OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical significance of preservation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in comparison with IMA ligation in surgery for sigmoid colon or rectal (colorectal) cancer. METHODS: Consecutive patients (n=862) with colorectal cancer who underwent intended surgical resection of the main tumor between 1986 and 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups: IMA preserved (n=745) and IMA ligated (n=117). RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in incidence of advanced stage III or IV disease between the 2 groups (P=0.56 and 0.51, respectively), whereas a longer operation time (287 [95 to 700] vs. 215 [60 to 900] min, respectively; P<0.001) and greater amount of intraoperative bleeding (595 [15 to 4530] vs. 235 [1 to 11565] mL, respectively; P<0.001) were observed in the IMA-ligated group. The overall incidence of surgery-related complications was higher in the IMA-ligated group than in the IMA-preserved group (53.0% vs. 38.5%, respectively; P=0.003). Urinary dysfunction and abdominal abscess were significantly more frequent in the IMA-ligated group (11.1% vs. 4.0%, P=0.001; and 6.8% vs. 2.6%, P=0.01, respectively), and postoperative hospitalization was longer (11 to 140, median 28 vs. 5 to 153, median 19 d, respectively; P<0.001). No significant difference was found in overall survival rate between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: For colorectal cancer resection, IMA preservation may be no change to IMA ligation as to patient' survival, with small risk of operative morbidity.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical significance of preservation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in comparison with IMA ligation in surgery for sigmoid colon or rectal (colorectal) cancer. METHODS: Consecutive patients (n=862) with colorectal cancer who underwent intended surgical resection of the main tumor between 1986 and 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups: IMA preserved (n=745) and IMA ligated (n=117). RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in incidence of advanced stage III or IV disease between the 2 groups (P=0.56 and 0.51, respectively), whereas a longer operation time (287 [95 to 700] vs. 215 [60 to 900] min, respectively; P<0.001) and greater amount of intraoperative bleeding (595 [15 to 4530] vs. 235 [1 to 11565] mL, respectively; P<0.001) were observed in the IMA-ligated group. The overall incidence of surgery-related complications was higher in the IMA-ligated group than in the IMA-preserved group (53.0% vs. 38.5%, respectively; P=0.003). Urinary dysfunction and abdominal abscess were significantly more frequent in the IMA-ligated group (11.1% vs. 4.0%, P=0.001; and 6.8% vs. 2.6%, P=0.01, respectively), and postoperative hospitalization was longer (11 to 140, median 28 vs. 5 to 153, median 19 d, respectively; P<0.001). No significant difference was found in overall survival rate between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: For colorectal cancer resection, IMA preservation may be no change to IMA ligation as to patient' survival, with small risk of operative morbidity.