Surgery · 2018
Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery in patients with limited peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Ha Sang Hun, Park Soo Yeun, Park Jun Seok, Kim Hye Jin, Woo In Teak, Park In Kyu, Kim Jong Gwang, Kang Byung Woog, Lee Soo Jung, Lee Won Kee, Choi Gyu-Seog
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety of laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery versus open surgery for patients with limited peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer.
METHODS: Laparoscopic surgery for patients with colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases has been performed at our institution since December 2004. We retrospectively evaluated data from patients with colorectal cancer metastatic to the peritoneum, with a peritoneal cancer index ≤10. We compared short-term operative and survival outcomes in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group and open cytoreductive surgery group.
RESULTS: A total of 21 patients underwent open cytoreductive surgery and 42 underwent laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery, of whom 6 (14%) required open conversion. Clinicopathologic characteristics and operative outcomes were comparable between the groups. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in all patients in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group and in 19 patients (91%) in the open cytoreductive surgery group (P = .042). Both the mean hospital stay and use of postoperative narcotics were significantly less in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group than in the open cytoreductive surgery group. The type of operation (open cytoreductive surgery versus laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery) was not related to survival outcomes.
CONCLUSION: With careful selection by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery was technically feasible and safe to treat colorectal cancer patients with limited peritoneal metastases.
METHODS: Laparoscopic surgery for patients with colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases has been performed at our institution since December 2004. We retrospectively evaluated data from patients with colorectal cancer metastatic to the peritoneum, with a peritoneal cancer index ≤10. We compared short-term operative and survival outcomes in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group and open cytoreductive surgery group.
RESULTS: A total of 21 patients underwent open cytoreductive surgery and 42 underwent laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery, of whom 6 (14%) required open conversion. Clinicopathologic characteristics and operative outcomes were comparable between the groups. Complete cytoreduction was achieved in all patients in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group and in 19 patients (91%) in the open cytoreductive surgery group (P = .042). Both the mean hospital stay and use of postoperative narcotics were significantly less in the laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery group than in the open cytoreductive surgery group. The type of operation (open cytoreductive surgery versus laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery) was not related to survival outcomes.
CONCLUSION: With careful selection by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery was technically feasible and safe to treat colorectal cancer patients with limited peritoneal metastases.