Annals of surgical oncology · 2014
Laparoscopic transabdominal approach partial intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: surgical feasibility and intermediate-term outcome.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка 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.
Chi Pan, Huang Sheng-Hui, Lin Hui-Ming, Lu Xing-Rong, Huang Ying, Jiang Wei-Zhong, Xu Zong-Bin, Chen Zhi-Fen, Sun Yan-Wu, Ye Dao-Xiong
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Traditionally, conventional intersphincteric resection requires a combined abdominal and perineal approach and a handsewn coloanal anastomosis procedure, which is difficult to accomplish via the perineal approach. A completely abdominal approach partial intersphincteric resection (APISR) with laparoscopy can simplify the anastomosis procedure. This study evaluated the intermediate-term oncological and functional results of laparoscopic versus open APISR for low rectal cancer.
METHODS: A total of 137 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer who underwent APISR from January 2006 to August 2013 were retrospectively evaluated. Patient groups were classified into as open surgery (OP, n = 48) group and laparoscopy (LAP, n = 89). The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival and the Wexner score for anal function.
RESULTS: The LAP group had longer operating time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stay after surgery compared with the OP group. Median follow-up was 32.3 months. The local recurrence rates were similar in the two groups (LAP 3.2% vs. OP 6.1%; P = 0.652). The combined 3-year disease-free survival rate was 83.2% in the LAP group and 83.8% in the OP group (P = 0.857). Wexner scores were similar in the two groups (LAP 2.9 ± 4.5 vs. OP 3.1 ± 5.0). In the LAP group, 89.7% of patients had good continence compared with 91.4% in the OP group (P = 0.311).
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic APISR can be performed safely and offers similar intermediate-term oncological and functional outcome compared with the open procedure. The oncological adequacy requires long-term follow-up data.
METHODS: A total of 137 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer who underwent APISR from January 2006 to August 2013 were retrospectively evaluated. Patient groups were classified into as open surgery (OP, n = 48) group and laparoscopy (LAP, n = 89). The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival and the Wexner score for anal function.
RESULTS: The LAP group had longer operating time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stay after surgery compared with the OP group. Median follow-up was 32.3 months. The local recurrence rates were similar in the two groups (LAP 3.2% vs. OP 6.1%; P = 0.652). The combined 3-year disease-free survival rate was 83.2% in the LAP group and 83.8% in the OP group (P = 0.857). Wexner scores were similar in the two groups (LAP 2.9 ± 4.5 vs. OP 3.1 ± 5.0). In the LAP group, 89.7% of patients had good continence compared with 91.4% in the OP group (P = 0.311).
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic APISR can be performed safely and offers similar intermediate-term oncological and functional outcome compared with the open procedure. The oncological adequacy requires long-term follow-up data.