title: Laparoscopic versus open techniques in rectal cancer surgery: a retrospective analysis of 121 sphincter-saving procedures in a single institution.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  There are few reports that show that laparoscopic rectal surgery for rectal cancer had similar oncological results based on short-term benefits. The purpose of this study was to analyze our institutional short- and long-term results in laparoscopic rectal surgery and to compare these results with that reported in the literature.
  
  
  METHODS
  The records of 121 patients who underwent sphincter-saving procedure for rectal cancer were reviewed. The variables analyzed included possible factors causing morbidity, anastomotic leak, and recurrence rate in the laparoscopic and open techniques. Multivariable analyses were used to determine relationship between variables. Survival curves were determined by using the Kaplan-Meier method.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision or partial mesorectal excision was performed in 97 patients (group 1). Twenty-four patients had open procedure (group 2). The conversion rate from laparoscopic to open technique was 10.3% (n=10). The overall postoperative morbidity and anastomotic leak rates were 33.4% and 14.8%, respectively. There was no statistical difference in terms of postoperative morbidity (p=0.177) and anastomotic leak (p=0.216) between the two groups. Old age was an independent predictor for postoperative morbidity, and downstaging was an independent predictor for anastomotic leak with a sixfold increased risk. Complete downstaging to stage 0 showed a lower overall 5-year survival rate compared with non-downstaged stage I patients (79% vs. 100%). The overall local recurrence rate was 6%. There was one port site metastasis (0.8%). There were two (1.7%) postoperative deaths in group 1. The overall 5-year patient and disease-free survivals were 64% and 74%, respectively, and there was no difference between groups 1 and 2 (p=0.801).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Laparoscopic sphincter-saving rectal resection for rectal cancer shows good long-term results. However, it has no advantage in terms of short-term benefits compared with the open procedure. Further studies are needed to validate the effect of downstaging on anastomotic leaks.
authors.affiliation: Department of Abdominal Surgery, St. Joseph Hospital (GHdC), Rue de la Duchère 6, 6060, Charleroi, Gilly, Belgium.
authors.forename: Hwai-Ding
authors.initials: HD
authors.lastname: Lam
authors.forename: Mauro
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Stefano
authors.forename: Tri
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Tran-Ba
authors.forename: Nicolas
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Tinton
authors.forename: Emmanuel
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Cambier
authors.forename: Benoit
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Navez
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001003:Anal Canal; D000714:Anastomosis, Surgical; D015331:Cohort Studies; D018572:Disease-Free Survival; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D053208:Kaplan-Meier Estimate; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods* / Q000401:mortality; D007813:Laparotomy / Q000379:methods*; D016015:Logistic Models; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D009364:Neoplasm Recurrence, Local / Q000401:mortality / Q000473:pathology*; D009367:Neoplasm Staging; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000401:mortality / Q000503:physiopathology; D011351:Proctoscopy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D011379:Prognosis; D012004:Rectal Neoplasms / Q000401:mortality / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D018570:Risk Assessment; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D016019:Survival Analysis; D016896:Treatment Outcome