R Kube1, H Ptok, R Steinert, M Sahm, U Schmidt, I Gastinger, H Lippert. 1. An-Institut für Qualitätssicherung in der operativen Medizin (gGmbH), Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Deutschland. rainer.kube@med.ovgu.de
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Using data and analysis compiled in the nationwide German Colon/Rectal Cancer qualitative multicenter study, the aim of this study was to determine the value of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer in clinical routine. METHODS: From 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2003, patients with colon cancer resections were evaluated for short-term postoperative and long-term oncologic results associated with operative approach (laparoscopic vs conversion vs open). RESULTS: Of 21,721 patients with colon cancer, 949 (4.4%) underwent laparoscopic resection. These patients were younger (P<0.001) with lower ASA risk factors (P<0.001) and earlier UICC tumor stages (P<0.001) than open resected patients. They also showed reduced overall morbidity (P<0.001), in-hospital mortality (P=0.001), and shorter hospital stays (P<0.001). The rates of intraoperative and specific complications remained unchanged. Nineteen percent of the patients had resections converted to open approaches. These had the highest overall morbidity and longest hospital stays. Their mortality was three times that of the group with complete laparoscopic resection. CONCLUSIONS: The open approach remained the standard of surgical care in colon cancer for the study duration. Laparoscopic surgery was used in only a small number of patients. By virtue of preferential patient selection, better early postoperative and long-term results could be achieved for the laparoscopic group than with the open approach. Conversions were shown to be associated with inferior results at the high rate of 19%. To ensure optimal results, laparoscopic surgery for colon carcinoma should be conducted by an experienced surgeon in an appropriately selected patient pool.
BACKGROUND: Using data and analysis compiled in the nationwide German Colon/Rectal Cancer qualitative multicenter study, the aim of this study was to determine the value of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer in clinical routine. METHODS: From 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2003, patients with colon cancer resections were evaluated for short-term postoperative and long-term oncologic results associated with operative approach (laparoscopic vs conversion vs open). RESULTS: Of 21,721 patients with colon cancer, 949 (4.4%) underwent laparoscopic resection. These patients were younger (P<0.001) with lower ASA risk factors (P<0.001) and earlier UICC tumor stages (P<0.001) than open resected patients. They also showed reduced overall morbidity (P<0.001), in-hospital mortality (P=0.001), and shorter hospital stays (P<0.001). The rates of intraoperative and specific complications remained unchanged. Nineteen percent of the patients had resections converted to open approaches. These had the highest overall morbidity and longest hospital stays. Their mortality was three times that of the group with complete laparoscopic resection. CONCLUSIONS: The open approach remained the standard of surgical care in colon cancer for the study duration. Laparoscopic surgery was used in only a small number of patients. By virtue of preferential patient selection, better early postoperative and long-term results could be achieved for the laparoscopic group than with the open approach. Conversions were shown to be associated with inferior results at the high rate of 19%. To ensure optimal results, laparoscopic surgery for colon carcinoma should be conducted by an experienced surgeon in an appropriately selected patient pool.
Authors: Ruben Veldkamp; Esther Kuhry; Wim C J Hop; J Jeekel; G Kazemier; H Jaap Bonjer; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio M Lacy Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Pierre J Guillou; Philip Quirke; Helen Thorpe; Joanne Walker; David G Jayne; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 May 14-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Ka Lau Leung; Samuel P Y Kwok; Steve C W Lam; Janet F Y Lee; Raymond Y C Yiu; Simon S M Ng; Paul B S Lai; Wan Yee Lau Journal: Lancet Date: 2004-04-10 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: James Fleshman; Daniel J Sargent; Erin Green; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; Heidi Nelson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: David G Jayne; Pierre J Guillou; Helen Thorpe; Philip Quirke; Joanne Copeland; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544