Takeru Matsuda1,2, Hiroshi Hasegawa3, Kimihiro Yamashita3, Tomoko Tanaka3, Masashi Yamamoto3, Shingo Kanaji3, Taro Oshikiri3, Tetsu Nakamura3, Yasuo Sumi4, Satoshi Suzuki3, Yoshihiro Kakeji3. 1. Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, 7-5-2 Kusunoki-chou, Chuo-ku, Kobe, 650-0017, Japan. takerumatsuda@nifty.com. 2. Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan. takerumatsuda@nifty.com. 3. Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan. 4. Division of International Clinical Cancer Research, Department of Surgery, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LLND) has been reported to be feasible; however, studies comparing the outcomes of laparoscopic LLND with that of open LLND following preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are limited. METHODS: Between November 2005 and October 2017, 38 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer underwent total mesorectal excision and LLND following preoperative CRT at Kobe University Hospital. The data of the patients who underwent open LLND (OP group, n = 19) and laparoscopic LLND (LAP group, n = 19) were retrospectively collected and compared. RESULTS: The operative time was significantly longer in the LAP group compared with that in the OP group. However, the volume of blood loss was significantly higher, and transfusion was more frequently performed in the OP group than in the LAP group. The number of LLNs harvested in the LAP group was significantly higher than that in the OP group. The prevalence of perineal wound infection and bowel obstruction was significantly higher in the OP group than in the LAP group. However, no significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of 5-year overall survival, relapse-free survival, and local recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic LLND is feasible and safe for patients with rectal cancer who were treated with preoperative CRT. Compared with open LLND, laparoscopic LLND might have several advantages such as higher yields of dissected LLNs and lower incidences of perineal wound infection and bowel obstruction.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LLND) has been reported to be feasible; however, studies comparing the outcomes of laparoscopic LLND with that of open LLND following preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) are limited. METHODS: Between November 2005 and October 2017, 38 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer underwent total mesorectal excision and LLND following preoperative CRT at Kobe University Hospital. The data of the patients who underwent open LLND (OP group, n = 19) and laparoscopic LLND (LAP group, n = 19) were retrospectively collected and compared. RESULTS: The operative time was significantly longer in the LAP group compared with that in the OP group. However, the volume of blood loss was significantly higher, and transfusion was more frequently performed in the OP group than in the LAP group. The number of LLNs harvested in the LAP group was significantly higher than that in the OP group. The prevalence of perineal wound infection and bowel obstruction was significantly higher in the OP group than in the LAP group. However, no significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of 5-year overall survival, relapse-free survival, and local recurrence-free survival. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic LLND is feasible and safe for patients with rectal cancer who were treated with preoperative CRT. Compared with open LLND, laparoscopic LLND might have several advantages such as higher yields of dissected LLNs and lower incidences of perineal wound infection and bowel obstruction.
Authors: Rolf Sauer; Heinz Becker; Werner Hohenberger; Claus Rödel; Christian Wittekind; Rainer Fietkau; Peter Martus; Jörg Tschmelitsch; Eva Hager; Clemens F Hess; Johann-H Karstens; Torsten Liersch; Heinz Schmidberger; Rudolf Raab Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-10-21 Impact factor: 91.245