Minimally invasive versus open intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer : long-term oncologic outcomes

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. e112
Author(s):  
H.C. Kim ◽  
J.K. Shin ◽  
S.H. Yun ◽  
W.Y. Lee
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung kyong Shin ◽  
Hee Cheol Kim ◽  
Woo Yong Lee ◽  
Seong Hyeon Yun ◽  
Yong Beom Cho ◽  
...  

AbstractIntersphincteric resection (ISR) is a surgical technique intended to avoid abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients diagnosed with low-lying rectal cancer. However, the oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive ISR are still controversial. We analyzed the long-term oncologic outcomes of open and minimally invasive ISR. A total of 313 rectal cancer patients who underwent ISR between 2000 and 2014 were analyzed, including 147 in the open surgery group and 166 in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group. This study also analyzed 113 patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for advanced lower rectal cancer. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences between the two groups. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was the primary end point. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MIS group (9.6 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001). Differences in overall postoperative morbidity rates between the groups were not significant; however, the rate of surgical site infection was significantly lower in the MIS group (1.2 vs. 10.9%, p < 0.001). The 5-year DFS associated with all stages combined in the matched patients were not significantly different: 75.2% in the open group vs. 64.2% in the MIS group (p = 0.214). Similar results were found in matched patients treated with nCRT, with 72.0% in the open group and 61.3% in the MIS group (p = 0.078) showing DFS. Both minimally-invasive and open ISR for rectal cancer yielded similar 5-year oncologic outcomes. MIS showed statistically significant advantages in some postoperative outcomes such as reduced surgical site infection and shorter hospital stay, and similar long-term outcomes compared with open ISR. This study also suggests that MIS after nCRT for advanced rectal cancer represents a surgical option with similar oncological results.


Author(s):  
Vicente Pla-Martí ◽  
José Martín-Arévalo ◽  
David Moro-Valdezate ◽  
Stephanie García-Botello ◽  
Leticia Pérez-Santiago ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Determine differences in pathologic outcomes between laparoscopic (LAP) and open surgery (OPEN) for mid and low rectal cancer and its influence in long-term oncological outcomes. Methods Retrospective case matched study at a tertiary institution. Adults with rectal cancer below 12 cm from the anal verge operated between January 2005 and September 2018 were included. Primary outcomes were quality of specimen, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence (LR). Results The study included 311 patients, LAP = 108 (34.7%), OPEN = 203 (65,3%). A successful resection was accomplished in 81% of the LAP group and in 84.5% of the OPEN (p = 0.505). No differences in free distal margin (LAP = 100%, OPEN = 97.5%; p = 0.156) or circumferential resection margin (LAP = 95.2%, OPEN = 93.2%; p = 0.603) were observed. However, mesorectum quality was incomplete in 16.2% for LAP and in 8.1% for OPEN (p = 0.048). OS was 91.1% for LAP and 81.1% for OPEN (p = 0.360). DFS was 81.4% for LAP and 77.5% for OPEN (p = 0.923). Overall, LR was 2.3% without differences between groups. Conclusions Laparoscopic approach could affect the quality of surgical specimen due to technical aspects. However, if principles of surgical oncology are respected, minor pathologic differences in the quality of the mesorectum may not influence on the long-term oncologic outcomes.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Yang ◽  
Jiabo Di ◽  
Ming Cui ◽  
Jiadi Xing ◽  
Chenghai Zhang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) can downstage rectal carcinoma, resulting in superior resectability, better local control and survival benefits. However, it is unclear whether patients treated with CRT and those who did not have similar outcomes at the same pathological stage. This study aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes of ypT1-3N0 mid-low rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant CRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) compared with pT1-3N0 rectal cancer immediately managed with surgery. Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 180 patients with pT1-3N0 or ypT1-3N0 rectal cancer located within 10cm from the anal edge who underwent TME between 2009 and 2015. Of these patients, 63 received neoadjuvant CRT, while 117 underwent radical proctectomy without preoperative therapy. The disease-free survival (DFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared between the two groups. Results: Within a median follow-up time of 65 months, the 5-year DFS was lower in the CRT group than the non-CRT group (74.9% vs. 92.6%, P=0.001), and the 5-year CSS presented a similar trend as well (89.6 % vs. 97.1%, P=0.054). By subgroup analysis, the difference in DFS and CSS was mainly caused by the difference between ypT3N0 and pT3N0 disease (71.1% vs. 96.1%, P<0.001 and 90.9% vs. 100%, P=0.029, respectively). However, patients with ypT1-2N0 had an analogous prognosis to those with pT1-2N0 disease (77.9% vs. 89.0%, P=0.225 and 88.1% vs. 94.2%, P=0.292, respectively). Multivariate analysis indicated that neoadjuvant CRT was not an independent predictor of DFS. Conclusion: After neoadjuvant CRT followed by TME, patients with ypT1-2N0 rectal cancer had an analogous prognosis to those with initial pT1-2N0 disease, whereas patients with ypT3N0 rectal cancer had worse prognosis compared with that of pT3N0 disease.


ISRN Surgery ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satoshi Nagayama ◽  
Waheeb Al-Kubati ◽  
Yoshiharu Sakai

Operating on low rectal cancer by performing an intersphincteric resection (ISR) with coloanal anastomosis has been adopted as an alternative to abdominoperineal excision (APE) following Schiessel et al. report in 1994, as it preserves the sphincter and avoids the need for a permanent stoma. We undertook a review of the recent literature specifically focusing on long-term oncologic and functional outcomes of ISR to evaluate whether this operation is a valid alternative to an APE. In conclusion, younger patients with T1 or T2 rectal cancers who require no preoperative therapy are ideal candidates for ISR, given that preoperative chemoradiotherapy may cause long-term severe anal dysfunction after ISR.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document