Literature DB >> 25987773

Long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open surgery for stages II and III rectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study.

Zhen-Xu Zhou1, Li-Ying Zhao1, Tian Lin1, Hao Liu1, Hai-Jun Deng1, Heng-Liang Zhu1, Jun Yan1, Guo-Xin Li1.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the 5-year survival after laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for stages II and III rectal cancer.
METHODS: This study enrolled 406 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stages II and III rectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2009 [laparoscopic rectal resection (LRR), n = 152; open rectal resection (ORR), n = 254]. Clinical characteristics, operative outcomes, pathological outcomes, postoperative recovery, and 5-year survival outcomes were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: Most of the clinical characteristics were similar except age (59 years vs 55 years, P = 0.033) between the LRR group and ORR group. The proportion of anterior resection was higher in the LRR group than that in the ORR group (81.6% vs 66.1%, P = 0.001). The LRR group had less estimated blood loss (50 mL vs 200 mL, P < 0.001) and a lower rate of blood transfusion (4.6% vs 11.8%, P = 0.019) compared to the ORR group. The pathological outcomes of the two groups were comparable. The LRR group was associated with faster recovery of bowel function (2.8 d vs 3.7 d, P < 0.001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (11.7 d vs 13.7 d, P < 0.001). The median follow-up time was 63 mo in the LRR group and 65 mo in the ORR group. As for the survival outcomes, the 5-year local recurrence rate (16.0% vs 16.4%, P = 0.753), 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate (63.0% vs 63.1%, P = 0.589), and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (68.1% vs 63.5%, P = 0.682) were comparable between the LRR group and the ORR group. Stage by stage, there were also no statistical differences between the LRR group and the ORR group in terms of the 5-year local recurrence rate (stage II: 6.3% vs 8.7%, P = 0.623; stage III: 26.4% vs 23.2%, P = 0.747), 5-year DFS rate (stage II: 77.5% vs 77.6%, P = 0.462; stage III: 46.5% vs 50.9%, P = 0.738), and 5-year OS rate (stage II: 81.4% vs 74.3%, P = 0.242; stage III: 53.9% vs 54.1%, P = 0.459).
CONCLUSION: LRR for stages II and III rectal cancer can yield comparable long-term survival while achieving short-term benefits compared to open surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Laparoscopic surgery; Locally advanced rectal cancer; Oncologic outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25987773      PMCID: PMC4427672          DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i18.5505

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1007-9327            Impact factor:   5.742


  36 in total

1.  Laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer: a prospective comparative study.

Authors:  M Morino; M E Allaix; G Giraudo; F Corno; C Garrone
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-10-03       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Perioperative blood transfusions reduce long-term survival following surgery for colorectal cancer.

Authors:  T H Edna; T Bjerkeset
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.585

3.  Laparoscopic resection in rectal cancer patients: outcome and cost-benefit analysis.

Authors:  Marco Braga; Matteo Frasson; Andrea Vignali; Walter Zuliani; Giovanni Capretti; Valerio Di Carlo
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  Rectal cancer: prognostic indicators of long-term outcome in patients considered for surgery.

Authors:  E J Bown; G M Lloyd; K M Boyle; A S Miller
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

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

6.  Prospective comparison of laparoscopic vs. open resections for colorectal adenocarcinoma over a ten-year period.

Authors:  Sanjiv K Patankar; Sergio W Larach; Andrea Ferrara; Paul R Williamson; Joseph T Gallagher; Samuel DeJesus; Shekar Narayanan
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a consecutive series of 100 patients.

Authors:  Mario Morino; Umberto Parini; Giuseppe Giraudo; Micky Salval; Riccardo Brachet Contul; Corrado Garrone
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trial.

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

9.  Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer.

Authors:  I J Adam; M O Mohamdee; I G Martin; N Scott; P J Finan; D Johnston; M F Dixon; P Quirke
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1994-09-10       Impact factor: 79.321

10.  Laparoscopy as a prognostic factor in curative resection for node positive colorectal cancer: results for a single-institution nonrandomized prospective trial.

Authors:  L Capussotti; P Massucco; A Muratore; M Amisano; C Bima; D Zorzi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-05-27       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  7 in total

1.  Survival outcomes following laparoscopic vs open surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer: a two-center cohort study with propensity score matching.

Authors:  Kang-Lian Tan; Hai-Jun Deng; Zhi-Qiang Chen; Ting-Yu Mou; Hao Liu; Run-Sheng Xie; Xue-Min Liang; Xiao-Hua Fan; Guo-Xin Li
Journal:  Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf)       Date:  2020-08-19

Review 2.  Watch and wait approach to rectal cancer: A review.

Authors:  Marcos E Pozo; Sandy H Fang
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-11-27

3.  The Feasibility and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Extended Total Mesorectal Excision for Locally Advanced Lower Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Takashi Nonaka; Akiko Fukuda; Kyoichiro Maekawa; Shigeki Nagayoshi; Takayuki Tokunaga; Mitsutoshi Takatsuki; Tomoo Kitajima; Ken Taniguchi; Hikaru Fujioka
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2018 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.155

4.  Two-port laparoscopic anterior resection through a self-made glove device versus conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparison of short-term surgical results.

Authors:  Hong Zhang; Yunzhi Ling; Jinchun Cong; Mingming Cui; Dingsheng Liu; Chunsheng Chen
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 2.754

5.  High expression of COL10A1 is associated with poor prognosis in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Haipeng Huang; Tingting Li; Gengtai Ye; Liying Zhao; Zhenzhan Zhang; Debin Mo; Yiming Wang; Ce Zhang; Haijun Deng; Guoxin Li; Hao Liu
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2018-03-20       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Non-Metastatic Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Kanittha Sakolprakaikij; Kamthorn Yolsuriyanwong; Piyanun Wangkulangkul; Praisuda Bwaloy; Siripong Cheewatanakornkul
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2021-12-01

7.  COL10A1 allows stratification of invasiveness of colon cancer and associates to extracellular matrix and immune cell enrichment in the tumor parenchyma.

Authors:  Ulf D Kahlert; Wenjie Shi; Marco Strecker; Lorenz A Scherpinski; Thomas Wartmann; Maximilian Dölling; Aristotelis Perrakis; Borna Relja; Miriam Mengoni; Andreas Braun; Roland S Croner
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-10-04       Impact factor: 5.738

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.