4.5 Article

Surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer

期刊

DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM
卷 48, 期 5, 页码 929-937

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1007/s10350-004-0909-0

关键词

recurrent rectal cancer; multimodal treatment; sacrectomy; circumferential resection margin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: Resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer after curative resection represents a difficult clinical problem and a surgical challenge. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of a series of patients who underwent resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer with curative intent. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of 64 patients, who underwent surgical exploration with a view to cure for locally recurrent rectal cancer under the care of one surgeon between April 1997 and April 2004. Details were obtained on the primary tumor and the operation, the indication for investigation of recurrence, preoperative imaging, operative findings, morbidity and mortality, and histopathology. RESULTS: The median time interval between resection of primary turner and surgery for locally recurrent disease was 31 (interquartile range, 21 to 48) months. Twenty-three patients had central disease, 10 patients had sacral involvement. 21 patients had pelvic sidewall involvement, and 10 patients had both sacral and sidewall involvement. Fifty-seven patients underwent resection of the tumor. Thirty-nine of the 57 patients underwent wide resection (abdominoperineal excision of rectum, anterior resection, or Hartmann's procedure) whereas 18 patients (31.6 percent) required radical resection (pelvic exenteration or sacrectomy). Curative, negative resection margins were obtained in 21 of 57 patients who had tumor excision (36.8 percent). Perioperative mortality was 1.6 percent. Significant postoperative morbidity occurred in 40 percent of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that a significant proportion of patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer can undergo resection with negative margins.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据