Literature DB >> 21689315

Circumferential resection margin involvement after laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer.

I Raftopoulos1, J F Reed, R Bergamaschi.   

Abstract

AIM: This study aimed to evaluate circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma after laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision (APR).
METHOD: Prospectively collected data were analyzed on consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic APR for histologically proven rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemotherapy, from 1998 to 2006. Patients with no sphincter involvement were not included and underwent intersphincteric resection with coloanal anastomosis. CRM involvement was defined as ≤ 2 mm using a standardized pathology protocol. Data were presented as mean ± SD or as median (range).
RESULTS: Seventy-four patients (60 ± 14 years of age; body mass index = 29.7 ± 7.9 kg/m(2) ) underwent laparoscopic APR. The distance of the tumour from the anal verge was 3.1 ± 0.93 cm. All patients had sphincter involvement. The operative time was 180 ± 73 min, and estimated blood loss was 269 ± 149 ml. There were no conversions and no postoperative mortality. The adverse event rate was 11%. There were two reoperations and three readmissions. Seventy-one patients had a T3 tumour and three patients had a T4 tumour. The median tumour size was 3.1 (range, 0-10) × 3 (range, 0-8.5) × 2 (range, 0-3.6) cm, and 26 (range, 3-41) lymph nodes were harvested. The median CRM was 7 (range, 1-11) mm. This was localized at the waist of the specimen in 12 (16.2%) of patients. Adjuvant therapy was given to 92% and 97% of patients with an involved and an uninvolved CRM, respectively. At 50 ± 27 months of follow up of 73 patients, 12 had CRM involvement and had a significantly decreased cancer-specific survival (log rank test, P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic APR resulted in CRM involvement in 16.2% of patients with rectal cancer.
© 2011 The Authors. Colorectal Disease © 2011 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 21689315     DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02626.x

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


  5 in total

1.  Therapeutic results of abdominoperineal resection in the prone jackknife position for T3-4 low rectal cancers.

Authors:  Xiang Hu; Liang Cao; Jian Zhang; Pin Liang; Ge Liu
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Laparoscopic-assisted abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer provides a shorter length of hospital stay while not affecting the recurrence or survival: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Manfred Odermatt; Karen Flashman; Jim Khan; Amjad Parvaiz
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-09-05       Impact factor: 2.549

3.  Staying on target.

Authors:  J Loyal; R Bergamaschi
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.781

4.  Laparoscopic translevator approach to abdominoperineal resection for rectal adenocarcinoma: feasibility and short-term oncologic outcomes.

Authors:  Vanessa N Palter; Steven MacLellan; Shady Ashamalla
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Laparoscopic technique and safety experience with barbed suture closure for pelvic cavity after abdominoperineal resection.

Authors:  Nobuhisa Matsuhashi; Takao Takahashi; Kenichi Nonaka; Toshiyuki Tanahashi; Hisashi Imai; Yoshiyuki Sasaki; Yoshihiro Tanaka; Naoki Okumura; Kazuya Yamaguchi; Shinji Osada; Kazuhiro Yoshida
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 2.754

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.