Literature DB >> 12239902

Results of laparoscopic versus open resections for non-early rectal cancer in patients with a minimum follow-up of four years.

Emanuele Lezoche1, Francesco Feliciotti, Alessandro M Paganini, Mario Guerrieri, Angelo De Sanctis, Roberto Campagnacci, Gianfranco D'Ambrosio.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Laparoscopic rectal resection for malignancy is still debated. Concern has been expressed regarding the lack of significant data from larger patient series with longer periods of follow-up. The aims of this study were to compare long-term outcome with a minimum follow-up of four years in unselected patients undergoing either laparoscopic rectal resection or open rectal resection for cancer.
METHODOLOGY: From May 1992 to August 1997 all electively admitted patients with rectal cancer were included in a prospective non-randomized study. Written information was submitted to each patient and the location in each group (laparoscopic or open) was related to the patient's choice. The inclusion protocol criteria excluded T1 tumors. All 68 T2-T4 patients underwent preoperative radiotherapy (5.040 cGy), completed with chemotherapy in selected cases (patients below 70 years of age). Long-term results were compared between the two groups. Follow-up time of both groups ranged between 48 and 96 months (mean, 49.4 months).
RESULTS: Excluding patients who underwent a palliative resection or conversion to open surgery and deaths not related to cancer, 53 pts (29 laparoscopic rectal resection, 24 open rectal resection) out of 68 are available and are the object of this study. No patient was lost to follow-up. No wound recurrence was observed. The local recurrence rate after laparoscopic rectal resection was 24.1% vs. 25% after open rectal resection (P = 0.799). Distant metastases occurred in 20.7% of patients in the LLR group (laparoscopic rectal resection) vs. 25% in the ORR group (open rectal resection) (P = 0.980). Cumulative survival probability after laparoscopic rectal resection and open rectal resection was 0.690 and 0.625 (P = 0.492), respectively. Cumulative survival probability for Duke's stage A, B and C in the LRR group vs. the ORR group was 1.000 vs. 0.900 (P = 0.585), 0.667 vs. 0.636 (P = 0.496) and 0.429 vs. 0.445 (P = 0.501), respectively. Sixteen laparoscopic rectal resection patients (55.2%) and 12 open rectal resection patients (50%) are presently disease free (P = 0.979).
CONCLUSIONS: Long-term results after laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer were comparable to those after conventional resection, with a trend in favor of the laparoscopic approach that does not reach a statistically significant difference, possibly due to the limited size of the sample.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12239902

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology        ISSN: 0172-6390


  9 in total

1.  Laparoscopic surgery--15 years after clinical introduction.

Authors:  Reinhard Bittner
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Laparoscopy for rectal cancer: the need for randomized trials.

Authors:  Thomas E Read; Peter W Marcello
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2006-02

3.  Laparoscopic-assisted approach in rectal cancer patients: lessons learned from >200 patients.

Authors:  S Delgado; D Momblán; L Salvador; R Bravo; A Castells; A Ibarzabal; J M Piqué; A M Lacy
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-08-26       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Transanal endoscopic versus total mesorectal laparoscopic resections of T2-N0 low rectal cancers after neoadjuvant treatment: a prospective randomized trial with a 3-years minimum follow-up period.

Authors:  E Lezoche; M Guerrieri; A M Paganini; G D'Ambrosio; M Baldarelli; G Lezoche; F Feliciotti; A De Sanctis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-05-04       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Does laparoscopic colorectal resection for diverticular disease impair male urinary and sexual function?

Authors:  M Lesurtel; S Fritsch; R Sellam; N Molinier; H Mosnier
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-10-13       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  [Present treatment strategies for rectal carcinoma].

Authors:  T Liersch; C Langer; B M Ghadimi; H Becker
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 0.955

7.  Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation for low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Z-G Zhou; M Hu; Y Li; W-Z Lei; Y-Y Yu; Z Cheng; L Li; Y Shu; T-C Wang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-06-23       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Kamyar Kahnamoui; Margherita Cadeddu; Forough Farrokhyar; Mehran Anvari
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.089

9.  Laparoscopic and converted approaches to rectal cancer resection have superior long-term outcomes: a comparative study by operative approach.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; Zhamak Khorgami; Brian Swendseid; Bradley J Champagne; Harry L Reynolds; Sharon L Stein; Conor P Delaney
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 4.584

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.