腹会阴切除与保留括约肌技术治疗低位直肠癌后的功能结局和患者满意度:一项回顾性单中心研究。

IF 0.8 Q4 SURGERY
Chirurgia Pub Date : 2025-07-01 DOI:10.21614/chirurgia.3152
Andrei Chitul, Emilica Ciofic, Traean Burcoş, Daniel Cristian, Florin Grama
{"title":"腹会阴切除与保留括约肌技术治疗低位直肠癌后的功能结局和患者满意度:一项回顾性单中心研究。","authors":"Andrei Chitul, Emilica Ciofic, Traean Burcoş, Daniel Cristian, Florin Grama","doi":"10.21614/chirurgia.3152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> In rectal cancer surgery, maintaining a balance between oncologic control and postoperative quality of life is critical. Sphincter-preserving procedures may offer better functional outcomes, but results vary depending on the technique used. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective, observational, single-center study included 62 patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum =5 cm from the anal verge, operated between August 2022 and August 2024. All received standard neoadjuvant therapy. Patients underwent one of three procedures: abdominoperineal resection, standard coloanal anastomosis, or delayed coloanal anastomosis (Turnbull-Cutait). Functional outcomes were assessed using LARS and St Marks scores at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Satisfaction was evaluated via telephone interviews. <b>Results:</b> Seventeen patients underwent abdominoperineal resection, 10 received standard coloanal anastomosis, and 35 underwent the delayed technique. Standard anastomosis yielded significantly better continence scores than the Turnbull-Cutait group. Patients with abdominoperineal resection had higher rates of pulmonary complications and prolonged inflammation. At one year, 80% of patients reported satisfaction with the procedure. Conclusion: All techniques can provide high satisfaction, but standard coloanal anastomosis appears to offer superior functional outcomes. Surgical decision-making should be individualized and based on thorough informed consent.</p>","PeriodicalId":10171,"journal":{"name":"Chirurgia","volume":"120 Ahead of print","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Functional Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction after Abdominoperineal Resection versus Sphincter-Preserving Techniques for Low Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Centre Study.\",\"authors\":\"Andrei Chitul, Emilica Ciofic, Traean Burcoş, Daniel Cristian, Florin Grama\",\"doi\":\"10.21614/chirurgia.3152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> In rectal cancer surgery, maintaining a balance between oncologic control and postoperative quality of life is critical. Sphincter-preserving procedures may offer better functional outcomes, but results vary depending on the technique used. <b>Methods:</b> This retrospective, observational, single-center study included 62 patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum =5 cm from the anal verge, operated between August 2022 and August 2024. All received standard neoadjuvant therapy. Patients underwent one of three procedures: abdominoperineal resection, standard coloanal anastomosis, or delayed coloanal anastomosis (Turnbull-Cutait). Functional outcomes were assessed using LARS and St Marks scores at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Satisfaction was evaluated via telephone interviews. <b>Results:</b> Seventeen patients underwent abdominoperineal resection, 10 received standard coloanal anastomosis, and 35 underwent the delayed technique. Standard anastomosis yielded significantly better continence scores than the Turnbull-Cutait group. Patients with abdominoperineal resection had higher rates of pulmonary complications and prolonged inflammation. At one year, 80% of patients reported satisfaction with the procedure. Conclusion: All techniques can provide high satisfaction, but standard coloanal anastomosis appears to offer superior functional outcomes. Surgical decision-making should be individualized and based on thorough informed consent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10171,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chirurgia\",\"volume\":\"120 Ahead of print\",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chirurgia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21614/chirurgia.3152\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chirurgia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21614/chirurgia.3152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在直肠癌手术中,维持肿瘤控制和术后生活质量之间的平衡是至关重要的。保留括约肌的手术可能提供更好的功能结果,但结果因使用的技术而异。方法:本研究为回顾性、观察性、单中心研究,纳入2022年8月至2024年8月手术的62例距肛缘5cm的直肠腺癌患者。所有患者均接受标准新辅助治疗。患者接受三种手术中的一种:腹会阴切除术、标准结肠肛管吻合术或延迟结肠肛管吻合术(turnbull - cut)。术后1、6、12个月采用LARS和St Marks评分评估功能结局。满意度通过电话访谈进行评估。结果:腹会阴切除术17例,标准结肠肛管吻合术10例,延期吻合术35例。标准吻合组的尿失禁评分明显优于turnbull - cut组。腹会阴切除术的患者有较高的肺部并发症发生率和延长的炎症。一年后,80%的患者对手术表示满意。结论:所有技术均能提供较高的满意度,但标准结肠肛管吻合术似乎具有更好的功能效果。手术决策应个体化,并基于充分的知情同意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Functional Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction after Abdominoperineal Resection versus Sphincter-Preserving Techniques for Low Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Centre Study.

Background: In rectal cancer surgery, maintaining a balance between oncologic control and postoperative quality of life is critical. Sphincter-preserving procedures may offer better functional outcomes, but results vary depending on the technique used. Methods: This retrospective, observational, single-center study included 62 patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum =5 cm from the anal verge, operated between August 2022 and August 2024. All received standard neoadjuvant therapy. Patients underwent one of three procedures: abdominoperineal resection, standard coloanal anastomosis, or delayed coloanal anastomosis (Turnbull-Cutait). Functional outcomes were assessed using LARS and St Marks scores at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Satisfaction was evaluated via telephone interviews. Results: Seventeen patients underwent abdominoperineal resection, 10 received standard coloanal anastomosis, and 35 underwent the delayed technique. Standard anastomosis yielded significantly better continence scores than the Turnbull-Cutait group. Patients with abdominoperineal resection had higher rates of pulmonary complications and prolonged inflammation. At one year, 80% of patients reported satisfaction with the procedure. Conclusion: All techniques can provide high satisfaction, but standard coloanal anastomosis appears to offer superior functional outcomes. Surgical decision-making should be individualized and based on thorough informed consent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Chirurgia
Chirurgia Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
75
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Chirurgia is a bimonthly journal. In Chirurgia, original papers in the area of general surgery which neither appeared, nor were sent for publication in other periodicals, can be published. You can send original articles, new surgical techniques, or comprehensive general reports on surgical topics, clinical case presentations and, depending on publication space, - reviews of some articles of general interest to surgeons from other publications. Chirurgia is also a place for sharing information about the activity of various branches of the Romanian Society of Surgery, information on Congresses and Symposiums organized by the Romanian Society of Surgery and participation notes in other scientific meetings. Letters to the editor: Letters commenting on papers published in Chirurgia are welcomed. They should contain substantive ideas and commentaries supported by appropriate data, and should not exceed 2 pages. Please submit these letters to the editor through our online system.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信