Abstract

PurposeDetermine differences in pathologic outcomes between laparoscopic (LAP) and open surgery (OPEN) for mid and low rectal cancer and its influence in long-term oncological outcomes.MethodsRetrospective case matched study at a tertiary institution. Adults with rectal cancer below 12 cm from the anal verge operated between January 2005 and September 2018 were included. Primary outcomes were quality of specimen, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence (LR).ResultsThe study included 311 patients, LAP = 108 (34.7%), OPEN = 203 (65,3%). A successful resection was accomplished in 81% of the LAP group and in 84.5% of the OPEN (p = 0.505). No differences in free distal margin (LAP = 100%, OPEN = 97.5%; p = 0.156) or circumferential resection margin (LAP = 95.2%, OPEN = 93.2%; p = 0.603) were observed. However, mesorectum quality was incomplete in 16.2% for LAP and in 8.1% for OPEN (p = 0.048). OS was 91.1% for LAP and 81.1% for OPEN (p = 0.360). DFS was 81.4% for LAP and 77.5% for OPEN (p = 0.923). Overall, LR was 2.3% without differences between groups.ConclusionsLaparoscopic approach could affect the quality of surgical specimen due to technical aspects. However, if principles of surgical oncology are respected, minor pathologic differences in the quality of the mesorectum may not influence on the long-term oncologic outcomes.

Highlights

  • IntroductionOutcomes have improved significantly in the last decades since Heald described the principles of total mesorectal resection [1]

  • Surgical resection remains the treatment of choice for rectal cancer

  • There were two cases lost to Outcomes after propensity score matching

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Outcomes have improved significantly in the last decades since Heald described the principles of total mesorectal resection [1]. This change in surgical technique allowed a decrease in local recurrence (LR) and functional results improvement. The multidisciplinary management has been another essential aspect that has improved the treatment of these patients. In this sense, the role of the pathologist auditing the quality of the surgical specimen is highly relevant. The quality of the mesorectum, the circumferential resection margin (CRM), and distal margin (DM) determine the oncological results such as overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS), and LR [2]

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call