Extralevator abdominoperineal excision versus conventional surgery for low rectal cancer: a single surgeon experience.

G. Nessar, A. Demirbağ, B. Celep, O. Elbir, C. Kayaalp
{"title":"Extralevator abdominoperineal excision versus conventional surgery for low rectal cancer: a single surgeon experience.","authors":"G. Nessar, A. Demirbağ, B. Celep, O. Elbir, C. Kayaalp","doi":"10.5152/UCD.2016.3251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) reduces the risk of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and of intraoperative perforation (IOP), both of which are associated with high local recurrence rates and poor survival outcomes for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the results of ELAPE with conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 25 consecutive patients underwent ELAPE for low rectal cancer between November 2008 and September 2011. Fifty-six patients treated by conventional APE prior to 2008 were selected from our rectal cancer database for comparison as a historical cohort. RESULTS The mean follow-up was 44.7 months in the ELAPE group, and 70.6 months in the APE group. Patients undergoing ELAPE had a lower CRM positivity and IOP rate than APE (12% vs. 20%, p=0,531; 4% vs. 8,9%, p=0,826; respectively). The ELAPE group was associated with higher perineal wound complications than the APE group (16.0% vs. 1.8%, p=0.030). Local recurrence rates for patients in both groups did not differ significantly (4.0% vs. 3.6%, p=1.0). CONCLUSION The results of this study suggest that ELAPE technique was associated with less CRM involvement and reduced rates of IOP but markedly higher rates of postoperative perineal complications occurred as compared to conventional surgery. ELAPE must be reserved for advanced low rectal cancers.","PeriodicalId":90992,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi","volume":"5 1","pages":"244-247"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/UCD.2016.3251","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) reduces the risk of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and of intraoperative perforation (IOP), both of which are associated with high local recurrence rates and poor survival outcomes for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the results of ELAPE with conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 25 consecutive patients underwent ELAPE for low rectal cancer between November 2008 and September 2011. Fifty-six patients treated by conventional APE prior to 2008 were selected from our rectal cancer database for comparison as a historical cohort. RESULTS The mean follow-up was 44.7 months in the ELAPE group, and 70.6 months in the APE group. Patients undergoing ELAPE had a lower CRM positivity and IOP rate than APE (12% vs. 20%, p=0,531; 4% vs. 8,9%, p=0,826; respectively). The ELAPE group was associated with higher perineal wound complications than the APE group (16.0% vs. 1.8%, p=0.030). Local recurrence rates for patients in both groups did not differ significantly (4.0% vs. 3.6%, p=1.0). CONCLUSION The results of this study suggest that ELAPE technique was associated with less CRM involvement and reduced rates of IOP but markedly higher rates of postoperative perineal complications occurred as compared to conventional surgery. ELAPE must be reserved for advanced low rectal cancers.
腹会阴外提手术与传统手术治疗低位直肠癌:单个外科医生的经验。
目的:腹外展切除(ELAPE)降低了直肠癌的环切缘阳性(CRM)和术中穿孔(IOP)的风险,这两者都与直肠癌的高局部复发率和较差的生存结果有关。本研究的目的是比较ELAPE与常规腹会阴切除术(APE)治疗低位直肠癌的结果。材料与方法2008年11月至2011年9月,共25例连续低位直肠癌患者接受ELAPE治疗。从我们的直肠癌数据库中选择了56例2008年之前接受常规APE治疗的患者作为历史队列进行比较。结果ELAPE组平均随访时间为44.7个月,APE组平均随访时间为70.6个月。ELAPE患者的CRM阳性和IOP率低于APE患者(12% vs. 20%, p= 0.531;4% vs. 8.9%, p= 0.826;分别)。ELAPE组会阴伤口并发症发生率高于APE组(16.0% vs. 1.8%, p=0.030)。两组患者的局部复发率无显著差异(4.0% vs 3.6%, p=1.0)。结论:与常规手术相比,ELAPE技术与更少的CRM累及和更低的IOP发生率相关,但术后会阴并发症发生率明显更高。ELAPE必须用于晚期低位直肠癌。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信