<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><bold>Objective:</bold> To evaluate and compare laparoscopic and conventional open rectum amputation procedures using clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological criteria.<bold>Methods:</bold> Fifty-nine patients with lower rectal and anorectal cancer were included in a retrospective study, conducted between 2014 and 2017. Patients underwent open or laparoscopic rectum amputation surgery and were divided into two groups: group 1 – laparoscopic amputation group (LAG) and group 2 – open amputation group (OAG). The clinical, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes and oncological results were compared between the two groups.<bold>Results:</bold> We found a significantly smaller intraoperative blood loss (325 mL vs. 538.29 mL, p = 0.0002), earlier return of bowel motility (2.41 days vs. 3.10 days, p = 0.036), shorter hospital stays (10.08 days vs. 12.66 days, p = 0.03), and a higher number of lymph nodes removed during surgery (12.33 nodes for LAG vs. 9.98 nodes for OAG, p = 0.049). In the open surgery group we found shorter durations of surgery (199.58 minutes for LAG vs. 157.87 minutes for OAG, p = 0.0046).<bold>Conclusion:</bold> Laparoscopic rectum amputation is a technically demanding procedure. The present study demonstrates the benefits and disadvantages of this surgery, with comparable clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological results compared to the conventional open rectum amputation procedure.</abstract>

Objective: To evaluate and compare laparoscopic and conventional open rectum amputation procedures using clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological criteria.Methods: Fifty-nine patients with lower rectal and anorectal cancer were included in a retrospective study, conducted between 2014 and 2017. Patients underwent open or laparoscopic rectum amputation surgery and were divided into two groups: group 1 – laparoscopic amputation group (LAG) and group 2 – open amputation group (OAG). The clinical, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes and oncological results were compared between the two groups.Results: We found a significantly smaller intraoperative blood loss (325 mL vs. 538.29 mL, p = 0.0002), earlier return of bowel motility (2.41 days vs. 3.10 days, p = 0.036), shorter hospital stays (10.08 days vs. 12.66 days, p = 0.03), and a higher number of lymph nodes removed during surgery (12.33 nodes for LAG vs. 9.98 nodes for OAG, p = 0.049). In the open surgery group we found shorter durations of surgery (199.58 minutes for LAG vs. 157.87 minutes for OAG, p = 0.0046).Conclusion: Laparoscopic rectum amputation is a technically demanding procedure. The present study demonstrates the benefits and disadvantages of this surgery, with comparable clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological results compared to the conventional open rectum amputation procedure.

Laparoscopic Versus Conventional Open Rectum Amputation: a Clinical, Intraoperative, and Short-term Outcome Comparative Study

Journal of Interdisciplinary Medicine

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Objective: To evaluate and compare laparoscopic and conventional open rectum amputation procedures using clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, and...

Laparoscopic Versus Conventional Open Rectum Amputation: a Clinical, Intraoperative, and Short-term Outcome Comparative Study

Online veröffentlicht: 19. Dez. 2018

Seitenbereich: 98 - 101

Eingereicht: 20. Mai 2018

Akzeptiert: 12. Juni 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jim-2018-0017

Schlüsselwörter
rectal tumor, laparoscopic, open, rectum amputation, oncologic

© 2018 Előd Etele Élthes et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Laparoscopic Versus Conventional Open Rectum Amputation: a Clinical, Intraoperative, and Short-term Outcome Comparative Study

Online veröffentlicht: 19. Dez. 2018

Seitenbereich: 98 - 101

Eingereicht: 20. Mai 2018

Akzeptiert: 12. Juni 2018

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jim-2018-0017

Schlüsselwörterrectal tumor, laparoscopic, open, rectum amputation, oncologic

© 2018 Előd Etele Élthes et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Schlüsselwörter
rectal tumor, laparoscopic, open, rectum amputation, oncologic