Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: outcomes in 194 patients and review of the literature. The oncological safety of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation for rectal carcinoma. Outcome of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer in 101 patients. Laparoscopic total mesorectum excision. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a consecutive series of 100 patients. Long-term results of laparoscopic versus open resections for rectal cancer for 124 unselected patients. Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection with coloplasty and coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal cancer. Local recurrence and survival after laparoscopic mesorectal resection forrectal adenocarcinoma. Randomized trial of surgical staging (extraperitoneal or laparoscopic) versus clinical staging in locally advanced cervical cancer.
There are few reports on laparoscopic rectum resection demonstrating its feasibility and efficacy in patients with rectal cancer. Most patient series are small, and results must be considered preliminary and medium-term. Our large prospective conducted study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a totally laparoscopic resection for rectum carcinoma with emphasis on perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes.
                Between November 1992 and July 2003, 194 unselected patients were resected laparoscopically for rectal carcinoma. Patients with locally advanced rectum carcinoma (uT3/uT4) and no evidence of distant metastases were candidates for neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Adjuvant treatment was administered to patients with UICC stage II/III disease. All patients were followed up prospectively to evaluate complications and late outcomes. Survival probability analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Study selection was made by Medline search using the following key words: rectal cancer, rectal neoplasms, laparoscopy, and resection. Single case reports and abstracts were excluded. When surgical series were reported more than once, only the most recent reports were considered and listed.
                The most common procedures were low anterior resection with total mesorectum excision in 65.5% of patients and high anterior resection in 25.3%. Average operative time was 174 min. Average number of lymph nodes removed was 25.4 and length of specimen resected was 27.6 cm. Resection was curative in 145 patients and palliative in 49 cases. UICC tumor stages were as follows: stage I: 25.2%, stage II: 27.3%, stage III: 30.4%, and stage IV: 17%. Intraoperative complications were <1% for lesions of the ureter, urinary bladder, and deferent duct. Conversion to conventional surgery was necessary in two cases (1%). The most common postoperative complication was anastomotic leakage in 13.5% of patients. There was no postoperative mortality. Follow-up evaluation ranged from 1 to 128 months with a mean of 46.1 months. The most common late complication was incisional hernia in 3.6% of patients. Port-site metastases occurred in one patient (0.5%). Tumor recurrence developed in 23 of the 145 curative resected patients (11.7% distant metastases and 4.1% local recurrence). Overall local recurrence rate was 6.7% (4.1% after curative resection and 14.3% after palliative resection). Overall survival rate was 90.6% at 1 year, 74.5% at 3 years, and 66.3% at 5 years. Overall 5-year survival rate was 76.9% after curative resection and 31.8% after palliative resection. Cancer-related survival rate was 94% at 1 year, 82.4% at 3 years, and 78.9% at 5 years. At 5 years it was 87.7% after curative resection and 48.5% after palliative resection. At 5 years, the survival rate was 100% for stage I, 94.4% for stage II, 66.6% for stage III, and 44.6% for stage IV.
                Our results and the literature review clearly demonstrate that laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer is not associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Established oncological and surgical principles are respected and long-term outcomes are at least as good as those after open surgery. Although experience of laparoscopic treatment of rectal carcinoma has been reported, there is no evidence of its oncological safety because most procedures included partial mesorectal excision or abdominoperineal excision and quality of surgery is lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the oncological results of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation for rectal carcinoma.
                From 2000 to 2003, 144 patients underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal adenocarcinoma. There were 88 men and 56 women, with a median age of 65 years. The tumor was located at 5.5 cm (range 1-12) from the anal verge and was classified uT1T2 in 25 cases and uT3 in 119 cases. One hundred twenty patients received preoperative radiotherapy.
                Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 1% and 34% respectively. Conversion was 14% (n = 20). Macroscopic assessment of the specimen (n = 92) showed an intact mesorectum in 88% of the cases. The distal margin and the circumferential margin were safe in 98% and 94% of the cases, respectively. A complete microscopic excision, i.e., R0 resection, was achieved in 134 cases (93%). Pathological data were similar to those of an open match group. With a median follow-up of 18 months, there was no port-site recurrence and two patients had local recurrence (1.4%). The 3-year overall and disease- free survival rates were 89% and 77%, respectively.
                A high quality of surgical excision can be achieved by the laparoscopic dissection, suggesting that this approach in treatment of rectal carcinoma is oncologically safe. This study was conducted to investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer and to compare early outcome data with the results of the conventional technique.
                From January 1996 to March 2002, 435 patients with primary rectal cancer were operated on at our institution. Low-risk, small rectal tumors treatable by local excision, rectal cancer recurrences, and emergency cases were excluded from the analysis. Three hundred thirty-four patients were operated on by the conventional open approach. One hundred one selected patients underwent surgery by the laparoscopic technique.
                Because of the selection process, significantly more patients with early tumor stages were operated on by laparoscopy. There were no differences in mean operation time, morbidity, mortality, or the anastomotic leakage rate; however, the need for intraoperative transfusion, mean stay in the intensive care unit, and length of hospital stay were reduced significantly.
                In terms of the intraoperative and early postoperative course, the laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer in a selected cohort of patients compares favorably with the open technique. Because follow-up time is limited to date, only very preliminary information can be given on tumor-related outcome data. However, these preliminary data appear to suggest that rectal cancer resection can be performed by laparoscopy in accordance with established principles of cancer therapy and that port-site metastases are not a relevant clinical problem. Prospective, randomized trials are required to determine whether the laparoscopic approach will play a significant role in the treatment of rectal cancer in the future. The main controversy of colon-rectal laparoscopic surgery comes from its use as a cancer treatment. Two points deserve special attention: the incidence of port-site tumor implantation and the possibility of performing radical cancer surgery, such as total mesorectum excision. Once these points are addressed, the laparoscopic approach will be used routinely to treat rectal cancer. To clarify these points, 32 patients with cancer of the lower rectum participated in a special protocol that included preoperative radiotherapy and laparoscopic total mesorectum excision. All data were recorded. At the same time, all data recorded from the experience of a multicenter laparoscopic group (Brazilian Colorectal Laparoscopic Surgeons - 130 patients with tumor of the lower rectum) were analyzed and compared with the data provided by our patients. Analysis of the results suggests that a laparoscopic approach allows the same effective resection as that of conventional surgery and that preoperative irradiation does not influence the incidence of intraoperative complications. The extent of lymph nodal excision is similar to that obtained with open surgery, with an average of 12.3 lymph nodes dissected per specimen. The rate of local recurrence was 3.12%. No port site implantation of tumor was noted in this series of patients with cancer of the lower rectum. To analyze total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer by the laparoscopic approach during a prospective nonrandomized trial.
                Improved local control and survival rates in the treatment of rectal cancer have been reported after TME.
                The authors conducted a prospective consecutive series of 100 laparoscopic TMEs for low and mid-rectal tumors. All patients had a sphincter-saving procedure. Case selection, surgical technique, and clinical and oncologic results were reviewed.
                The distal limit of rectal neoplasm was on average 6.1 (range 3-12) cm from the anal verge. The mean operative time was 250 (range 110-540) minutes. The conversion rate was 12%. Excluding the patient who stayed 104 days after a severe fistula and reoperation, the mean postoperative stay was 12.05 (range 5-53) days. The 30-day mortality was 2% and the overall postoperative morbidity was 36%, including 17 anastomotic leaks. Of 87 malignant cases, 70 (80.4%) had a minimum follow-up of 12 months, with a median follow-up of 45.7 (range 12-72) months. During this period 18.5% (13/70) died of cancer and 8.5% (6/70) are alive with metastatic disease. The port-site metastasis rate was 1.4% (1/70): a rectal cancer stage IV presented with a parietal recurrence at 17 months after surgery. The locoregional pelvic recurrence rate was 4.2% (3/70): three rectal cancers stage III at 19, 13, and 7 postoperative months.
                Laparoscopic TME is a feasible but technically demanding procedure (12% conversion rate). This series confirms the safety of the procedure, while oncologic results are at present comparable to the open published series with the limitation of a short follow-up period. Further studies and possibly randomized series will be necessary to evaluate long-term clinical outcome in cancer patients. Controversy continues to surround laparoscopic rectal resection for malignancy. A longer follow-up period is required to evaluate the long-term efficacy of the procedure and its impact on survival. Furthermore, no data from ongoing randomized controlled trials are yet available. The aims of this study were to compare long-term outcomes for unselected patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open rectal resection for cancer.
                A series of 124 unselected consecutive patients with rectal cancer, who underwent surgery by the same surgical team, have been included in this study. Patients with T1N0 tumors underwent local excision, and emergency cases were excluded from the study. Written consent was submitted by each patient, and inclusion in either group (laparoscopic or open) was left to the patient's choice. The laparoscopic approach was chosen by 81 patients, and 43 patients chose open surgery. All the patients underwent preoperative radiotherapy (5,040 cGy), performed in selected cases with chemotherapy (for patients younger than 70 years). The following parameters were compared between the two groups: length of the surgical specimen, clearance of the margins of the specimen, number of lymph nodes identified, local recurrence rate, incidence of distant metastases, and survival probability analysis. The mean follow-up period for both groups was 43.8 months (range, l-9 years).
                We performed 60 laparoscopic and 27 open anterior resections, as well as 21 laparoscopic and 16 open abdomino perineal resections, respectively. No mortality occurred in either group. The mean length of the resected specimens was 24.3 cm in the laparoscopic group and 23.8 cm in the open group ( p = 0.47). The mean tumor-free margin was 3.0 cm in the laparoscopic group and 2.8 cm in the open group ( p = 0.57), and the mean number of lymph nodes identified was 10.3 in the laparoscopic group and 9.8 in the open group ( p = 0.63). Of the 124 patients, 86 (52 laparoscopic and 34 open) were included in out study. We excluded patients who underwent a palliative resection (6 laparoscopic and 6 open patients) or conversion to open surgery ( n = 10) and patients who had undergone surgery in the past year ( n = 16). One laparoscopic patient was lost to follow-up evaluation, whereas three laparoscopic patients and one open patient died of causes not related to cancer. No wound recurrence was observed. The local recurrence rate after laparoscopic resection was 20.8%, as compared with 16.6% after open resection ( p = 0.687). Distant metastases occurred in 18.2% of the patients in the laparoscopic group, as compared with 21.2% in the open group ( p = 0.528). Cumulative survival probability was 0.709 after laparoscopic resection after LR and 0.606 after open resection ( p = 0.162), whereas for Dukes' stages A, B, and C in the laparoscopic group versus the open group, it was 0.875 vs 0.889 ( p = 0.392), 0.722 vs 0.584 ( p = 0.199), and 0.500 vs 0.417 ( p = 0.320), respectively. At this writing 20 laparoscopic patients (62.5%) and 20 open patients (60.6%) are disease free ( p = 0.623).
                Oncologic surgical principles were respected. Long-term outcome after laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer was comparable with that after conventional resection. We should wait to draw conclusive scientific statements until the completion of ongoing international randomized controlled trials. The feasibility of laparoscopic rectal resection in patients with mid or low rectal cancer was studied prospectively with regard to quality of mesorectal excision, autonomic pelvic nerve preservation and anal sphincter preservation.
                Laparoscopic rectal excision was performed in 32 patients (21 men) with rectal carcinoma located 5 cm from the anal verge. Most patients had T3 disease and received preoperative radiotherapy. The surgical procedure was performed 6 weeks after radiotherapy and included total mesorectal excision, intersphincteric resection, transanal coloanal anastomosis with coloplasty and loop ileostomy.
                Three patients needed conversion to a laparotomy. Postoperative morbidity occurred in ten patients, related mainly to coloplasty. Macroscopic evaluation showed an intact mesorectal excision in 29 of 32 excised specimens; microscopically, 30 of the 32 resections were R0. Sphincter preservation was achieved in 31 patients. The hypogastric nerves and pelvic plexuses were identified and preserved in 24 of the 32 patients. Sexual function was preserved in ten of 18 evaluable men.
                A laparoscopic approach can be considered in most patients with mid or low rectal cancer.
                Copyright 2003 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer is controversial. Actuarial survival and local recurrence rates have not been determined.
                A prospective database containing 80 consecutive unselected laparoscopic resections of rectal cancers performed between November 1991 and 1999 was reviewed. Local recurrence was defined as any detectable local disease at follow-up assessment occurring either alone or in conjunction with generalized recurrence. The tumor node metastases (TNM) classification for colorectal cancers and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to determine staging and survival curves. The mesorectal excision technique was used during surgery.
                The median follow-up period was 31 months for patients with stages I, II, and III cancer, and 15.5 months for patients with stage IV cancer. The overall 5-year survival rate was 65.1% for all cancer stages and 72.1% for stages I, II, and III cancer. No trocar-site recurrence was observed. The overall local recurrence rate was 3.75% (3/80) for all cancer stages, and 4.3% (3/70) for stages I, II, and III cancer.
                The survival and local recurrence rates for patients with rectal cancer treated by laparoscopic mesorectal excision do not differ negatively from those in the literature for open mesorectal excision. Further validation is needed. To define the role of pretreatment surgical staging for locally advanced cervical carcinoma.
                A two-step randomized trial was conducted to compare clinical staging (arm A) versus surgical staging (arm B) and to compare the laparoscopic (LAP) with the extraperitoneal (EXP) approach in previously untreated locally advanced cervical carcinoma. After the first randomization, those in arm B were randomly allocated to either LAP or EXP. An interim analysis was planned to evaluate the feasibility of LAP versus EXP, which led to the current report.
                A total of 61 patients were eligible (arm A, 29; arm B, 32). The operation time, blood loss, and lymph node yield of LAP and EXP were not significantly different. Serious acute and late toxicity was not different between arm A and arm B, or LAP versus EXP. Para-aortic node metastasis was documented in 25% (95% confidence interval, 10% to 40%) of patients on arm B. An interim analysis was performed in January 2000. Patients on arm B had significantly worse progression-free survival than those on arm A. Hazard ratios of relapse/persistent or death were 3.13 (P = 0.005) and 1.76 (P = 0.150), respectively. Patient accrual was terminated according to the early stopping rules. With further follow-up till December 2001, the difference in progression-free survival remained significant (P = 0.003), and the difference in overall survival became significant (P = 0.024) as the data matured.
                The benefit of pretreatment surgical staging for cervical carcinoma remained unproven. The detrimental effects of surgical staging observed in this study must be considered in the design of clinical guidelines or future trials.
The main source of evidence for the current practice of laparoscopic excision of renal cancer is drawn from case series, small retrospective studies and very few small randomised controlled trials. The results and conclusions of these studies must therefore be interpreted with caution.