Literature DB >> 15932561

Comparison of circumferential margin involvement between restorative and nonrestorative resections for rectal cancer.

P P Tekkis1, A G Heriot, J Smith, M R Thompson, P Finan, J D Stamatakis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To study circumferential margin involvement (CMI) in patients undergoing restorative, compared with nonrestorative, surgery for rectal cancer. DATA SOURCE: Descriptive multicentre study, using routinely collected clinical data from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) Bowel Cancer Audit database. The study encompassed 1403 newly diagnosed patients with rectal cancer undergoing either restorative (anterior resection (AR)), or nonrestorative (abdominoperineal excision of rectum (APER) or Hartmann's procedure), surgery. Operations were carried out in 39 hospitals during a variable period between April 1999 to March 2002. A logistic regression analysis was used to control for variables associated with circumferential margin involvement.
RESULTS: One thousand and thirty-six patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. The average CMI was 12.5% (range 0-33.3% between hospitals). CMI for anterior resection was 7.5% (n = 629) compared with a CMI of 16.7% for APER (n = 306) and a CMI of 31.7% for Hartmann's procedure (n = 101); P < or = 0.001. CMI for patients undergoing curative surgery was 7.1% (423 anterior resections, CMI 3.8% (n = 16); 181 APER, CMI 13.3% (n = 24); 29 Hartmann's procedure, CMI 17.2%). On multivariate analysis, having controlled for Dukes' stage and operative intent, the CMI was significantly different between APER and AR (odds ratio 3.3, 95%CI 2.0-5.4), but less so between Hartmann's procedure and AR (odds ratio 2.2, 95%CI 1.1-4.2).
CONCLUSIONS: APER is associated with a significantly higher CMI than anterior resection. Attention to surgical technique, with a wide perineal dissection and the use of pre-operative adjuvant therapy, may reduce CMI in patients undergoing APER.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15932561     DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2005.00767.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 1462-8910            Impact factor:   3.788


  25 in total

1.  Comparison of administrative data with the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) colorectal cancer database.

Authors:  Mohammed Garout; Henry S Tilney; Paris P Tekkis; Paul Aylin
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Oncological superiority of extralevator abdominoperineal resection over conventional abdominoperineal resection: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ao Huang; Hongchao Zhao; Tianlong Ling; Yingjun Quan; Minhua Zheng; Bo Feng
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-01-03       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Abdominoperineal resection: how is it done and what are the results?

Authors:  W Brian Perry; J Christopher Connaughton
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

4.  Predictors of circumferential resection margin involvement in surgically resected rectal cancer: A retrospective review of 23,464 patients in the US National Cancer Database.

Authors:  Eisar Al-Sukhni; Kristopher Attwood; Emmanuel Gabriel; Steven J Nurkin
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2016-02-21       Impact factor: 6.071

5.  Changes in treatment of rectal cancer: increased use of low anterior resection.

Authors:  A Mekras; A Michalopoulos; V N Papadopoulos; D Mekras; V Kalles; I Tzeveleki; G Dabakis; S Netta; G Basdanis
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.781

6.  Wound dehiscence after abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer is associated with decreased survival.

Authors:  Alexander T Hawkins; David L Berger; Paul C Shellito; Patrica Sylla; Liliana Bordeianou
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  High Rate of Positive Circumferential Resection Margins Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Call to Action.

Authors:  Aaron S Rickles; David W Dietz; George J Chang; Steven D Wexner; Mariana E Berho; Feza H Remzi; Frederick L Greene; James W Fleshman; Maher A Abbas; Walter Peters; Katia Noyes; John R T Monson; Fergal J Fleming
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Rectal cancer: prognostic indicators of long-term outcome in patients considered for surgery.

Authors:  E J Bown; G M Lloyd; K M Boyle; A S Miller
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 9.  A systematic review of transabdominal levator division during abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER).

Authors:  D L H Baird; C Simillis; C Kontovounisios; Q Sheng; S Nikolaou; W L Law; S Rasheed; P P Tekkis
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2017-09-11       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 10.  Extended abdominoperineal excision vs. standard abdominoperineal excision in rectal cancer--a systematic overview.

Authors:  Sigmar Stelzner; Carsta Koehler; Juliane Stelzer; Anja Sims; Helmut Witzigmann
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2011-05-21       Impact factor: 2.571

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.