• Shapour Omidvari, Sayed Hasan Hamedi, Mohammad Mohammadianpanah, Samira Razzaghi, Ahmad Mosalaei, Niloofar Ahmadloo, Mansour Ansari, and Saeideh Pourahmad.
• Department of Radiation Oncology, Namazi Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
• J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2013 Sep 1; 25 (3): 151-60.

IntroductionThis study aimed to investigate local control and survival rates following abdominoperineal resection (APR) compared with low anterior resection (LAR) in lower and middle rectal cancer.MethodsIn this retrospective study, 153 patients with newly histologically proven rectal adenocarcinoma located at low and middle third that were treated between 2004 and 2010 at a tertiary hospital. The tumors were pathologically staged according to the 7th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system. Surgery was applied for 138 (90%) of the patients, of which 96 (70%) underwent LAR and 42 were (30%) treated with APR. Total mesorectal excision was performed for all patients. In addition, 125 patients (82%) received concurrent (neoadjuvant, adjuvant or palliative) pelvic chemoradiation, and 134 patients (88%) received neoadjuvant, adjuvant or concurrent chemotherapy. Patients' follow-up ranged from 4 to 156 (median 37) months.ResultsOf 153 patients, 89 were men and 64 were women with a median age of 57 years. One patient (0.7%) was stage 0, 15 (9.8%) stage I, 63 (41.2%) stage II, 51 (33.3%) stage III and 23 (15%) stage IV. There was a significant difference between LAR and APR in terms of tumor distance from anal verge, disease stage and combined modality therapy used. However, there was no significant difference regarding 5-year local control, disease free and overall survival rates between LAR and APR.ConclusionLAR can provide comparable local control, disease free and overall survival rates compared with APR in eligible patients with lower and middle rectal cancer.Copyright © 2013. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V.

36 keywords...

hide…