4.6 Article

The oncological safety of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation for rectal carcinoma

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-004-2228-x

Keywords

laparoscopy; total mesorectal excision; rectal carcinoma; sphincter preservation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Although experience of laparoscopic treatment of rectal carcinoma has been reported, there is no evidence of its oncological safety because most procedures included partial mesorectal excision or abdominoperineal excision and quality of surgery is lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the oncological results of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation for rectal carcinoma. Methods: From 2000 to 2003, 144 patients underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal adenocarcinoma. There were 88 men and 56 women, with a median age of 65 years. The tumor was located at 5.5 cm (range 1-12) from the anal verge and was classified uTIT2 in 25 cases and uT3 in 119 cases. One hundred twenty patients received preoperative radiotherapy. Results: Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 1% and 34% respectively. Conversion was 14% (n 20). Macroscopic assessment of the specimen (n 92) showed an intact mesorectum in 88% of the cases. The distal margin and the circumferential margin were safe in 98% and 94% of the cases, respectively. A complete microscopic excision, i.e., RO resection, was achieved in 134 cases (93%). Pathological data were similar to those of an open match group. With a median follow-up of 18 months, there was no port-site recurrence and two patients had local recurrence (1.4%). The 3-year overall and disease- free survival rates were 89% and 77%, respectively. Conclusions: A high quality of surgical excision can be achieved by the laparoscopic dissection, suggesting that this approach in treatment of rectal carcinoma is oncologically safe.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available