Literature DB >> 35378615

Comparative survival risks in patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection and sphincter-saving operation for rectal cancer: a 10-year cohort analysis using propensity score matching.

Hyun Gu Lee1, Chan Wook Kim1, Jong Lyul Lee1, Yong Sik Yoon1, In Ja Park1, Seok-Byung Lim1, Chang Sik Yu1, Jin Cheon Kim2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) has been considered to have a higher risk of local recurrence and poorer survival outcome than sphincter-saving operation (SSO) in patients with rectal cancer. This study compared long-term oncologic outcomes and prognostic parameters in propensity score-matched patients who underwent APR and SSO.
METHODS: This study analyzed 958 consecutive patients with lower rectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by APR or SSO between 2005 and 2015. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to adjust baseline characteristics, including clinical stage, tumor distance from the anal verge, and tumor size.
RESULTS: In the entire cohort, the APR group had larger and lower tumors and showed significantly shorter 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) than the SSO group (64.5% vs. 75.8%, p = 0.01). After propensity score matching, there were no significant between-group differences in local (9.5% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.59) and systemic (27.9% vs. 23.4%, p = 0.3) recurrence rates, and 5-year DFS (67.5% vs. 69.9%, p = 0.49) and overall survival (80.8% vs. 82.9%, p = 0.65) rates. A lower number of lymph nodes retrieved was independently associated with recurrence and survival outcomes in the APR group, whereas poorly differentiated histology was an independent associated parameter in the SSO group. Advanced stage and perineural invasion were identified as independent prognostic parameters in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that the long-term oncologic outcomes of APR were comparable to those of SSO. Because prognostic parameters associated with oncologic outcomes differed between the respective procedures, correctable parameters could be ameliorated through complete total mesorectal excision and personalized systemic treatment.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abdominoperineal resection; Prognostic factor; Rectal cancer; Sphincter-saving operation

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35378615     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-022-04138-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.571


  19 in total

1.  Comparison of circumferential margin involvement between restorative and nonrestorative resections for rectal cancer.

Authors:  P P Tekkis; A G Heriot; J Smith; M R Thompson; P Finan; J D Stamatakis
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.788

2.  Sites of surgical wasting in the abdominoperineal specimen.

Authors:  G Salerno; I Chandler; A Wotherspoon; K Thomas; B Moran; G Brown
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  Abdominoperineal excision of the rectum--an endangered operation. Norman Nigro Lectureship.

Authors:  R J Heald; R K Smedh; A Kald; R Sexton; B J Moran
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  Intersphincteric resection in patients with very low rectal cancer: a review of the Japanese experience.

Authors:  Norio Saito; Yoshihiro Moriya; Kazuo Shirouzu; Koutarou Maeda; Hidetaka Mochizuki; Keiji Koda; Takashi Hirai; Masanori Sugito; Masaaki Ito; Akihiro Kobayashi
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 4.585

5.  Sphincter preservation in low rectal cancer is facilitated by preoperative chemoradiation and intersphincteric dissection.

Authors:  Martin R Weiser; Hak-Mien Quah; Jinru Shia; José G Guillem; Philip B Paty; Larissa K Temple; Karyn A Goodman; Bruce D Minsky; W Douglas Wong
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  The relationship between the extent of distal clearance and survival and local recurrence rates after curative anterior resection for carcinoma of the rectum.

Authors:  W G Pollett; R J Nicholls
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1983-08       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  Oncologic outcome of intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer.

Authors:  Norio Saito; Masanori Sugito; Masaaki Ito; Akihiro Kobayashi; Yusuke Nishizawa; Yasuo Yoneyama; Yuji Nishizawa; Nozomi Minagawa
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Ultralow anterior resection with intersphincteric dissection--what is the limit of safe sphincter preservation?

Authors:  E Tiret; B Poupardin; D McNamara; N Dehni; R Parc
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.788

9.  The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery--the clue to pelvic recurrence?

Authors:  R J Heald; E M Husband; R D Ryall
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1982-10       Impact factor: 6.939

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.