title: Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection revisited: are there any health-related benefits? A comparative study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Laparoscopic colectomy is associated with less overall morbidity and improved survival for patients with colonic cancers. There are unfortunately limited clinical reports on laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. We therefore designed this study to compare laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with conventional open surgery, with emphasis on health-related issues from the patients' perspective in order to justify its role in the management of low rectal or anal canal tumours.
  
  
  METHODS
  We carried out a non-randomized, prospective comparative study on a cohort of patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open abdominoperineal resection between March 1994 and December 2003. Patient demographics, tumour characteristics, operative morbidity and mortality, as well as overall survival were considered. The standard endpoints of last follow-up date and deaths were used. Data was analyzed according to intention-to-treat principle.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 102 patients were recruited: 31 patients underwent conventional open abdominoperineal resection (OAPR) and 71 patients were treated laparoscopically. Patient demographics, median follow-up period, as well as tumour characteristics were similar between groups. The median operating time was similar among groups (145 min in laparoscopic group vs. 156 min in open group; p=0.62). Patients in the laparoscopic group had significantly less blood loss (p=0.01) and fewer requirements for blood transfusion (p=0.01). Despite similar overall morbidity, the laparoscopic group had a reduced incidence of abdominal wound infections (p=0.01) and chest infections (p=0.01). Overall survival was significantly better in the laparoscopic group (p=0.01).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection confers definite health-related benefits the over open approach in terms of reduced septic complications and fewer requirements for blood transfusion. It should be considered the procedure of choice for patients with low rectal or anal canal tumour in whom sphincter excision proved inevitable.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital, 3 Lok Man Road, Chai Wan, Hong Kong SAR. dct_wong@yahoo.com
authors.forename: D C T
authors.initials: DC
authors.lastname: Wong
authors.forename: C C
authors.initials: CC
authors.lastname: Chung
authors.forename: E S W
authors.initials: ES
authors.lastname: Chan
authors.forename: A S Y
authors.initials: AS
authors.lastname: Kwok
authors.forename: W W C
authors.initials: WW
authors.lastname: Tsang
authors.forename: M K W
authors.initials: MK
authors.lastname: Li
mesh_terms: D000005:Abdomen / Q000601:surgery; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D013505:Digestive System Surgical Procedures / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010502:Perineum / Q000601:surgery; D011446:Prospective Studies; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D016019:Survival Analysis; D016896:Treatment Outcome