{"title":"Short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched cohort study.","authors":"Jinzhu Zhang, Fei Huang, Ruilong Niu, Shiwen Mei, Jichuan Quan, Gang Hu, Bo Li, Meng Zhuang, Wei Guo, Xishan Wang, Jianqiang Tang","doi":"10.1007/s10151-024-02977-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Radical surgery remains the primary option for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) as it has the potential to considerably extend the patient's lifespan. At present, the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for LRRC remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The clinical data of patients with LRRC who were admitted to the Cancer Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences between 2015 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed in this study. Patients were categorized into two groups, namely the open group and the laparoscopic group, based on the surgical method used. Propensity score matching was used to reduce baseline differences. The short-term outcomes and long-term survival between the two groups were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Curative surgery was performed on 111 patients who were diagnosed with LRRC. After propensity score matching, a total of 80 patients were included and divided into the laparoscopic group (40 patients) and the open group (40 patients). The laparoscopic group had less intraoperative bleeding (100 vs. 300, P = 0.011), a lower postoperative complication rate (20.0% vs. 42.5%, P = 0.030), a lower incidence of wound infection (0 vs. 15.0%, P = 0.026), and a shorter time to first flatus (2 vs. 3, P = 0.005). The laparoscopic group had higher 3-year overall survival (85.4% vs. 57.5%, P = 0.016) and 3-year disease-free survival (63.9% vs 36.5%, P = 0.029).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In comparison to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery is linked to less bleeding during the operation, quicker recovery after the surgery, and a lower incidence of infections at the surgical site. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery for LRRC might yield superior long-term survival outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":51192,"journal":{"name":"Techniques in Coloproctology","volume":"28 1","pages":"100"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques in Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-024-02977-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Radical surgery remains the primary option for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) as it has the potential to considerably extend the patient's lifespan. At present, the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for LRRC remains unclear.
Methods: The clinical data of patients with LRRC who were admitted to the Cancer Hospital of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences between 2015 and 2021 were retrospectively analyzed in this study. Patients were categorized into two groups, namely the open group and the laparoscopic group, based on the surgical method used. Propensity score matching was used to reduce baseline differences. The short-term outcomes and long-term survival between the two groups were compared.
Results: Curative surgery was performed on 111 patients who were diagnosed with LRRC. After propensity score matching, a total of 80 patients were included and divided into the laparoscopic group (40 patients) and the open group (40 patients). The laparoscopic group had less intraoperative bleeding (100 vs. 300, P = 0.011), a lower postoperative complication rate (20.0% vs. 42.5%, P = 0.030), a lower incidence of wound infection (0 vs. 15.0%, P = 0.026), and a shorter time to first flatus (2 vs. 3, P = 0.005). The laparoscopic group had higher 3-year overall survival (85.4% vs. 57.5%, P = 0.016) and 3-year disease-free survival (63.9% vs 36.5%, P = 0.029).
Conclusions: In comparison to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery is linked to less bleeding during the operation, quicker recovery after the surgery, and a lower incidence of infections at the surgical site. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery for LRRC might yield superior long-term survival outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Techniques in Coloproctology is an international journal fully devoted to diagnostic and operative procedures carried out in the management of colorectal diseases. Imaging, clinical physiology, laparoscopy, open abdominal surgery and proctoperineology are the main topics covered by the journal. Reviews, original articles, technical notes and short communications with many detailed illustrations render this publication indispensable for coloproctologists and related specialists. Both surgeons and gastroenterologists are represented on the distinguished Editorial Board, together with pathologists, radiologists and basic scientists from all over the world. The journal is strongly recommended to those who wish to be updated on recent developments in the field, and improve the standards of their work.
Manuscripts submitted for publication must contain a statement to the effect that all human studies have been reviewed by the appropriate ethics committee and have therefore been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in an appropriate version of the 1965 Declaration of Helsinki. It should also be stated clearly in the text that all persons gave their informed consent prior to their inclusion in the study. Details that might disclose the identity of the subjects under study should be omitted. Reports of animal experiments must state that the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication no. 86-23 revised 1985) were followed as were applicable national laws (e.g. the current version of the German Law on the Protection of Animals). The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. Authors will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill such requirements.