review Period: Nov 4, 2026 - Dec 30, 2026
(currently open for review)

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Complete Mesocolic Excision With Central Vascular Ligation Versus Standard Colectomy for Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Lymph-Node Harvest

  • Jorge Maldonado; 
  • Alexis Agustin Dunay Silva; 
  • Patricia Juana Mamani de la Cruz Choque; 
  • Sofia Duarte Gantiva; 
  • Sergio Antonio Barahona Botache; 
  • Daniel Gilberto González Santos

ABSTRACT

Background:

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation has been proposed to improve lymph-node harvest compared with standard colectomy for colon cancer, though prior reviews report inconsistent heterogeneity and safety findings.

Objective:

This review aims to comprehensively synthesize lymph-node harvest as the primary outcome across the most current available evidence comparing CME with standard colectomy.

Methods:

PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ScienceDirect were searched to August 2026 per PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I; certainty was rated using GRADE. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences and dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios using random-effects models in Review Manager (RevMan), with heterogeneity assessed via I² and Tau². Studies reporting outcomes in incompatible formats were synthesized narratively alongside pooled estimates.

Results:

Eighteen studies were included. For lymph-node yield, eight studies (n=926 CME, 1,145 comparator) pooled as mean differences showed CME significantly increased yield (MD 6.62, 95% CI [4.40, 8.84]; I²=80%), reduced after confounder-based subgrouping (confound-free MD 8.78, I²=61%; confounded MD 4.14, I²=58%; p=.010); narratively, all remaining studies reporting yield as medians, graded exposure, or unpooled means also favoured CME without exception. For the ≥12-node threshold, four studies showed no overall difference (RR 1.07, 95% CI [0.95, 1.21]; I²=81%), becoming significant after excluding one outlying study (RR 1.13, 95% CI [1.02, 1.24]; I²=51%); two additional studies reported this narratively, one non-significant and one showing the largest individual effect (94.7% vs. 79.1%, p<.001). Node positivity showed no pooled difference across thirteen studies (RR 0.99, 95% CI [0.87, 1.13]; I²=47%), while narratively synthesized studies showed mixed, largely non-significant findings. Postoperative complications showed no difference across eight pooled studies (RR 1.00, 95% CI [0.88, 1.13]; I²=0%), corroborated narratively across nine further studies with only one exception showing higher non-severe morbidity.

Conclusions:

CME consistently increases lymph-node harvest without increasing perioperative complications, though evidence certainty remains low-to-moderate and long-term oncological benefit is unconfirmed.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Maldonado J, Dunay Silva AA, Mamani de la Cruz Choque PJ, Duarte Gantiva S, Barahona Botache SA, González Santos DG

Complete Mesocolic Excision With Central Vascular Ligation Versus Standard Colectomy for Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Lymph-Node Harvest

JMIR Preprints. 03/11/2026:115982

DOI: 10.2196/preprints.115982

URL: https://preprints.jmir.org/preprint/115982

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.