4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Patients' preferences for low rectal cancer surgery

Journal

EJSO
Volume 34, Issue 1, Pages 42-48

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2007.08.007

Keywords

rectal cancer; faecal incontinence; stoma; treatment preference; trade-off

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: To elicit surgery preferences of patients who have experience with either low anterior resection (LAR) or abdominoperineal resection (APR) and its outcomes, to support decision-making in future patients with resectable rectal cancer. Methods: One hundred and twenty-two patients were interviewed. Surgery preference was assessed in two ways. In the treatment trade-off method, the certainty of a stoma was hypothetically weighed against the risk of incontinence. In the time trade-off method, remaining life expectancy was traded off to avoid a permanent stoma or faecal incontinence. Results: To avoid APR, LAR patients accepted a much higher risk of incontinence than APR patients. In fact, 71% of the LAR patients chose LAR if they would certainly suffer monthly incontinence, and still 32% if they would certainly suffer daily incontinence. Nevertheless, APR patients would give up less remaining life years to be without a permanent stoma than LAR patients to be without monthly incontinence. Conclusions: Most patients preferred LAR above APR, even if LAR involved a risk of faecal incontinence. This seems to justify that LAR, if surgically possible, is performed in the first instance. However, since APR patients could live well with a permanent stoma, we recommend clearly informing patients before surgery about the surgical options and their potential outcomes. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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