Daiki Yasukawa1, Tomohide Hori2, Yoshio Kadokawa3, Shigeru Kato3, Yuki Aisu3, Suguru Hasegawa4. 1. Department of Digestive Surgery, Tenri Hospital, 200 Mishima-cho, Tenri, Nara, 632-8552, Japan. d.y.0825@tenriyorozu.jp. 2. Department of Digestive Surgery, Tenri Hospital, 200 Mishima-cho, Tenri, Nara, 632-8552, Japan. horitomo@tenriyorozu.jp. 3. Department of Digestive Surgery, Tenri Hospital, 200 Mishima-cho, Tenri, Nara, 632-8552, Japan. 4. Department of Surgery, Fukuoka University Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancer (LRC) is performed worldwide. However, APR involves technical difficulties and often causes intractable perineal complications. Therefore, a novel and secure technique during APR is required to overcome these critical issues. Although the usefulness of the endoscopic trans-anal approach has been documented, no series of the endoscopic trans-perineal approach during laparoscopic APR for LRC has been reported. METHODS: Trans-perineal minimally invasive surgery (TpMIS) has been used during laparoscopic APR in our institution since April 2014. TpMIS is defined as an endoscopic trans-perineal approach using a single-port device and laparoscopic instruments. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated 50 consecutive patients with LRC who underwent laparoscopic APR at our institution from February 2011 to June 2017 and compared the outcomes of the patients who underwent TpMIS [trans-perineal APR (TpAPR) group, n = 21] versus the conventional trans-perineal approach (conventional group, n = 29). We investigated our experiences with TpMIS in detail and evaluated the safety and utility of TpMIS for patients with LRC. Moreover, major features and difficulties of TpMIS were examined from a surgical viewpoint. RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss (median (range) 55 (10-600) vs. 120 (20-1650) ml) and severe perineal wound infection (Clavien-Dindo grade 3, 0 vs. 5 cases) were significantly lower in the TpAPR than conventional group. TpMIS led to a shortened hospital stay (median (range), 14 (10-74) vs. 23 (10-84) days), and neither mortality nor conversion to open surgery occurred in the TpAPR group. CONCLUSIONS: Magnified visualization via endoscopy provided more accurate dissection and less blood loss during surgery. Minimal skin incisions enabled a reduction in postoperative perineal complications, and consequently shortened the hospital stay. TpMIS during laparoscopic APR is safe and beneficial for patients with LRC.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancer (LRC) is performed worldwide. However, APR involves technical difficulties and often causes intractable perineal complications. Therefore, a novel and secure technique during APR is required to overcome these critical issues. Although the usefulness of the endoscopic trans-anal approach has been documented, no series of the endoscopic trans-perineal approach during laparoscopic APR for LRC has been reported. METHODS: Trans-perineal minimally invasive surgery (TpMIS) has been used during laparoscopic APR in our institution since April 2014. TpMIS is defined as an endoscopic trans-perineal approach using a single-port device and laparoscopic instruments. In this study, we retrospectively evaluated 50 consecutive patients with LRC who underwent laparoscopic APR at our institution from February 2011 to June 2017 and compared the outcomes of the patients who underwent TpMIS [trans-perineal APR (TpAPR) group, n = 21] versus the conventional trans-perineal approach (conventional group, n = 29). We investigated our experiences with TpMIS in detail and evaluated the safety and utility of TpMIS for patients with LRC. Moreover, major features and difficulties of TpMIS were examined from a surgical viewpoint. RESULTS:Intraoperative blood loss (median (range) 55 (10-600) vs. 120 (20-1650) ml) and severe perineal wound infection (Clavien-Dindo grade 3, 0 vs. 5 cases) were significantly lower in the TpAPR than conventional group. TpMIS led to a shortened hospital stay (median (range), 14 (10-74) vs. 23 (10-84) days), and neither mortality nor conversion to open surgery occurred in the TpAPR group. CONCLUSIONS: Magnified visualization via endoscopy provided more accurate dissection and less blood loss during surgery. Minimal skin incisions enabled a reduction in postoperative perineal complications, and consequently shortened the hospital stay. TpMIS during laparoscopic APR is safe and beneficial for patients with LRC.
Authors: Aaron J Franke; Hiral Parekh; Jason S Starr; Sanda A Tan; Atif Iqbal; Thomas J George Journal: Clin Colorectal Cancer Date: 2017-06-27 Impact factor: 4.481
Authors: M W Onaitis; R B Noone; M Hartwig; H Hurwitz; M Morse; P Jowell; K McGrath; C Lee; M S Anscher; B Clary; C Mantyh; T N Pappas; K Ludwig; H F Seigler; D S Tyler Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Constantinos Simillis; Daniel L H Baird; Christos Kontovounisios; Nikhil Pawa; Gina Brown; Shahnawaz Rasheed; Paris P Tekkis Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: S E van Oostendorp; S X Roodbeen; C C Chen; A Caycedo-Marulanda; H M Joshi; P J Tanis; C Cunningham; J B Tuynman; R Hompes Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 3.781