Comparison on the short- and long-term clinical efficacy between laparoscopic and open radical resection of cectal rancer in a single centre

Abstract

Objective To discuss the surgical feasibility, oncological safety, advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer (RC) by comparing the short- and long-term clinical efficacy between laparoscopic and open surgery. Methods From January 2008 to December 2014, nine hundred and forty-nine RC cases were divided into laparoscopic group (undergoing laparoscopic radical resection) and open group (undergoing open radical resection). The basic clinical data, surgical parameters, oncological pathology indicators and the postoperation follow-up data were analyzed retrospectively. Results (1) There was no statistical difference on the basic clinical data between the laparoscopic group (394 cases) and the open group (555 cases). (2) Compared with the open group, the laparoscopic group had less surgical blood loss, preventive colostomy rate, time of fart recovery, defecation recovery and pulling out the abdominal cavity drainage tube, and took shorter time in hospital both of postoperation and the total (P<0.05). However, the laparoscopic group took more surgical time and hospitalized costs. Except for the lower incidence of surgical massive bleeding, the laparoscopic group were statistically similar to the incidence of other complications. (3) There was no statistical difference in oncology pathology indicators, tumor recurrence, disease free survival rate and overall survival rate between the two groups. (4) In the subgroup analysis by pTNM stages, the long-term survival between the two groups also had no significant difference. Conclusion The laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer is feasible and safe, with similar clinical efficacy as the open surgery. Key words: Rectal neoplasms; Laparoscopes; Laparotomy; Treatment outcome