Literature DB >> 26494005

The feasibility of laparoscopic extended pelvic surgery for rectal cancer.

Hayato Nakamura1, Keisuke Uehara2, Atsuki Arimoto1, Takehiro Kato1, Tomoki Ebata1, Masato Nagino1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The present study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic extended pelvic surgery for primary or recurrent rectal cancer.
METHODS: The data on 77 patients, who underwent extended pelvic surgery between February 2008 and June 2014, were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided, based on their treatment history, into an open surgery (OS) group (n = 41) and a laparoscopic surgery (LS) group (n = 36).
RESULTS: The operative time in the LS group was significantly longer than that in the OS group (766 vs. 561 min; p < 0.001). In contrast, the LS group was associated with a significantly lower volume of intraoperative blood loss (195 vs. 923 ml; p < 0.001), fluid balance (5.38 vs. 8.23 ml/kg/h; p < 0.001) and rate of complications (40.0 vs. 68.3 %; p = 0.035), and a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay. The postoperative levels of colloid osmotic pressure and albumin were significantly higher in the LS group.
CONCLUSION: The operative time of the LS group was longer than that of the OS group; however, the LS group experienced less blood loss and fewer complications. Moreover, LS was associated with a reduction in intraoperative infusions and a reduced fluid balance, which maintained homeostasis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Extended pelvic surgery; Laparoscopic surgery; Rectal cancer

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26494005     DOI: 10.1007/s00595-015-1267-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Today        ISSN: 0941-1291            Impact factor:   2.549


  35 in total

Review 1.  The systemic inflammation-based Glasgow Prognostic Score: a decade of experience in patients with cancer.

Authors:  Donald C McMillan
Journal:  Cancer Treat Rev       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 12.111

2.  Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial.

Authors:  Ruben Veldkamp; Esther Kuhry; Wim C J Hop; J Jeekel; G Kazemier; H Jaap Bonjer; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio M Lacy
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 41.316

3.  Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy).

Authors:  M Jacobs; J C Verdeja; H S Goldstein
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc       Date:  1991-09

4.  Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic vs. open surgery for rectal carcinoma--a matched case-control study.

Authors:  Keisuke Uehara; Seiichiro Yamamoto; Shin Fujita; Takayuki Akasu; Yoshihiro Moriya
Journal:  Hepatogastroenterology       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug

5.  Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  Mark Buunen; Ruben Veldkamp; Wim C J Hop; Esther Kuhry; Johannes Jeekel; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio Lacy; Hendrik J Bonjer
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2008-12-13       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Seung Hyuk Baik; Hye Youn Kwon; Jin Soo Kim; Hyuk Hur; Seung Kook Sohn; Chang Hwan Cho; Hoguen Kim
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer.

Authors:  Heidi Nelson; Daniel J Sargent; H Sam Wieand; James Fleshman; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; David Ota
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-05-13       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial.

Authors:  James Fleshman; Daniel J Sargent; Erin Green; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; Heidi Nelson
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Neoadjuvant oxaliplatin and capecitabine and bevacizumab without radiotherapy for poor-risk rectal cancer: N-SOG 03 Phase II trial.

Authors:  Keisuke Uehara; Kazuhiro Hiramatsu; Atsuyuki Maeda; Eiji Sakamoto; Masaya Inoue; Satoshi Kobayashi; Yuichiro Tojima; Yuichiro Yoshioka; Goro Nakayama; Hiroshi Yatsuya; Naoki Ohmiya; Hidemi Goto; Masato Nagino
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-08-09       Impact factor: 3.019

10.  Pelvic exenteration for clinical T4 rectal cancer: oncologic outcome in 93 patients at a single institution over a 30-year period.

Authors:  Seiji Ishiguro; Takayuki Akasu; Shin Fujita; Seiichiro Yamamoto; Miranda Kusters; Yoshihiro Moriya
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2008-12-23       Impact factor: 3.982

View more
  1 in total

1.  Efficacy of an additional flap operation in bladder-preserving surgery with radical prostatectomy and cystourethral anastomosis for rectal cancer involving the prostate.

Authors:  Keita Noguchi; Yuji Nishizawa; Yoshinobu Komai; Yasuyuki Sakai; Akihiro Kobayasi; Masaaki Ito; Norio Saito
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2017-03-04       Impact factor: 2.549

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.