4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Minimally invasive versus open pelvic exenterations for rectal cancer: a comparative analysis of perioperative and 3-year oncological outcomes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          This study compared the surgical and oncological outcomes of open and minimally invasive pelvic exenteration.

          Methods

          Patients who underwent pelvic exenterations for primary locally advanced rectal cancers with invasion of the urogenital organs (central and anterior disease) between August 2013 and September 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were categorized as undergoing open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and these groups were compared for perioperative outcomes and 3-year survival (overall, recurrence-free and local relapse-free survival). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the independent influence of approach of surgery and cancer features on recurrence-free survival (RFS).

          Results

          Of the 158 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration, 97 (61.4 per cent) had open exenterations and 61 (38.6 per cent) patients had an MIS resection (44 patients (72 per cent) using laparoscopy and 17 (28 per cent) using robotic surgery). There were 96 (60.8 per cent) total pelvic exenterations and 62 (39.2 per cent) posterior pelvic exenterations. MIS exenterations had significantly longer operative times (MIS versus open: 640 mins versus 450 mins; P < 0.001) but reduced blood loss (MIS versus open: 900 ml versus 1600 ml; P < 0.001) and abdominal wound infections (MIS versus open: 8.2 versus 17.5 per cent; P = 0.020) without a difference in hospital stay (MIS versus open: 11 versus 12 days; P = 0.620). R0 resection rates and involvement of circumferential resection margins were similar (MIS versus open: 88.5 versus 91.8 per cent, P = 0.490 and 13.1 versus 8.2 per cent, P = 0.342 respectively). At a median follow-up of 29 months, there were no differences in 3-year overall survival (MIS versus open: 79.4 versus 60.2 per cent; P = 0.251), RFS (MIS versus open: 51.9 versus 47.8 per cent; P = 0.922) or local relapse-free survival (MIS versus open: 89.7 versus 75.2 per cent; P = 0.491. On multivariable analysis, approach to surgery had no bearing on RFS, and only known distant metastasis, aggressive histology and inadequate response to neoadjuvant radiation (pathological tumour regression grade greater than 3) predicted worse RFS.

          Conclusion

          MIS exenterations documented longer procedures but resulted in less blood loss and fewer wound infections compared with open surgeries. In the setting of an experienced centre, the hospital stay, R0 resection rates and oncological outcomes at 3 years were similar to those of open exenterations.

          Abstract

          Minimally invasive exenterations are oncologically safe operations for primary rectal cancers in specialized centres, with outcomes comparable to those of open exenterations. Minimally invasive surgeries were associated with longer operative times but reduced blood loss and abdominal wound infections.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy before total mesorectal excision (TME) versus preoperative chemoradiotherapy, TME, and optional adjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer (RAPIDO): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

          Systemic relapses remain a major problem in locally advanced rectal cancer. Using short-course radiotherapy followed by chemotherapy and delayed surgery, the Rectal cancer And Preoperative Induction therapy followed by Dedicated Operation (RAPIDO) trial aimed to reduce distant metastases without compromising locoregional control.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to Open Laparotomy Among Patients Undergoing Resection for Rectal Cancer

            Robotic rectal cancer surgery is gaining popularity, but limited data are available regarding safety and efficacy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

              Compared with open resection, laparoscopic resection of rectal cancers is associated with improved short-term outcomes, but high-level evidence showing similar long-term outcomes is scarce. We aimed to compare survival outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for patients with mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BJS Open
                BJS Open
                bjsopen
                BJS Open
                Oxford University Press
                2474-9842
                October 2021
                14 September 2021
                14 September 2021
                : 5
                : 5
                : zrab074
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Colorectal Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI) , Mumbai, India
                [2 ]Department of Surgical Oncology, Manipal Comprehensive Cancer Care Centre, Kasturba Medical College, Manipal Academy of Higher Education (MAHE) , Manipal, India
                [3 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI) , Mumbai, India
                [4 ]Department of Radiology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI) , Mumbai, India
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: Department of Colorectal Surgical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute (HBNI), Dr Ernest Borges, Marg, Parel, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400012, India (e-mail: asaklani@ 123456hotmail.com )
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3295-0006
                Article
                zrab074
                10.1093/bjsopen/zrab074
                8438253
                34518872
                a00b7ce3-c5ea-4959-ace7-85b9dc4517e4
                © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com

                History
                : 27 March 2021
                : 13 July 2021
                Page count
                Pages: 8
                Categories
                Original Article
                AcademicSubjects/MED00010
                AcademicSubjects/MED00910

                Comments

                Comment on this article