Yih-Jong Chern1,2, Wen-Sy Tsai1,2, Hsin-Yuan Hung1,2, Jinn-Shiun Chen1,2, Reiping Tang1,2, Jy-Ming Chiang1,2, Chien-Yuh Yeh1,2, Yau-Tong You1,2, Pao-Shiu Hsieh1,2, Sum-Fu Chiang1,2, Cheng-Chou Lai1,2, Geng-Pin Lin1,2, Yu-Ren Hsu1,2, Jeng-Fu You3,4. 1. Colorectal Section, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 5, Fuxing St., Guishan Dist, Taoyuan City, 33305, Taiwan, Republic of China. 2. School of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan City, Taiwan, Republic of China. 3. Colorectal Section, Department of Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, No. 5, Fuxing St., Guishan Dist, Taoyuan City, 33305, Taiwan, Republic of China. jenodyssey@gmail.com. 4. School of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan City, Taiwan, Republic of China. jenodyssey@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality is reportedly high in patients aged ≥ 75 years with colorectal cancer (CRC). In such patients, a comparison of the short-term outcome between open method and laparoscopy has not been clearly defined in Taiwan. We aimed to compare postoperative morbidity and mortality parameters after open method and laparoscopy in CRC patients aged ≥ 75 years. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent surgery for CRC from February 2009 to September 2015 at the Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Taiwan and analyzed their clinicopathological factors. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were analyzed for evaluating if laparoscopic surgery offers more favorable outcomes than open surgery in the elderly. RESULTS: A total of 1133 patients were enrolled and analyzed in this study; they were divided into two groups (open method vs. laparoscopy = 797 vs. 336). The anastomotic leakage rate was significantly higher in the laparoscopy group than in the open method group (3.3 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.003). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates showed no significant difference between these two groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group than in the open method group (10.4 ± 8.7 vs. 13.8 ± 13.5 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that laparoscopy in patients aged ≥ 75 years with CRC had higher anastomosis leakage rate compared with open surgery but is acceptable and offers the benefit of a shorter hospital stay over open surgery.
PURPOSE: The rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality is reportedly high in patients aged ≥ 75 years with colorectal cancer (CRC). In such patients, a comparison of the short-term outcome between open method and laparoscopy has not been clearly defined in Taiwan. We aimed to compare postoperative morbidity and mortality parameters after open method and laparoscopy in CRC patients aged ≥ 75 years. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent surgery for CRC from February 2009 to September 2015 at the Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Taiwan and analyzed their clinicopathological factors. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were analyzed for evaluating if laparoscopic surgery offers more favorable outcomes than open surgery in the elderly. RESULTS: A total of 1133 patients were enrolled and analyzed in this study; they were divided into two groups (open method vs. laparoscopy = 797 vs. 336). The anastomotic leakage rate was significantly higher in the laparoscopy group than in the open method group (3.3 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.003). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates showed no significant difference between these two groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group than in the open method group (10.4 ± 8.7 vs. 13.8 ± 13.5 days, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that laparoscopy in patients aged ≥ 75 years with CRC had higher anastomosis leakage rate compared with open surgery but is acceptable and offers the benefit of a shorter hospital stay over open surgery.
Entities:
Keywords:
Colorectal cancer; Elderly; Laparoscopy; Open surgery; Outcome
Authors: Celia N Robinson; Courtney J Balentine; Christy L Marshall; Jonathan A Wilks; Daniel Anaya; Avo Artinyan; David H Berger; Daniel Albo Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2010-12-10 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: S Trastulli; R Cirocchi; C Listorti; D Cavaliere; N Avenia; N Gullà; G Giustozzi; F Sciannameo; G Noya; C Boselli Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 3.788
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
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
Authors: Antonio Biondi; Marco Vacante; Immacolata Ambrosino; Erika Cristaldi; Giuseppe Pietrapertosa; Francesco Basile Journal: World J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2016-09-27