{"title":"Application of modified extralevator abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer resection","authors":"Xiang Zhang, Xin Li, Qingdi Qin, Yanlei Wang","doi":"10.1007/s00464-024-11246-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Background</h3><p>Laparoscopic ELAPE surgery has been carried out in our center for a long time, and some modifications have been made in clinical practice. In this study, we compared conventional ELAPE operation with modified ELAPE operation to investigate the efficacy and safety of modified ELAPE operation.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>We retrospectively analyzed the data from 339 patients with low rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection from 2017 to 2021 in the Department of General Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University. Patients were classified into modified ELAPE groups (199 patients) and conventional ELAPE groups (140 patients). Total operation time, reconstruction time, postoperative hospital stay, total cost, intraoperative data, postoperative short-term and long-term complications and tumor recurrence were compared.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Total operation time was less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (190.6 ± 33.1 min vs 230.1 ± 51.6 min, <i>P</i> = 0.022). Pelvic floor reconstruction time was also less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (4.3 ± 1.2 min vs 11.9 ± 1.7 min, <i>P</i> = 0.004). Positive CRM was observed in 11 and 9 patients in modified ELAPE groups and conventional ELAPE groups (<i>P</i> = 0.744). IOP occurred in 12 and 7 patients in modified ELAPE group and conventional ELAPE group (<i>P</i> = 0.701). Total cost was also less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (9004 ± 1146 USD vs 10,336 ± 2047 USD, <i>P</i> = 0.031). The incidence of parastomal hernia was less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (7/199 vs 22/140, <i>P</i> < 0.001). Three-year follow-up data did not show any difference in overall survival rate or local occurrence between the two groups.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Modified ELAPE surgery is technically safe and feasible, and oncologically comparable to that of conventional ELAPE surgery, which can be considered for popularization and application.</p>","PeriodicalId":501625,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy","volume":"11 11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11246-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Laparoscopic ELAPE surgery has been carried out in our center for a long time, and some modifications have been made in clinical practice. In this study, we compared conventional ELAPE operation with modified ELAPE operation to investigate the efficacy and safety of modified ELAPE operation.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed the data from 339 patients with low rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection from 2017 to 2021 in the Department of General Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University. Patients were classified into modified ELAPE groups (199 patients) and conventional ELAPE groups (140 patients). Total operation time, reconstruction time, postoperative hospital stay, total cost, intraoperative data, postoperative short-term and long-term complications and tumor recurrence were compared.
Results
The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Total operation time was less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (190.6 ± 33.1 min vs 230.1 ± 51.6 min, P = 0.022). Pelvic floor reconstruction time was also less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (4.3 ± 1.2 min vs 11.9 ± 1.7 min, P = 0.004). Positive CRM was observed in 11 and 9 patients in modified ELAPE groups and conventional ELAPE groups (P = 0.744). IOP occurred in 12 and 7 patients in modified ELAPE group and conventional ELAPE group (P = 0.701). Total cost was also less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (9004 ± 1146 USD vs 10,336 ± 2047 USD, P = 0.031). The incidence of parastomal hernia was less with modified ELAPE group compared to conventional ELAPE group (7/199 vs 22/140, P < 0.001). Three-year follow-up data did not show any difference in overall survival rate or local occurrence between the two groups.
Conclusion
Modified ELAPE surgery is technically safe and feasible, and oncologically comparable to that of conventional ELAPE surgery, which can be considered for popularization and application.