INTRODUCTION: The main objective of surgery of rectal carcinomas is to avoid a permanent colostomy by sphincter-sparing surgical procedures. A variety of different abdominoperineal resection rates is described in the literature. MATERIAL/ METHOD: The study was performed in 2000 within the framework of a multicentric study including 282 hospitals. The purpose of the study was to document the quality of diagnosis and therapy for colorectal carcinomas.A total of 9477 patients were included in this study: 3402 suffering from a rectal carcinoma and 6075 suffering from a colon carcinoma. RESULTS: A total of 866 abdominoperineal resections was performed. This corresponds to an abdominoperineal resection rate of 27.4%. In 30.4% of all men and in 23.0% of all women an abdominoperineal resection was performed. Of all tumor patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection, 8.3% had a pT4 carcinoma and 57.5% a pT3 carcinoma. Adapted to the localization of the tumor in the rectum, i.e., the distance of the aboral tumor margin to the anal verge, the following abdominoperineal resection rates were found: <4 cm from the anal verge 84.6%, 4-7.9 cm 43.9%, 8-11.9 cm 5.8%, and 12-16 cm 0.5%.Intraoperative complications occurred in 11.8%, specific postoperative complications in 33.1%, and general postoperative complications in 27.4% of the patients. The postoperative lethality was 2.8%. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 21.7 days. Logistic regression identified the body mass index, gender, the distance of the carcinoma from the anal verge, and the T category as independent factors influencing the abdominoperineal resection rate. DISCUSSION: Despite an overall decrease in use, abdominoperineal resection will continue to play an important role for the surgical treatment of low rectal cancers in routine clinical practice in Germany. It will remain an individual decision for each patient whether the tumor and the patient allow sphincter preservation or whether abdominoperineal resection seems to be necessary. According to the results of the present study,a general definition of an abdominoperineal resection rate in an unselected group of patients should be viewed critically.
INTRODUCTION: The main objective of surgery of rectal carcinomas is to avoid a permanent colostomy by sphincter-sparing surgical procedures. A variety of different abdominoperineal resection rates is described in the literature. MATERIAL/ METHOD: The study was performed in 2000 within the framework of a multicentric study including 282 hospitals. The purpose of the study was to document the quality of diagnosis and therapy for colorectal carcinomas.A total of 9477 patients were included in this study: 3402 suffering from a rectal carcinoma and 6075 suffering from a colon carcinoma. RESULTS: A total of 866 abdominoperineal resections was performed. This corresponds to an abdominoperineal resection rate of 27.4%. In 30.4% of all men and in 23.0% of all women an abdominoperineal resection was performed. Of all tumorpatients who underwent abdominoperineal resection, 8.3% had a pT4 carcinoma and 57.5% a pT3 carcinoma. Adapted to the localization of the tumor in the rectum, i.e., the distance of the aboral tumor margin to the anal verge, the following abdominoperineal resection rates were found: <4 cm from the anal verge 84.6%, 4-7.9 cm 43.9%, 8-11.9 cm 5.8%, and 12-16 cm 0.5%.Intraoperative complications occurred in 11.8%, specific postoperative complications in 33.1%, and general postoperative complications in 27.4% of the patients. The postoperative lethality was 2.8%. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 21.7 days. Logistic regression identified the body mass index, gender, the distance of the carcinoma from the anal verge, and the T category as independent factors influencing the abdominoperineal resection rate. DISCUSSION: Despite an overall decrease in use, abdominoperineal resection will continue to play an important role for the surgical treatment of low rectal cancers in routine clinical practice in Germany. It will remain an individual decision for each patient whether the tumor and the patient allow sphincter preservation or whether abdominoperineal resection seems to be necessary. According to the results of the present study,a general definition of an abdominoperineal resection rate in an unselected group of patients should be viewed critically.
Authors: I Gastinger; F Marusch; A Koch; F Meyer; G Nestler; U Schmidt; J Meyer; A Eggert; R Albrecht; F Köckerling; H Lippert Journal: Chirurg Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 0.955
Authors: K H Link; M Kornmann; R Bittner; F Köckerling; R Arbogast; I Gastinger; W Heitland; D Henne-Bruns; H Lang; H Lippert; M Mann; H J Meyer; M-J Polonius; S Post; R Raab; T Schiedeck; V Schumpelick Journal: Chirurg Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 0.955
Authors: Henry Ptok; Frank Meyer; Ralf Steinert; Michael Vieth; Karsten Ridwelski; Hans Lippert; Ingo Gastinger Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2006-11-23 Impact factor: 2.796