+ Site Statistics
References:
52,572,879
Abstracts:
28,705,754
PMIDs:
27,750,366
DOIs:
25,464,004
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Rectal cancer within 10 cm. Comparison of the radicality of laparoscopic and open surgical techniques with regard to the circumferential resection margin and the completeness of mesorectal excision



Rectal cancer within 10 cm. Comparison of the radicality of laparoscopic and open surgical techniques with regard to the circumferential resection margin and the completeness of mesorectal excision



Rozhledy V Chirurgii 92(6): 312-319



The issue of achieving radical circumferential margin in laparoscopic rectal surgery has not yet been satisfactorily clarified. In this paper we have focused on circumferential margin assessment and the quality of the mesorectal excision, comparing laparoscopic and open resection for cancer of the middle and lower rectum. The results of surgical procedures for middle and low rectal cancer were analysed. All the interventions were performed at the Department of Surgery, Teaching Hospital in Hradec Kralove, during the period from January 2011 to December 2012. The data were prospectively collected and entered in the Rectal Cancer Registry. Age, gender, BMI, tumour localisation and topography, the clinical stage, preoperative chemoradiotherapy and response to it, the type of surgery, distal and circumferential margin characteristics, mesorectal excision quality, pT and pN were compared for laparoscopic and open surgery. A total of 161 patients were operated on for rectal cancer during the abovementioned period. 94 patients were included in the trial following selection. Laparoscopy was used in 40 patients and open surgery in 54 patients. Laparoscopic approach was performed in 33 (82.5%) low anterior resections (including four intersphincteric resections), 6 (15%) abdominoperineal amputations and 1 (2.5%) Hartmanns procedure. Open surgery was used for 26 (48.1%) low anterior resections, 21 (38.9%) APR and 7 (13%) Hartmanns procedures. Complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 45% of the laparoscopic resections vs. 46.3% of open resections. Nearly complete excision was performed in 22.5% and 11.1%, respectively. Finally, incomplete excision was described in 30% vs. 38.9%. No available data for TME was detected in three patients. The differences in TME were not statistically significant. Positive circumferential margin was found in 5 (12.5%) patients in the laparoscopy group; on the contrary, in the group undergoing open surgery, pCRO+ was found in 15 (27.8%) patients. Here, too, the results were not statistically significant. When patients without preoperative chemoradiotherapy were excluded, the relationship between ypCRM in the laparoscopy and open surgery group was on the border of statistical significance (Fischer=0.0556). As has been shown in our trial, the outcomes of laparoscopic and open approach in rectal cancer treatment are very similar. Particularly, mesorectal excision quality and negative CRM results have proven that the laparoscopic technique is safe and comparable to open surgery in rectal cancer treatment.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 055416677

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 23965316


Related references

The circumferential resection margins status: A comparison of robotic, laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer. European Journal of Surgical Oncology 42(6): 808-812, 2016

Quality of total mesorectal excision and depth of circumferential resection margin in rectal cancer: a matched comparison of the first 20 robotic cases. Colorectal Disease 16(8): 603-609, 2015

Comparison of the short-term outcomes in lower rectal cancer using three different surgical techniques: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TME), laparoscopic TME, and open TME. Asian Journal of Surgery: -, 2018

The radicality of surgical resection in rectal cancer. Analysis of factors associated with incomplete mesorectal excision. Rozhledy V Chirurgii 92(6): 304-310, 2015

Prognostic significance of the circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. British Journal of Surgery 89(3): 327-334, 2002

Prognostic significance of circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer. Annals of Surgical Oncology 14(2): 462-469, 2006

Higher risk of incomplete mesorectal excision and positive circumferential margin in low rectal cancer regardless of surgical technique. Wideochirurgia i Inne Techniki Maloinwazyjne 9(4): 569-577, 2015

Risk factors for circumferential R1 resection after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a study in 233 consecutive patients with mid or low rectal cancer. International Journal of Colorectal Disease 30(2): 197-203, 2015

Circumferential resection margin involvement after laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer. Colorectal Disease 14(4): 431-437, 2012

Role of total mesorectal excision and of circumferential resection margin in local recurrence and survival of patients with rectal carcinoma. Digestive Diseases 25(1): 51-55, 2007

Comparison of tumor recurrence between laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation and laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer. Surgical Endoscopy 27(9): 3452-3464, 2014

Circumferential margin involvement after mesorectal excision of rectal cancer with curative intent. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum 41(8): 979-983, 1998

Circumferential margin involvement after total mesorectal excision for mid or low rectal cancer: are all R1 resections equal?. Colorectal Disease 19(11): O377-O385, 2017

Factors related to preoperative assessment of the circumferential resection margin and the extent of mesorectal invasion by magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer: a prospective comparison study. World Journal of Surgery 33(9): 1952-1960, 2009

The circumferential margin in rectal cancer: Recommendations based on the Dutch total mesorectal excision study. European Journal of Cancer 38(7): 973-976, 2002