M Finochi1, B Menahem2,3,4, G Lebreton1,5,6, J Lubrano1,5,6, Y Eid1, A Alves1,5,6. 1. Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Caen, Avenue de La côte de Nacre, 14032, Caen Cedex, France. 2. Department of Digestive Surgery, University Hospital of Caen, Avenue de La côte de Nacre, 14032, Caen Cedex, France. menahem-b@chu-caen.fr. 3. ANTICIPE INSERM U, Centre François Baclesse, 1086, Avenue du Général Harris, Caen, France. menahem-b@chu-caen.fr. 4. Pôle de Formation Et de Recherche en santé, Caen, France. menahem-b@chu-caen.fr. 5. ANTICIPE INSERM U, Centre François Baclesse, 1086, Avenue du Général Harris, Caen, France. 6. Pôle de Formation Et de Recherche en santé, Caen, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival after laproscopic completed and laparoscopic converted rectal resection for cancer. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent curative laparoscopic rectal surgery for cancer at our institution between January 2001 and December 2016 were included in a single-center retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups: the converted (CONV) group and the totally laparoscopic (LAP) group. The primary outcomes were long-term oncologic outcomes including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), as well as local and distant recurrence (LR, DR). The secondary outcomes included postoperative mortality and morbidity as defined as death or any complication occurring within 90 days postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 214 consecutive patients included, 57 were converted to open surgery (CONV group), leading to a 26.6% conversion rate. Mean length of follow-up was 68 ± 42 months in the LAP group and 70 ± 41 months in the CONV group. Five-year OS was significantly shorter in the CONV group compared to the LAP group (p = 0.0016). On multivariate analysis, rectal tumor location (middle and low) and conversion to open surgery were predictors of both OS and DFS. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that conversion to open surgery after laparoscopic rectal resection appears to significantly reduce OS without having a significant impact on DFS and recurrence rates.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival after laproscopic completed and laparoscopic converted rectal resection for cancer. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent curative laparoscopic rectal surgery for cancer at our institution between January 2001 and December 2016 were included in a single-center retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups: the converted (CONV) group and the totally laparoscopic (LAP) group. The primary outcomes were long-term oncologic outcomes including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), as well as local and distant recurrence (LR, DR). The secondary outcomes included postoperative mortality and morbidity as defined as death or any complication occurring within 90 days postoperatively. RESULTS: Of 214 consecutive patients included, 57 were converted to open surgery (CONV group), leading to a 26.6% conversion rate. Mean length of follow-up was 68 ± 42 months in the LAP group and 70 ± 41 months in the CONV group. Five-year OS was significantly shorter in the CONV group compared to the LAP group (p = 0.0016). On multivariate analysis, rectal tumor location (middle and low) and conversion to open surgery were predictors of both OS and DFS. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that conversion to open surgery after laparoscopic rectal resection appears to significantly reduce OS without having a significant impact on DFS and recurrence rates.
Entities:
Keywords:
Anastomotic leakage; Overall survival; Rectal cancer
Authors: H Jaap Bonjer; Charlotte L Deijen; Gabor A Abis; Miguel A Cuesta; Martijn H G M van der Pas; Elly S M de Lange-de Klerk; Antonio M Lacy; Willem A Bemelman; John Andersson; Eva Angenete; Jacob Rosenberg; Alois Fuerst; Eva Haglind Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Pierre J Guillou; Philip Quirke; Helen Thorpe; Joanne Walker; David G Jayne; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 May 14-20 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Z Lakkis; G Manceau; V Bridoux; A Brouquet; S Kirzin; L Maggiori; C de Chaisemartin; J H Lefevre; Y Panis Journal: Colorectal Dis Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 3.788
Authors: Martijn Hgm van der Pas; Eva Haglind; Miguel A Cuesta; Alois Fürst; Antonio M Lacy; Wim Cj Hop; Hendrik Jaap Bonjer Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: James Fleshman; Megan Branda; Daniel J Sargent; Anne Marie Boller; Virgilio George; Maher Abbas; Walter R Peters; Dipen Maun; George Chang; Alan Herline; Alessandro Fichera; Matthew Mutch; Steven Wexner; Mark Whiteford; John Marks; Elisa Birnbaum; David Margolin; David Larson; Peter Marcello; Mitchell Posner; Thomas Read; John Monson; Sherry M Wren; Peter W T Pisters; Heidi Nelson Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Andrew R L Stevenson; Michael J Solomon; John W Lumley; Peter Hewett; Andrew D Clouston; Val J Gebski; Lucy Davies; Kate Wilson; Wendy Hague; John Simes Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: A Agha; A Fürst; I Iesalnieks; S Fichtner-Feigl; N Ghali; D Krenz; M Anthuber; K W Jauch; P Piso; H J Schlitt Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: David G Jayne; Pierre J Guillou; Helen Thorpe; Philip Quirke; Joanne Copeland; Adrian M H Smith; Richard M Heath; Julia M Brown Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: T Matsuyama; H Endo; H Yamamoto; I Takemasa; K Uehara; T Hanai; H Miyata; T Kimura; H Hasegawa; Y Kakeji; M Inomata; Y Kitagawa; Y Kinugasa Journal: BJS Open Date: 2021-09-06