Xialin Yan1,2, Hao Su1, Sen Zhang1, Leqi Zhou1, Jiaoyang Lu1, Xiao Yang1, Jianwen Li1, Pei Xue1, Zirui He1, Mingliang Wang1, Aiguo Lu1, Junjun Ma1, Lu Zang1, Zhenghao Cai1, Jing Sun1, Hiju Hong1, Minhua Zheng3, Bo Feng4. 1. Department of General Surgery, Shanghai Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 197, Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China. 2. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China. 3. Department of General Surgery, Shanghai Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 197, Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China. zmhtiger@yeah.net. 4. Department of General Surgery, Shanghai Minimally Invasive Surgery Center, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, No. 197, Ruijin Er Road, Shanghai, 200025, China. fengbo2022@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate feasibility of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with pelvic peritoneum closure (LAPR-PPC) for lower rectal cancer. METHODS: LAPR-PPC has been used for lower rectal cancer in our institution since 2014. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the data from 86 patients who underwent LAPR-PPC and compared with the data from 96 patients who underwent laparoscopic APR without PPC (LAPR) from January 2013 to December 2018. RESULTS: The rate of perineal surgical site infection (SSI) (18.75% (18/96) vs. 5.81% (5/86), p < 0.01), delayed (> 4 weeks) perineal healing (12.50% (12/96) vs. 3.49% (3/86), p = 0.027), ileus (7.29% (7/96) vs 1.16% (1/86), p = 0.044), and postoperative perineal hernia (PPH, 5.21% (5/96) vs. 0% (0/86), p = 0.032) were significantly lower in LAPR-PPC group than LAPR group. The patients in LAPR-PPC group had shorter hospitalization time (21.32 ± 11.95 days vs. 13.93 ± 11.51 days, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: PPC procedure enabled the reduction in perineal wound complications, ileus, PPH, and consequently shortened hospitalization time. LAPR-PPC is beneficial for the patients with lower rectal cancer.
BACKGROUND: To investigate feasibility of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with pelvic peritoneum closure (LAPR-PPC) for lower rectal cancer. METHODS: LAPR-PPC has been used for lower rectal cancer in our institution since 2014. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the data from 86 patients who underwent LAPR-PPC and compared with the data from 96 patients who underwent laparoscopic APR without PPC (LAPR) from January 2013 to December 2018. RESULTS: The rate of perineal surgical site infection (SSI) (18.75% (18/96) vs. 5.81% (5/86), p < 0.01), delayed (> 4 weeks) perineal healing (12.50% (12/96) vs. 3.49% (3/86), p = 0.027), ileus (7.29% (7/96) vs 1.16% (1/86), p = 0.044), and postoperative perineal hernia (PPH, 5.21% (5/96) vs. 0% (0/86), p = 0.032) were significantly lower in LAPR-PPC group than LAPR group. The patients in LAPR-PPC group had shorter hospitalization time (21.32 ± 11.95 days vs. 13.93 ± 11.51 days, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: PPC procedure enabled the reduction in perineal wound complications, ileus, PPH, and consequently shortened hospitalization time. LAPR-PPC is beneficial for the patients with lower rectal cancer.
Authors: K Bertrand; J H Lefevre; B Creavin; M Luong; C Debove; T Voron; N Chafai; E Tiret; Y Parc Journal: Hernia Date: 2019-03-18 Impact factor: 4.739