INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to investigate local control and survival rates following abdominoperineal resection (APR) compared with low anterior resection (LAR) in lower and middle rectal cancer. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 153 patients with newly histologically proven rectal adenocarcinoma located at low and middle third that were treated between 2004 and 2010 at a tertiary hospital. The tumors were pathologically staged according to the 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system. Surgery was applied for 138 (90%) of the patients, of which 96 (70%) underwent LAR and 42 were (30%) treated with APR. Total mesorectal excision was performed for all patients. In addition, 125 patients (82%) received concurrent (neoadjuvant, adjuvant or palliative) pelvic chemoradiation, and 134 patients (88%) received neoadjuvant, adjuvant or concurrent chemotherapy. Patients' follow-up ranged from 4 to 156 (median 37) months. RESULTS: Of 153 patients, 89 were men and 64 were women with a median age of 57 years. One patient (0.7%) was stage 0, 15 (9.8%) stage I, 63 (41.2%) stage II, 51 (33.3%) stage III and 23 (15%) stage IV. There was a significant difference between LAR and APR in terms of tumor distance from anal verge, disease stage and combined modality therapy used. However, there was no significant difference regarding 5-year local control, disease free and overall survival rates between LAR and APR. CONCLUSION: LAR can provide comparable local control, disease free and overall survival rates compared with APR in eligible patients with lower and middle rectal cancer.
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to investigate local control and survival rates following abdominoperineal resection (APR) compared with low anterior resection (LAR) in lower and middle rectal cancer. METHODS: In this retrospective study, 153 patients with newly histologically proven rectal adenocarcinoma located at low and middle third that were treated between 2004 and 2010 at a tertiary hospital. The tumors were pathologically staged according to the 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system. Surgery was applied for 138 (90%) of the patients, of which 96 (70%) underwent LAR and 42 were (30%) treated with APR. Total mesorectal excision was performed for all patients. In addition, 125 patients (82%) received concurrent (neoadjuvant, adjuvant or palliative) pelvic chemoradiation, and 134 patients (88%) received neoadjuvant, adjuvant or concurrent chemotherapy. Patients' follow-up ranged from 4 to 156 (median 37) months. RESULTS: Of 153 patients, 89 were men and 64 were women with a median age of 57 years. One patient (0.7%) was stage 0, 15 (9.8%) stage I, 63 (41.2%) stage II, 51 (33.3%) stage III and 23 (15%) stage IV. There was a significant difference between LAR and APR in terms of tumor distance from anal verge, disease stage and combined modality therapy used. However, there was no significant difference regarding 5-year local control, disease free and overall survival rates between LAR and APR. CONCLUSION: LAR can provide comparable local control, disease free and overall survival rates compared with APR in eligible patients with lower and middle rectal cancer.
Authors: Lisa J Herrinton; Andrea Altschuler; Carmit K McMullen; Joanna E Bulkley; Mark C Hornbrook; Virginia Sun; Christopher S Wendel; Marcia Grant; Carol M Baldwin; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Larissa K F Temple; Robert S Krouse Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2016-03-21 Impact factor: 508.702