J Minim Invasive Surg 2009; 12(2): 96-101
Published online December 15, 2009
© The Korean Society of Endo-Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgery
서재범ㆍ최규석ㆍ임경훈ㆍ조민정1ㆍ장유석ㆍ박준석ㆍ전수한
경북대학교 의학전문대학원 외과학교실, 1서부연합외과
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Purpose: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) has been regarded as the standard procedure for the treatment of distal rectal cancer since Miles first described it in 1908. But because of the better understanding of the patterns of spreading tumor, the pelvic physiology, the development of stapling devices and introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME), the rate of sphincter preserving surgery has been increasing. The aim of this study is to compare the oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic APR and ultra-low anterior resection with hand- sewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA) for treating distal rectal cancer.
Methods: Between January 2003 and October 2007, 95 patients who were followed up for more than 2 years after curative laparoscopic APR or CAA for distal rectal cancer were included in this study. The clinical characteristics, pathologic findings, postoperative complications and oncologic results were retrospectively analyzed.
Results: There were 31 APRs and 64 CAAs. The median follow-up period was 43 (5∼79) months. The mean distance between the lower margin of the tumor and the anal verge was 2.1±1.2 cm in APR and 3.7±1.4 cm in CAA (p<0.001). There were 2 (6.5%) local recurrences and 8 (25.8%) systemic recurrences after APR and 3 (4.7%) local recurrences and 10 (15.6%) systemic recurrences after CAA, respectively (p=0.641, p=0.161). The 3-year disease-specific survival rate was 86.7% in APR and 93.5% in CAA (p=0.407). The 3-year disease free survival rate was 73.7% in APR and 80.1% in CAA (p=0.161) but there were no significant differences in the oncologic results according to the stages between the two groups.
Conclusion: The operative procedures are changing toward sphincter preservation. Laparoscopic ultra-low anterior resection and hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis is oncologically as safe as laparoscopic APR for treating lower rectal cancer. However, APR should be considered the standard treatment for distal rectal cancer when it invades the anal sphincter or the levator ani.
Keywords Rectal cancer, Abdominoperineal resection, Coloanal anastomosis, Oncologic outcomes, Laparoscopy
J Minim Invasive Surg 2009; 12(2): 96-101
Published online December 15, 2009
Copyright © The Korean Society of Endo-Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgery.
서재범ㆍ최규석ㆍ임경훈ㆍ조민정1ㆍ장유석ㆍ박준석ㆍ전수한
경북대학교 의학전문대학원 외과학교실, 1서부연합외과
Jae-Beom Seo, M.D., Gyu-Seog Choi, M.D., Kyoung-Hoon Lim, M.D., Min-Jung Jo, M.D.1, You-Seok Jang, M.D., Jun-Seok Park, M.D., Soo-Han Jun, M.D.
Department of Surgery, Kyungpook National University School of Medicine, 1Department of Surgery, Seobu Clinic, Daegu, Korea
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Purpose: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) has been regarded as the standard procedure for the treatment of distal rectal cancer since Miles first described it in 1908. But because of the better understanding of the patterns of spreading tumor, the pelvic physiology, the development of stapling devices and introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME), the rate of sphincter preserving surgery has been increasing. The aim of this study is to compare the oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic APR and ultra-low anterior resection with hand- sewn coloanal anastomosis (CAA) for treating distal rectal cancer.
Methods: Between January 2003 and October 2007, 95 patients who were followed up for more than 2 years after curative laparoscopic APR or CAA for distal rectal cancer were included in this study. The clinical characteristics, pathologic findings, postoperative complications and oncologic results were retrospectively analyzed.
Results: There were 31 APRs and 64 CAAs. The median follow-up period was 43 (5∼79) months. The mean distance between the lower margin of the tumor and the anal verge was 2.1±1.2 cm in APR and 3.7±1.4 cm in CAA (p<0.001). There were 2 (6.5%) local recurrences and 8 (25.8%) systemic recurrences after APR and 3 (4.7%) local recurrences and 10 (15.6%) systemic recurrences after CAA, respectively (p=0.641, p=0.161). The 3-year disease-specific survival rate was 86.7% in APR and 93.5% in CAA (p=0.407). The 3-year disease free survival rate was 73.7% in APR and 80.1% in CAA (p=0.161) but there were no significant differences in the oncologic results according to the stages between the two groups.
Conclusion: The operative procedures are changing toward sphincter preservation. Laparoscopic ultra-low anterior resection and hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis is oncologically as safe as laparoscopic APR for treating lower rectal cancer. However, APR should be considered the standard treatment for distal rectal cancer when it invades the anal sphincter or the levator ani.
Keywords: Rectal cancer, Abdominoperineal resection, Coloanal anastomosis, Oncologic outcomes, Laparoscopy
Kwang Hyun Kim, Eui Hyuk Chong, Incheon Kang, Sung Hwan Lee, Seok Jeong Yang
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery 2024; 27(2): 118-124Thanat Tantinam, Tawadchai Treeratanawikran, Pattiya Kamoncharoen, Ekawit Srimaneerak, Metpiya Siripoonsap, Thawatchai Phoonkaew
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery 2024; 27(2): 85-94Sung Seo Hwang, Heung-Kwon Oh, Hye-Rim Shin, Tae-Gyun Lee, Mi Jeong Choi, Min Hyeong Jo, Hong-min Ahn, Hyeonjeong Park, Hyun Hee Sim, Eunjeong Ji, Anuj Naresh Singhi, Duck-Woo Kim, Sung-Bum Kang
Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery 2024; 27(2): 76-84