BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate oncologic outcomes, as well as perioperative and pathologic outcomes, of single-incision laparoscopic anterior resection (SILAR) compared with conventional laparoscopic anterior resection (CLAR) for sigmoid colon cancer using propensity-score matching analysis. METHODS: From July 2009 through April 2012, a total of 407 patients underwent laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid colon cancer. Data on short- and long-term outcomes were collected prospectively and reviewed. Propensity-score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:2 comparing the SILAR (n = 60) and CLAR (n = 120) groups. RESULTS: There was no difference in operation time, estimated blood loss, time to soft diet, and length of hospital stay; however, the SILAR group showed less pain on postoperative day 2 (mean 2.6 vs. 3.6; p = 0.000) and shorter length of incision (3.3 vs. 7.7 cm; p = 0.000) compared with the CLAR group. Morbidity, mortality, and pathologic outcomes were similar in both groups. The 3-year overall survival rates were 94.5 versus 97.1% (p = 0.223), and disease-free survival rates were 89.5 versus 87.4% (p = 0.751) in the SILAR and CLAR groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The long-term oncologic outcomes, as well as short-term outcomes, of SILAR are comparable with those of CLAR. Although SILAR might have some technical difficulties, it appears to be a safe and feasible option, with better cosmetic results.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate oncologic outcomes, as well as perioperative and pathologic outcomes, of single-incision laparoscopic anterior resection (SILAR) compared with conventional laparoscopic anterior resection (CLAR) for sigmoid colon cancer using propensity-score matching analysis. METHODS: From July 2009 through April 2012, a total of 407 patients underwent laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid colon cancer. Data on short- and long-term outcomes were collected prospectively and reviewed. Propensity-score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:2 comparing the SILAR (n = 60) and CLAR (n = 120) groups. RESULTS: There was no difference in operation time, estimated blood loss, time to soft diet, and length of hospital stay; however, the SILAR group showed less pain on postoperative day 2 (mean 2.6 vs. 3.6; p = 0.000) and shorter length of incision (3.3 vs. 7.7 cm; p = 0.000) compared with the CLAR group. Morbidity, mortality, and pathologic outcomes were similar in both groups. The 3-year overall survival rates were 94.5 versus 97.1% (p = 0.223), and disease-free survival rates were 89.5 versus 87.4% (p = 0.751) in the SILAR and CLAR groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The long-term oncologic outcomes, as well as short-term outcomes, of SILAR are comparable with those of CLAR. Although SILAR might have some technical difficulties, it appears to be a safe and feasible option, with better cosmetic results.
Authors: Su Mi Kim; Man Ho Ha; Jeong Eun Seo; Ji Eun Kim; Min Gew Choi; Tae Sung Sohn; Jae Moon Bae; Sung Kim; Jun Ho Lee Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Byung Mo Kang; Hyung Jin Kim; Bong-Hyeon Kye; Sang Chul Lee; Kil Yeon Lee; Sun Jin Park; Suk-Hwan Lee; Sang Woo Lim; Yoon Suk Lee; Ji Hoon Kim; Jinkwon Lee; Min Ki Kim; Jun-Gi Kim Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 4.584