Literature DB >> 26622341

Factors affecting sphincter-preserving resection treatment for patients with low rectal cancer.

Zhenqiang Sun1, Xianbo Yu2, Haijiang Wang2, Ming Ma3, Zeliang Zhao2, Qisan Wang2.   

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to identify the factors associated with the use of sphincter-preserving resection (SPR) surgery for the treatment of low rectal cancer. A total of 330 patients with histopathologically confirmed low rectal cancer were divided into two groups, namely the abdominoperineal resection (APR) and sphincter-preserving (SP) groups. For SPR factor analysis, the χ2 test was performed as the univariate analysis, while a logistic regression test was conducted as the multivariate analysis. Of the 330 patients, 192 cases (58.18%) received SPR surgery and 138 cases (41.82%) underwent an APR. Univariate analysis results revealed that the sphincter-preserving factor was significantly associated with age, gender, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), total infiltrated circumference, distance of the tumor from the anal verge (DTAV), depth of invasion and tumor grade (P<0.05). However, there were no statistically significant associations with family medical history, diabetes history, venous tumor embolism, growth type, tumor length, lymphatic metastasis and level of preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (P>0.05). Multivariate analysis indicated that the sphincter-preserving factor was strongly associated with DTAV and the depth of invasion, with significant statistical difference (P<0.05). Therefore, selecting SPR surgery for patients with low rectal cancer is dependent on age, gender, ethnicity, BMI, the total infiltrated circumference, DTAV, depth of invasion and tumor grade. In addition, DTAV and the depth of invasion are independent risk factors for the selection of SPR surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  abdominoperineal resection; clinicopathological features; low rectal cancer; sphincter-preserving

Year:  2015        PMID: 26622341      PMCID: PMC4508973          DOI: 10.3892/etm.2015.2552

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Ther Med        ISSN: 1792-0981            Impact factor:   2.447


  36 in total

1.  [Prevalence on overweight and obesity in Han, Uygur and Hazakh in adults from Xinjiang].

Authors:  Cheng Liu; Xiang Ma; Yi-tong Ma; Fen Liu; Yi-ning Yang; Ding Huang; Xiao-mei Li; Ying Huang; You Chen; Bang-dang Chen; Xiang Xie
Journal:  Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi       Date:  2010-10

2.  Characteristics and risk factors associated with permanent stomas after sphincter-saving resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Seok In Seo; Chang Sik Yu; Gwon Sik Kim; Jong Lyul Lee; Yong Sik Yoon; Chan Wook Kim; Seok-Byung Lim; Jin Cheon Kim
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  The current abdominoperineal resection: oncological problems and surgical modifications for low rectal cancer.

Authors:  F Mauvais; C Sabbagh; O Brehant; L Viart; T Benhaim; D Fuks; R Sinna; J-M Regimbeau
Journal:  J Visc Surg       Date:  2011-04-11       Impact factor: 2.043

4.  Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for stage I-III mid and low rectal cancer: a retrospective 5 years analysis.

Authors:  L M Siani; F Ferranti; M Benedetti; Alessandro De Carlo; A Quintiliani
Journal:  G Chir       Date:  2012 Nov-Dec

5.  Perineal and pelvic anatomy of extralevator abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer: cadaveric dissection.

Authors:  Halil İbrahim Açar; Mehmet Ayhan Kuzu
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  Risk factors for anastomotic failure after total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer.

Authors:  K C M J Peeters; R A E M Tollenaar; C A M Marijnen; E Klein Kranenbarg; W H Steup; T Wiggers; H J Rutten; C J H van de Velde
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  The prognostic significance of MRI-detected extramural venous invasion in rectal carcinoma.

Authors:  W G Bugg; A K Andreou; D Biswas; A P Toms; S M Williams
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 2.350

8.  Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978-1997.

Authors:  R J Heald; B J Moran; R D Ryall; R Sexton; J K MacFarlane
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1998-08

9.  The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery--the clue to pelvic recurrence?

Authors:  R J Heald; E M Husband; R D Ryall
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 6.939

10.  Sphincter-saving surgeries for rectal cancer: A single center study from Kashmir.

Authors:  Shabeer Ahmed Mir; Nisar A Chowdri; Fazl Q Parray; Parvez Ahmed Mir; Yasir Bashir; Muntakhab Nafae
Journal:  South Asian J Cancer       Date:  2013-10
View more
  4 in total

1.  Anal function and quality of life analysis after laparoscopic modified Parks for ultra-low rectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Haibo Ding; Jian Li; Yuxiang Chen; Zhi Yang; Zha Peng; Xin Liao
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 2.754

2.  Can Pre-Treatment Inflammatory Parameters Predict the Probability of Sphincter-Preserving Surgery in Patients with Locally Advanced Low-Lying Rectal Cancer?

Authors:  Richard Partl; Katarzyna Lukasiak; Bettina Stranz; Eva Hassler; Marton Magyar; Heidi Stranzl-Lawatsch; Tanja Langsenlehner
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-25

3.  The Outcome of Induction Chemotherapy, Followed by Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy and Surgery, in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Ali Yaghobi Joybari; Behnaz Behzadi; Payam Azadeh; Sam Alahyari
Journal:  Iran J Pathol       Date:  2021-05-09

4.  Clinical parameters predictive for sphincter-preserving surgery and prognostic outcome in patients with locally advanced low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Richard Partl; Marton Magyar; Eva Hassler; Tanja Langsenlehner; Karin Sigrid Kapp
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 3.481

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.