Techniques in coloproctology · 2019
TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM for resection of intraluminal rectal tumors.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Van den Eynde F, Jaekers J, Fieuws S, D'Hoore A M, Wolthuis A M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcome after Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery (TEM) and Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS) for intraluminal rectal lesions.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of all TEM and TAMIS procedures performed at a single institution by one surgeon between March 2009 and September 2017 was conducted. Primary outcome was operating time. Secondary outcomes were blood loss, pathological outcome, length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission and mortality.
RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent TEM procedure and 68 patients underwent TAMIS. Operating time was significantly shorter for TAMIS compared with TEM (median 45 vs 65 min, p < 0.0001). Blood loss was negligible for both TEM and TAMIS. Resection margins, lesion grade and invasion depth were comparable for both approaches. A significantly higher postoperative readmission rate was observed in the TEM group (17% vs 4.4%, p = 0.031). Mortality was zero in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM, leading to decreased operating times, because all resections can be done in lithotomy position.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of all TEM and TAMIS procedures performed at a single institution by one surgeon between March 2009 and September 2017 was conducted. Primary outcome was operating time. Secondary outcomes were blood loss, pathological outcome, length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission and mortality.
RESULTS: Fifty-three patients underwent TEM procedure and 68 patients underwent TAMIS. Operating time was significantly shorter for TAMIS compared with TEM (median 45 vs 65 min, p < 0.0001). Blood loss was negligible for both TEM and TAMIS. Resection margins, lesion grade and invasion depth were comparable for both approaches. A significantly higher postoperative readmission rate was observed in the TEM group (17% vs 4.4%, p = 0.031). Mortality was zero in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: TAMIS is a valuable alternative to TEM, leading to decreased operating times, because all resections can be done in lithotomy position.