论文部分内容阅读
AIM: To evaluate the 5-year survival after laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer.METHODS:This study enrolled 406 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2009[laparoscopic rectal resection(LRR),n=152;open rectal resection(ORR),n=254].Clinical characteristics,operative outcomes,pathological outcomes,postoperative recovery,and 5-year survival outcomes were compared between the two groups.RESULTS:Most of the clinical characteristics were similar except age(59 years vs 55 years,P=0.033)between the LRR group and ORR group.The proportion of anterior resection was higher in the LRR group than that in the ORR group(81.6%vs 66.1%,P=0.001).The LRR group had less estimated blood loss(50m L vs 200 m L,P<0.001)and a lower rate of blood transfusion(4.6%vs 11.8%,P=0.019)compared to the ORR group.The pathological outcomes of the two groups were comparable.The LRR group was associated with faster recovery of bowel function(2.8 d vs 3.7 d,P<0.001)and shorter postoperative hospital stay(11.7 d vs 13.7 d,P<0.001).The median followup time was 63 mo in the LRR group and 65 mo in the ORR group.As for the survival outcomes,the 5-year local recurrence rate(16.0%vs 16.4%,P=0.753),5-year disease-free survival(DFS)rate(63.0%vs63.1%,P=0.589),and 5-year overall survival(OS)rate(68.1%vs 63.5%,P=0.682)were comparable between the LRR group and the ORR group.Stageby stage,there were also no statistical differences between the LRR group and the ORR group in terms of the 5-year local recurrence rate(stageⅡ:6.3%vs 8.7%,P=0.623;stageⅢ:26.4%vs 23.2%,P=0.747),5-year DFS rate(stageⅡ:77.5%vs 77.6%,P=0.462;stageⅢ:46.5%vs 50.9%,P=0.738),and5-year OS rate(stageⅡ:81.4%vs 74.3%,P=0.242;stageⅢ:53.9%vs 54.1%,P=0.459).CONCLUSION:LRR for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer can yield comparable long-term survival while achieving short-term benefits compared to open surgery.
AIM: To evaluate the 5-year survival after laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer. METHODS: This study enrolled 406 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲrectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2009 [laparoscopic rectal resection (LRR ), n = 152; open rectal resection (ORR), n = 254]. Clinical characteristics, operative outcomes, pathological outcomes, postoperative recovery, and 5-year survival outcomes were more between the two groups. were similar except age (59 years vs 55 years, P = 0.033) between the LRR group and ORR group.The proportion of anterior resection was higher in the LRR group than that in the ORR group (81.6% vs 66.1%, P = 0.001 ). The LRR group had less estimated blood loss (50 m L versus 200 m L, P <0.001) and a lower rate of blood transfusion (4.6% vs 11.8%, P = 0.019) compared to the ORR group. Pathological outcomes of the two groups were comparable.The LRR group was associated wit h faster recovery of bowel function (2.8 d vs 3.7 d, P <0.001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (11.7 d vs 13.7 d, P <0.001). The median follow up time was 63 mo in the LRR group and 65 mo in the ORR group. As for the survival outcomes, the 5-year local recurrence rate (16.0% vs 16.4%, P = 0.753), 5-year disease-free survival ), and 5-year overall survival (OS) rate (68.1% vs 63.5%, P = 0.682) were comparable between the LRR group and the ORR group. Stage by stage, there were also no statistical differences between the LRR group and the ORR group in terms of the 5-year local recurrence rate (stage II: 6.3% vs 8.7%, P = 0.623; stage III: 26.4% vs 23.2%, P = 0.747) , P = 0.462; stage III: 46.5% vs 50.9%, P = 0.738), and 5-year OS rate (stage II: 81.4% vs 74.3%, P = 0.242; : LRR for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲrectal cancer can yield comparable long-term survival while achieving short-term benefits compared to open surgery.