Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Colon Cancer in Noncancer-Specific Hospital: Propensity Score Analysis.

Abstract

Background: Noninferiority of the laparoscopic approach compared with open surgery for colon cancer treatment has remained controversial. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery (LS) versus open surgery (OPS). Methods: A total of 418 patients with Stage I-III colon cancer, who received radical surgery at the Tokyo Medical University Hospital from 2000 to 2014 were included. Propensity score analysis with overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) as the primary endpoints was performed retrospectively to reduce the effects of confounding factors between groups, including age, sex, body mass index, tumor size, clinical T stage, and clinical N stage. Results: After case matching, the 5-year OS rate was 87.8% in the OPS group (n = 97) and 90.1% in the LS group (n = 97; P = .59), indicating no significant difference. The 5-year RFS rate was 79.0% in the OPS group (n = 97) and 84.1% in the LS group (n = 97; P = .29), indicating no significant difference. Five-year cumulative local recurrence (LR) rates were 7.6% and 0% in the OPS group and the LS group, respectively, indicating a significant difference (P = .007). Five-year cumulative distant metastasis rates were 9.2% and 12.7% in the OPS group and the LS group, respectively (P = .49). Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery appears to be a reasonable option with similar long-term outcomes and to have low LR rate to open surgery in colon cancer patients.