• Dis. Colon Rectum · Jan 2012

    Comparative Study

    Factors associated with oncologic outcomes after abdominoperineal resection compared with restorative resection for low rectal cancer: patient- and tumor-related or technical factors only?

    • Avraham Reshef, Ian Lavery, and Ravi P Kiran.
    • Department of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
    • Dis. Colon Rectum. 2012 Jan 1; 55 (1): 51-8.

    BackgroundPrevious reports suggest that patients with rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection have worse oncologic outcomes in comparison with those undergoing restorative rectal resection.ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess factors influencing oncologic outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer.DesignThis study is a retrospective review of prospectively gathered data.SettingData were gathered from a prospective cancer database.PatientsPatients were included who underwent radical resection for mid and lower third rectal cancer (1991-2006).Main Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcomes measured were the impact of various factors on perioperative outcomes, local recurrence, and disease-free survival for patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection.ResultsFour hundred thirteen (29%) patients underwent abdominoperineal resection and 993 (71%) underwent restorative resection for rectal cancer. Patients with abdominoperineal resection were older (p < 0.0001), had a higher mean ASA score (p < 0.001), worse tumor differentiation (p < 0.001), and higher tumor stage (p = 0.0001). Although overall morbidity was lower in the abdominoperineal resection group (p = 0.001), the length of stay was greater (p < 0.001). After a similar period of follow-up (5.2 ± 3.9 vs 5.3 ± 3.4 y, p = 0.58), local recurrence (7% vs 3%, p = 0.02) was higher after abdominoperineal resection, but overall survival (56% vs 71%, p < 0.001) and disease-free survival (54% vs 70%, p < 0.001) were lower. On multivariate analysis, higher stage, poor tumor differentiation, involved margins, and older age were associated with worse survival, whereas higher stage, poor tumor differentiation, and abdominoperineal resection were associated with greater recurrence. These worse oncologic outcomes persisted even when the groups were stratified based on the location of the cancer in mid or distal rectum and for patients with a clear circumferential margin.LimitationThis study was limited by its retrospective nature.ConclusionTechnical factors alone are unlikely to be responsible for the worse outcomes after abdominoperineal resection in comparison with restorative resection. A combination of patient- and tumor-related factors that may have indicated the choice of the procedure also probably contribute to the worse outcomes. Because patients undergoing abdominoperineal resection represent a high risk for poor outcomes, management strategies need to consider all these factors during treatment.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…