Curative resection with minilaparotomy approach in the treatment of rectal cancer / 中华胃肠外科杂志

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To compare the surgical safety and short-term efficacy of minilaparotomy and laparoscopic approach for curative resection of rectal cancer.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>The retrospective cohort study was adopted. A review of patients scheduled to undergo a curative resection of rectal cancer via minilaparotomy or laparoscopic approach at Department of Colorectal Surgery of Changhai Hospital from June 2016 to May 2017 was carried out. All the patients were confirmed as rectal cancer by postoperative pathology. The following patients were excluded from the study patients who had acute complete obstruction or perforation; patients underwent Miles or Hartmann procedure; patients who required an elongation of the skin incision in minilaparotomy or a conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery. Finally, 216 patients were enrolled in this study, of whom 143 were performed with minilaparotomy approach (minilaparotomy group) and 73 with laparoscopic approach (laparoscopic group) for curative resection of rectal cancer. For the minilaparotomy technique, a 7 cm longitudinal midline incision was made between the pubic symphysis and umbilicus; a wound retractor was applied to the edge of the wound; lymph node dissection around the inferior mesenteric and artery high ligation of inferior mesenteric artery were performed; by moving the minilaparotomy wound laterally and caudad or cephalad with the S-shaped hook, cautious mobilization of the relevant segment of the bowel loop was performed; bowel anastomosis was achieved by using the double-stapled technique; the gap of the pelvic floor peritoneum and mesentery were routinely closed by the absorbable surgical suture in cases with middle and low position rectal cancer. The surgical safety, the condition of resuming and the morbidity of postoperative complication were compared between the two groups.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>There were 145 men and 71 women. Age ranged from 26 to 87 years, with of mean age of 61 years. According to the TNM stage grouping, there were 61 patients with stage I(, 62 with stage II(, 85 with stage III(, and 8 with stage IIII( disease, respectively. These two groups did not differ significantly in terms of age, sex, body mass index, site of tumor, TNM stage(all P>0.05). All the patients completed the operation successfully. The median operation time of minilaparotomy group was significantly shorter than that of laparoscopic group [164(80-296) minutes vs. 230(90-665) minutes, Z=4.410, P=0.000]. The intraoperative medical consumable expense [11000(7000-22000) yuan vs. 23000(12000-47000) yuan, Z=11.759, P=0.000] and the total hospitalization expense [44000(22000-146000) yuan vs. 57000(45000-126000) yuan, Z=9.637, P=0.000] were significantly lower in the minilaparotomy group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of operative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, distance of distal resection margin, positive rate of circumferential resection margin (all P>0.05). The rate of postoperative complication in minilaparotomy group was 7.0%(10/143) and in laparoscopic group was 9.6%(7/73) without significant difference (χ=0.449, P=0.503). There were 2 patients in each group who required readmission to the hospital within postoperative 30 days. The cause of readmission was ileus or acute hyponatremia in minilaparotomy group, and ileus or pevic infection in laparoscopic group. One patient died of brain death caused by acute pulmonary embolism during the perioperative period in minilaparotomy group.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>The minilaparotomy approach for curative resection of rectal cancer is safe and feasible. As compared with laparoscopic approach, it is advantageous to achieve minimal invasiveness and early recovery, but much cheaper and less time consuming.</p>