Literature DB >> 29022779

Short-term surgical outcomes and patient quality of life between robotic and laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision for adenocarcinoma of the rectum.

D Kamali1, A Reddy1, S Imam1, K Omar1, A Jha1, M Jha1.   

Abstract

Introduction Some studies advocate a laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (l-ELAPE) approach for low rectal cancer. The da Vinci™ robot (r-ELAPE) technique has potential to overcome some limitations of l-ELAPE, such as reduction of the learning curve and more precise tissue handling. It is unknown whether this approach results in improved surgical or quality of life outcomes compared with l-ELAPE. This study aimed to address this issue. Methods Consecutive patients having undergone either robotic or laparoscopic ELAPE for adenocarcinoma were studied. All operations were performed by two surgeons experienced in laparoscopic and recently introduced robotic surgery. Surgical outcomes were determined by postoperative histology and short-term complications. Quality of life was prospectively assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLC-CR30 and QLC-CR29 questionnaires. Results A total of 22 patients (11 r-ELAPE) with a median follow-up of 13 months (8 months robotic; 22 months laparoscopic) were studied. The groups were similarly matched for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, preoperative chemoradiotherapy and tumour height. All had R0 resection. There was no significant difference in short-term surgical outcomes between groups. There was no significant difference in mean global health scores between the two groups (74 ± 14 r-ELAPE vs. 73 ± 10 l-ELAPE). The r-ELAPE group had a lower mean impotence score compared with the I-ELAPE group (55.5 ± 40 vs. 72.2 ± 44), although this was not statistically significant. Conclusions The newly introduced r-ELAPE was non-inferior to l-ELAPE in either patient quality of life or surgical outcomes. Robotic surgery could be particularly beneficial in the technically challenging area of low rectal cancer surgery with a shorter learning curve than laparoscopy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abdominoperineal excision; Laparoscopy; Quality of life; Rectal cancer; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29022779      PMCID: PMC5696922          DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2017.0093

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  28 in total

1.  A prospective case-control study of extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) of the rectum versus conventional laparoscopic and open abdominoperineal excision: comparative analysis of short-term outcomes and quality of life.

Authors:  P G Vaughan-Shaw; T Cheung; J S Knight; P H Nichols; S A Pilkington; A H Mirnezami
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 2.  Quality of life after laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sanne A L Bartels; Malaika S Vlug; Dirk T Ubbink; Willem A Bemelman
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Oncological superiority of extralevator abdominoperineal resection over conventional abdominoperineal resection: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ao Huang; Hongchao Zhao; Tianlong Ling; Yingjun Quan; Minhua Zheng; Bo Feng
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-01-03       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Robot-Assisted Abdominoperineal Resection: Clinical, Pathologic, and Oncologic Outcomes.

Authors:  Saleh M Eftaiha; Ajit Pai; Suela Sulo; John J Park; Leela M Prasad; Slawomir J Marecik
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.585

5.  Abdominoperineal excision of the rectum--an endangered operation. Norman Nigro Lectureship.

Authors:  R J Heald; R K Smedh; A Kald; R Sexton; B J Moran
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.585

6.  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

7.  Bladder and sexual function following resection for rectal cancer in a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open technique.

Authors:  D G Jayne; J M Brown; H Thorpe; J Walker; P Quirke; P J Guillou
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Extended abdominoperineal resection with gluteus maximus flap reconstruction of the pelvic floor for rectal cancer.

Authors:  T Holm; A Ljung; T Häggmark; G Jurell; J Lagergren
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 6.939

9.  Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: comparison of right-sided and left-sided resections.

Authors:  Paris P Tekkis; Antony J Senagore; Conor P Delaney; Victor W Fazio
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology.

Authors:  N K Aaronson; S Ahmedzai; B Bergman; M Bullinger; A Cull; N J Duez; A Filiberti; H Flechtner; S B Fleishman; J C de Haes
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1993-03-03       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  6 in total

1.  Meta-analysis on current status, efficacy, and safety of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse treatment: can robotic surgery become the gold standard?

Authors:  Xu Bao; Huan Wang; Weiliang Song; Yuzhuo Chen; Ying Luo
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.

Authors:  Ka Ting Ng; Azlan Kok Vui Tsia; Vanessa Yu Ling Chong
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 3.  Extralevator abdominoperineal excision for advanced low rectal cancer: Where to go.

Authors:  Yu Tao; Jia-Gang Han; Zhen-Jun Wang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Prospective multicentre observational cohort to assess quality of life, functional outcomes and cost-effectiveness following minimally invasive surgical techniques for rectal cancer in 'dedicated centres' in the Netherlands (VANTAGE trial): a protocol.

Authors:  Ritch Geitenbeek; Thijs Burghgraef; Roel Hompes; David Zimmerman; Marcel Dijkgraaf; Maarten Postma; Adelita Ranchor; Paul Verheijen; Esther Consten
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-08-19       Impact factor: 3.006

5.  A retrospective study of post-operative complications and cost analysis in robotic rectal resection versus laparoscopic rectal resection.

Authors:  Muhammad Ali; Xiaodong Zhu; Yang Wang; Jianyue Ding; Qi Zhang; Qiannan Sun; Shantanu Baral; Daorong Wang
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-08-19

6.  Difference in surgical outcomes of rectal cancer by study design: meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, case-matched studies, and cohort studies.

Authors:  N Hoshino; T Sakamoto; K Hida; Y Takahashi; H Okada; K Obama; T Nakayama
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2021-03-05
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.