ABSTRACT
Objective: To compare the morbidity of perineum-related complication between biological mesh and primary closure in closing pelvic floor defects following extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE). Methods: A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang database, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, VIP database, and China Biological Medicine database for published clinical researches on perineum-related complications following ELAPE between January 2007 and August 2020. Literature inclusion criteria: (1) study subjects: patients undergoing ELAPE with rectal cancers confirmed by colonoscopy pathological biopsy or surgical pathology; (2) study types: randomized controlled studies or observational studies comparing the postoperative perineum-related complications between the two groups (primary perineal closure and reconstruction with a biological mesh) following ELAPE; (3) intervention measures: biological mesh reconstruction used as the treatment group, and primary closure used as the control group; (4) outcome measures: the included literatures should at least include one of the following postoperative perineal complications: overall perineal wound complications, perineal wound infection, perineal wound dehiscence, perineal hernia, chronic sinus, chronic perineal pain (postoperative 12-month), urinary dysfunction and sexual dysfunction. Literature exclusion criteria: (1) data published repeatedly; (2) study with incomplete or wrong original data and unable to obtain original data. Two reviewers independently performed screening, data extraction and assessment on the quality of included studies. Review Manager 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis. The mobidities of perineum-related complications, including overall perineal wound (infection, dehiscence, hernia, chronic sinus) and perineal chronic pain (postoperative 12-month), were compared between the two pelvic floor reconstruction methods. Finally, publication bias was assessed, and sensitivity analysis was used to evaluate the stability of the results. Results: A total of five studies, including two randomized controlled studies and three observational controlled studies, with 650 patients (399 cases in the biological mesh group and 251 cases in primary closure group) were finally included. Compared with primary closure, biological mesh reconstruction had significantly lower ratio of perineal hernia (RR=0.37, 95%CI: 0.21-0.64, P<0.001). No significant differences in ratios of overall perineal wound complication, perineal wound infection, perineal wound dehiscence, perineal chronic sinus and perineal chronic pain (postoperative 12-month) were found between the two groups (all P>0.05). Conclusion: Compared with primary closure, pelvic floor reconstruction following ELAPE with biological mesh has the advantage of a lower incidence of perineal hernia.
Subject(s)
Humans , Pelvic Floor/surgery , Perineum/surgery , Proctectomy , Rectum/surgery , Surgical MeshABSTRACT
Background@#Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) has become a popular procedure for low rectal cancer as compared with abdominoperineal excision (APE). No definitive answer has been achieved whether one is superior to the other. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ELAPE for low rectal cancer with meta-analysis.@*Methods@#The Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed databases before September 2019 were comprehensively searched to retrieve comparative trials of ELAPE and APE for low rectal cancer. Pooled analyses of the perioperative variables, surgical complications, and oncological variables were performed. Odds ratio (OR) and mean differences (MD) from each trial were pooled using random or fixed effects model depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies. A subgroup analysis or a sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the potential source of heterogeneity when necessary.@*Results@#This meta-analysis included 17 studies with 4049 patients, of whom 2248 (55.5%) underwent ELAPE and 1801 (44.5%) underwent APE. There were no statistical differences regarding the circumferential resection margin positivity (13.0% vs. 16.2%, OR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.42-1.14, P = 0.15) and post-operative perineal wound complication rate (28.9% vs. 24.1%, OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.75-1.94, P= 0.43). The ELAPE was associated with lower rate of intraoperative perforation (6.6% vs. 11.3%, OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.39-0.64, P < 0.001) and local recurrence (8.8% vs. 20.5%, OR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.21-0.41, P < 0.001) when compared with APE.@*Conclusions@#The ELAPE was associated with a reduction in the rate of intra-operative perforation and local recurrence, without any increase in the circumferential resection margin positivity and post-operative perineal wound complication rate when compared with APE in the surgical treatment of low rectal cancer.
ABSTRACT
Objective To investigate the application value of biological mesh in the pelvic floor reconstruction of extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) for advanced low rectal cancer (RC).Methods The retrospective cohort study was conducted.The clinicopathological data of 228 patients with advanced low RC who underwent ELAPE in the Beijing Chaoyang Hospital of Capital Medical University between August 2008 and December 2016 were collected.Of 228 patients,174 using biological mesh closure and 54 using primary closure were respectively allocated into the biological mesh group and primary closure group.Observation indicators:(1)intra-and post-operative situations;(2) postoperative complications (including short-term and long-term complications);(3) follow-up and survival situations.Follow-up using outpatient examination and telephone interview was performed to detect postoperative long-term complications,tumor recurrence or metastasis and overall survival up to December,2017.Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as（ x） ±s,and comparison between groups was analyzed using the independent-sample t test.Measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range),and comparison between groups was analyzed using the nonparametric test.Comparisons of count data were evaluated by the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability.Results (1)Intra-and post-operative situations:all the patients underwent successful ELAPE.The perineal operation time,time of indwelling perineal drainage-tube and hospital expenses were respectively (60 ± 50)minutes,(11.6 ± 2.4) days,(57 781± 11 337) yuan in the biological mesh group and (50±21) minutes,(8.9± 1.7) days,(53 714± 13 395)yuan in the primary closure group,with statistically significant differences between groups (t =3.327,7.691,-2.203,P＜0.05).The total operation time and duration of postoperative hospital stay were respectively (242±53) minutes,(13.0±5.0) days in the biological mesh group and (228±51) minutes,(12.0±5.0) days in the primary closure group,with no statistically significant difference between groups (t =1.701,1.309,P＞0.05).(2) Postoperative complications:26 and 19 patients in the biological mesh group and primary closure group had respectively perineal wound complications (1 patient combined with multiple complications),showing a statistically significant difference between groups (x2 =10.660,P＜0.05).The perineal wound infection,perineal hernia and disruption of perineal wound were respectively detected in 20,6,1 patients in the biological mesh group and 12,7,3 patients in the primary closure group,showing statistically significant differences between groups (x2 =3.931,5.282,P＜0.05).(3) Follow-up and survival situations:174 patients in the biological mesh group were followed up for 64 months (range,13-112 months),and 54 patients in the primary closure group were followed up for 51 months (range,23-76 months).The local recurrence rate,distal metastasis rate and overall survival rate were respectively 5.17％ (9/174),20.11％ (35/174),77.59％ (135/174) in the biological mesh group and 7.41％(4/54),24.07％(13/54),79.63％(43/54) in the primary closure group,with no statistically significant difference between groups (x2 =0.080,0.389,0.101,P＞0.05).Conclusions The biological mesh in the pelvic floor reconstruction of ELAPE for advanced low RC is safe and feasible.Compared with primary closure,biological mesh closure will extend perineal operation time and time of indwelling perineal drainage-tube,and increase hospital expenses,but doesn't affect total operation time and duration of postoperative hospital stay,meanwhile,it can also reduce the overall perineal wound complications,especially in perineal wound infection,perineal hernia and disruption of perineal wound.
ABSTRACT
Compared with patients with high-middle rectal cancer,local recurrent rate of low rectal cancer in patients is worse.The poor outcome of low rectal cancer is due to the unique anatomical features of the low rectum and the lack of clearly defined anatomical excision planes.Therefore,how to use the appropriate imaging methods,evaluate accurately preoperative cancer staging,plan feasible surgical plane and select the appropriate surgical approach,these will be very important for radical resection of rectal cancer.Therefore,the quality of life and long-term survival of the patients will be improved.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (laparoscopic ELAPE) for low rectal cancer with modified Lloyd-Davies lithotomy position and without turning position.Methods The retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted.The clinicopathological data of 27 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic ELAPE without turning position in the West China Hospital of Sichuan University from September 2013 to January 2015 were collected.The modified Lloyd-Davies lithotomy position was used in perineal resection.Observation indicators:(1) surgical situation;(2) postoperative recovery situation;(3) postoperative pathological examination situation;(4) follow-up and survival situations.Follow-up using outpatient examination and telephone interview was performed to detect postoperative complications,survival of patients and tumor recurrence or metastasis up to March 2017.Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as (x)±s.Measurement data with skewed distribution were described as M (range).Results (1) Surgical situation:A total of 27 patients received laparoscopic ELAPE without turning position,and operation time and volume of intraoperative blood loss were (198±51)minutes and (85±66)mL.Among 5 of 27 patients with intraoperative complications,1 with intestinal perforation received successful intraoperative repair,1with presacral haemorrhage received successful hemostasis by intraoperative gauze pressing,1 with left and right pelvic plexus injury didn't receive special treatment,1 with left pelvic plexus injury + left internal iliac vein injury didn't receive special treatment and were repaired in vascular injury repair,1 with right neurovascular bundle injury didn't receive special treatment of nerve injury and received successful hemostasis by ultrasonic scalpel.There was no perforation in the site of the tumor.Number of lymph node dissected was 14 (range,9-22),and number of lymph node dissected ≥ 12 and ＜ 12 were detected in 15 and 12 patients,respectively.(2)Postoperative recovery situation:time to anal exsufflation and time for fluid diet intake in 27 patients were respectively (78±21)hours and (83±21)hours.Of 27 patients,8 with postoperative complications were improved by conservative treatment,including 1 in Clavien-Dindo Ⅰ (volume of perineal exudation ＞ 100 mL) and 7 in Clavien-Dindo Ⅱ (3 with pulmonary infection,2 with chylous fistula,1 with perineal incision infection and 1 with hematuria).There was no death within 30 days postoperatively.The median duration of hospital stay of 27 patients was 7 days (range,6-8 days).(3) Postoperative pathological examination situation:of 27 patients,1 and 26 had respectively positive and negative circumferential margins and median distance of circumferential margin was 0.7 cm (range,0.1-1.1 cm).T stage:14,12 and 1 patients were respectively detected in T2,T3 and T4.N stage:18,6 and 3 patients were respectively found in N0,N1 and N2.(4) Follow-up and survival situations:25 of 27 patients were followed up for 2-32 months,with a median time of 24 months.During the follow-up,5 had complications after discharge from hospital.Of 5 patients,2 with persistent anal pain didn't receive special treatment and were not relieved,and 3 with sexual dysfunction didn't receive special treatment and were followed up or observed.Of 25 patients,2 died of tumor-related diseases,1 died of non-tumor-related disease and other 22 had survival.No local tumor recurrence was detected.Eight patients had tumor distant metastases,including 4 with pulmonary metastases,3 with hepatic metastases and 1 with brain metastasis.Conclusion Laparoscopic ELAPE by modified Lloyd-Davies lithotomy position without turning position is safe and feasible,with closing pelvic floor peritoneum in stage Ⅰ.
ABSTRACT
Objective To explore the short and long-term efficacy of extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE)vs.conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE)on distal rectal cancer.Methods Relevant studies were identified by search of Medline,EMBASE,and Web of Science published between January 1,2008 and February 28,2015,and included in the systematic review and meta-analysis with Stata software (version 12.0). Results Our Meta-analysis included 14 studies involving 3278 patients,of whom 1843 (56.2%)underwent ELAPE and 1435 (43.8%)underwent APE.Compared with patients undergoing APE,those undergoing ELAPE had a significantly reduced risk of intraoperative bowel perforation (IBP)involvement (OR=0 .55 ,95% CI= 0 .37-0 .85 ),but no significant reduction in the occurrence of CRM positivity (OR=0 .81 ,95% CI=0 .52-1 .25 ), local recurrence (LR)(OR=0.49,95% CI=0.18-1.30),wound complications (WCs)(OR=0.93,95% CI=0.65-1.35)or in-hospital death (IHD)(OR=0.89,95% CI=0.47-1.71).Conclusion ELAPE can reduce the risk of IBP but not for CRM positivity or LR when compared with APE.Therefore,more higher-quality studies are needed to verify the short-and long-term effects of ELAPE procedure on distal rectal cancer.
ABSTRACT
Objective:Whether extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) improves survival and safety remains controversial.Systematic review of all comparative studies to define the superiority of ELAPE to conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE).Methods:Corresponding data,with case-control studies or cohorts regarding intraoperative perforation rate,the local recurrence rate and postoperative complications in the ELAPE group and the APE group,were retrieved from PubMed,Embase,the Cochrane Library,Chinese Biomedical Literature (CMB),VIP,China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI),and Wanfang Database.Meta-analysis was performed by using RenMan 5.2.Results:A total of 10 articles were included.Intraperative perforation rate (MD=0.54,95％ CI 0.31 to 1.39,P=0.03),local recurrence rate (MD=0.30,95％ CI 0.21 to 0.42,P＜0.001) in the ELAPE group was significantly lower than that in the APE group.The difference in positive margin rate between the 2 groups was not statistically significant (P=0.07).Conclusion:Through gap repair of episiotomy and individualized therapy can improve ELAPE postoperative quality of life.ELAPE shows certain advantages in treating lower rectal cancer comparing to APE,but it should pay attention to individualized treatment.More studies through large sample multi-center,medium and long term randomized design are necessary to determine the effect of surgery on tumor.