AIM: To compare a consecutive series of patients who underwent laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (LAPR) versus conventional open abdomino-perineal resection (CAPR). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixteen patients (8 females) and 11 patients (4 females) underwent LAPR and CAPR respectively. RESULTS: The median operative time was 110 (65-210) mins and 100 (80-185) mins for LAPR and CAPR respectively (P = 0.43). The median amount of blood loss were 200 (100-1000) mls and 100 (60-800) mls for LAPR and CAPR respectively. There was no significant difference in the need for post operative analgesics and time to first stoma function but the LAPR group showed significant improvement in starting fluids, diet, ambulation and discharge from hospital. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic technique may be an acceptable alternative to conventional abdomino-perineal resection for the patient requiring anal resection for rectal cancer.
AIM: To compare a consecutive series of patients who underwent laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (LAPR) versus conventional open abdomino-perineal resection (CAPR). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixteen patients (8 females) and 11 patients (4 females) underwent LAPR and CAPR respectively. RESULTS: The median operative time was 110 (65-210) mins and 100 (80-185) mins for LAPR and CAPR respectively (P = 0.43). The median amount of blood loss were 200 (100-1000) mls and 100 (60-800) mls for LAPR and CAPR respectively. There was no significant difference in the need for post operative analgesics and time to first stoma function but the LAPR group showed significant improvement in starting fluids, diet, ambulation and discharge from hospital. CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic technique may be an acceptable alternative to conventional abdomino-perineal resection for the patient requiring anal resection for rectal cancer.
Authors: S O Breukink; J P E N Pierie; A J K Grond; C Hoff; T Wiggers; W J H J Meijerink Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2005-03-31 Impact factor: 2.571