TY - JOUR
T1 - Open versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Advanced Low Rectal Cancer
T2 - A Large, Multicenter, Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study in Japan
AU - Japan Society of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery
AU - Hida, Koya
AU - Okamura, Ryosuke
AU - Sakai, Yoshiharu
AU - Konishi, Tsuyoshi
AU - Akagi, Tomonori
AU - Yamaguchi, Tomohiro
AU - Akiyoshi, Takashi
AU - Fukuda, Meiki
AU - Yamamoto, Seiichiro
AU - Yamamoto, Michio
AU - Nishigori, Tatsuto
AU - Kawada, Kenji
AU - Hasegawa, Suguru
AU - Morita, Satoshi
AU - Watanabe, Masahiko
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/8/1
Y1 - 2018/8/1
N2 - Background: Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is widely performed all over the world and several randomized controlled trials have been reported. However, the usefulness of laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery has not been demonstrated sufficiently, especially for the low rectal area. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that laparoscopic primary tumor resection is safe and effective when compared with the open approach for locally advanced low rectal cancer. Patients and Methods: Data from patients with clinical stage II to III low rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection were collected and analyzed. The operations were performed from 2010 to 2011. Short-term outcomes and long-term prognosis were analyzed with propensity score matching. Results: Of 1608 cases collated from 69 institutes, 1500 cases were eligible for analysis. The cases were matched into 482 laparoscopic and 482 open cases. The mean height of the tumor from the anal verge was 4.6 cm. Preoperative treatment was performed in 35% of the patients. The conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery was 5.2%. Estimated blood loss during laparoscopic surgery was significantly less than that during open surgery (90 vs 625 mL, P < 0.001). Overall, the occurrence of complications after laparoscopic surgeries was less than that after open surgeries (30.3% vs 39.2%, P = 0.005). Three-year overall survival rates were 89.9% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 86.7-92.4] and 90.4% (95% CI 87.4-92.8) in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively, and no significant difference was seen between the 2 groups. No significant difference was observed in recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the 2 groups (3-year RFS: 70.9%, 68.4 to 74.2 vs 71.8%, 67.5 to 75.7). Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery could be considered as a treatment option for advanced, low rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection, based on the short-term and long-term results of this large cohort study (UMIN-ID: UMIN000013919).
AB - Background: Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is widely performed all over the world and several randomized controlled trials have been reported. However, the usefulness of laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery has not been demonstrated sufficiently, especially for the low rectal area. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that laparoscopic primary tumor resection is safe and effective when compared with the open approach for locally advanced low rectal cancer. Patients and Methods: Data from patients with clinical stage II to III low rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection were collected and analyzed. The operations were performed from 2010 to 2011. Short-term outcomes and long-term prognosis were analyzed with propensity score matching. Results: Of 1608 cases collated from 69 institutes, 1500 cases were eligible for analysis. The cases were matched into 482 laparoscopic and 482 open cases. The mean height of the tumor from the anal verge was 4.6 cm. Preoperative treatment was performed in 35% of the patients. The conversion rate from laparoscopic to open surgery was 5.2%. Estimated blood loss during laparoscopic surgery was significantly less than that during open surgery (90 vs 625 mL, P < 0.001). Overall, the occurrence of complications after laparoscopic surgeries was less than that after open surgeries (30.3% vs 39.2%, P = 0.005). Three-year overall survival rates were 89.9% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 86.7-92.4] and 90.4% (95% CI 87.4-92.8) in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively, and no significant difference was seen between the 2 groups. No significant difference was observed in recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the 2 groups (3-year RFS: 70.9%, 68.4 to 74.2 vs 71.8%, 67.5 to 75.7). Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery could be considered as a treatment option for advanced, low rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection, based on the short-term and long-term results of this large cohort study (UMIN-ID: UMIN000013919).
KW - laparoscopic surgery
KW - multicenter
KW - propensity score matching
KW - rectal cancer
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021048441&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021048441&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002329
DO - 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002329
M3 - Article
C2 - 28628565
AN - SCOPUS:85021048441
SN - 0003-4932
VL - 268
SP - 318
EP - 324
JO - Annals of Surgery
JF - Annals of Surgery
IS - 2
ER -