• Dis. Colon Rectum · Aug 2012

    Comparative Study

    Short- and long-term outcome following laparoscopic versus open resection for carcinoma of the rectum in the multimodal setting.

    • Ilmo H Kellokumpu, Matti I Kairaluoma, Kyösti P Nuorva, Hannu J Kautiainen, and Ismo T Jantunen.
    • Department of Surgery, Central Hospital of Central Finland, Jyväskylä, Finland. Ilmo.Kellokumpu@Ksshp.Fi
    • Dis. Colon Rectum. 2012 Aug 1; 55 (8): 854-63.

    BackgroundLaparoscopic resection for rectal cancer has remained controversial because of the lack of level 1 evidence regarding oncologic safety and long-term survival.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the impact of laparoscopic versus open resection for rectal cancer on clinical and oncologic outcome in the multimodal setting.DesignThis is a review of prospectively gathered data from a single-institution rectal cancer database.SettingsThis study was conducted in the Central Hospital of Central Finland.PatientsFrom January 1999 to December 2006, 191 selected patients were included.InterventionsOne hundred patients underwent laparoscopic resection, and 91 patients, also suitable for laparoscopic surgery, underwent open major rectal resection in the multimodal setting.Main Outcome MeasuresThe main measures of outcome were early recovery and short- and long-term morbidity; local recurrence and survival were secondary outcomes.LimitationsThis is not a randomized study.ResultsThe study groups were balanced for baseline characteristics. Conversion rate to open surgery was 22%. Laparoscopic surgery resulted in significantly less bleeding (175 mL vs 500 mL, p < 0.001), 1 day earlier recovery of normal diet (3 days vs 4 days, p = 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (7 days vs 9 days, p < 0.001). Postoperative 30-day mortality (1% vs 3%), morbidity (31% vs 43%), readmission (11% vs 15%), and reoperation (6% vs 9%) rates were similar in the 2 groups, but significantly fewer patients in the laparoscopic group had long-term complications (19% vs 36%, p = 0.033). The 5-year disease-free survival (78% vs 80%, p = 0.74) and local recurrence (5% vs 6%, p = 0.66) rates were similar in the laparoscopic and open group for those 175 patients treated for cure.ConclusionLaparoscopic surgery resulted in faster postoperative recovery and fewer long-term complications than open surgery without apparently compromising the long-term oncologic outcome. Our results indicate that laparoscopic rectal resection is an acceptable alternative to open surgery in selected patients with rectal cancer.

      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…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.