Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A · 2018
Right Colon Resection for Colon Cancer: Does Surgical Approach Matter?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Haskins Ivy N, Ju Tammy, Skancke Matthew, Kuang Xiangyu, Amdur Richard L, Brody Fred, Obias Vincent, Agarwal Samir
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Surgical resection with curative intent remains the standard of care for colon cancer. This study aims to compare the 30-day outcomes and oncologic results following open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted right colon resection for colon cancer using the Targeted Colectomy American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing elective, right colon resection with primary anastomosis were identified within the targeted colectomy ACS-NSQIP database. Only patients with stage I, II, or III colon cancer were included. The association of surgical approach with oncologic results and 30-day morbidity and mortality outcomes was investigated using a variety of statistical tests.
RESULTS: A total of 3518 patients met inclusion criteria; 1024 (29.1%) underwent open surgery (OS), 2405 (63.4%) underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 89 (2.5%) underwent robotic surgery. Patients undergoing OS were significantly more likely to have positive resection margins (P < .001). Patients undergoing OS were significantly more likely to experience prolonged intubation (P = .02), deep wound infections (P = .001), wound dehiscence (P = .005), deep venous thrombosis (P = .04), bleeding requiring a blood transfusion (P < .001), a prolonged postoperative ileus (P < .001), and longer length of hospital stay (P < .001), and were more likely to die (P = .02).
CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach to colon resection for colon cancer has lower 30-day morbidity compared to OS. The robotic approach is equivalent to the laparoscopic approach, and its utilization may increase in the future.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients undergoing elective, right colon resection with primary anastomosis were identified within the targeted colectomy ACS-NSQIP database. Only patients with stage I, II, or III colon cancer were included. The association of surgical approach with oncologic results and 30-day morbidity and mortality outcomes was investigated using a variety of statistical tests.
RESULTS: A total of 3518 patients met inclusion criteria; 1024 (29.1%) underwent open surgery (OS), 2405 (63.4%) underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 89 (2.5%) underwent robotic surgery. Patients undergoing OS were significantly more likely to have positive resection margins (P < .001). Patients undergoing OS were significantly more likely to experience prolonged intubation (P = .02), deep wound infections (P = .001), wound dehiscence (P = .005), deep venous thrombosis (P = .04), bleeding requiring a blood transfusion (P < .001), a prolonged postoperative ileus (P < .001), and longer length of hospital stay (P < .001), and were more likely to die (P = .02).
CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach to colon resection for colon cancer has lower 30-day morbidity compared to OS. The robotic approach is equivalent to the laparoscopic approach, and its utilization may increase in the future.