ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to describe and compare minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery for rectal cancer in Peru. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective single-center analysis was performed for all patients who underwent sphinctersparing surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer at Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas in Peru between January 2016 and December 2020. Clinical, perioperative, pathological, and survival outcomes were compared between both groups. A propensity score matching method was used to minimize bias. RESULTS: 162 patients were included in the final analysis. 124 had open surgery and 38 had MIS. Patients, clinical tumour, pathological characteristics, and perioperative were similar between groups after matching. Similar circumferential resection margin (CRM) with optimal quality of the mesorectum (p=1.000) but higher number of lymph nodes resected in open surgery group (p=0.741) was described. The leakage rate was slightly higher in the MIS group (p=0.358) with 10.5%, while the postoperative hospital stay was longer in the open surgery group after matching (p=0.001; OR 95% 5.2 CI: 1.8-15.6). The estimated recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) at 3 years in open surgery and MIS was 71.8% (95% CI; 0.58-0.89) and 70% (95% CI; 0.56-0.88) (p=0.431) and 77.7% (95% CI; 0.64-0.94) and 88.9% (95% CI; 0.79-0.99) (p=0.5), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter postoperative hospital stay in the minimally invasive surgery group was reported. RFS, OS, and recurrence rates were similar between both groups. This approach is for non-metastatic rectal cancer in referral centers in Peru.
Subject(s)
Laparoscopy , Rectal Neoplasms , Anal Canal , Humans , Laparoscopy/methods , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures/methods , Organ Sparing Treatments , Peru , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective : The study aimed to describe and compare minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery for rectal cancer in Peru. Material and methods : A retrospective single-center analysis was performed for all patients who underwent sphinctersparing surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer at Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas in Peru between January 2016 and December 2020. Clinical, perioperative, pathological, and survival outcomes were compared between both groups. A propensity score matching method was used to minimize bias. Results : 162 patients were included in the final analysis. 124 had open surgery and 38 had MIS. Patients, clinical tumour, pathological characteristics, and perioperative were similar between groups after matching. Similar circumferential resection margin (CRM) with optimal quality of the mesorectum (p=1.000) but higher number of lymph nodes resected in open surgery group (p=0.741) was described. The leakage rate was slightly higher in the MIS group (p=0.358) with 10.5%, while the postoperative hospital stay was longer in the open surgery group after matching (p=0.001; OR 95% 5.2 CI: 1.8-15.6). The estimated recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) at 3 years in open surgery and MIS was 71.8% (95% CI; 0.58-0.89) and 70% (95% CI; 0.56-0.88) (p=0.431) and 77.7% (95% CI; 0.64-0.94) and 88.9% (95% CI; 0.79-0.99) (p=0.5), respectively. Conclusions: Shorter postoperative hospital stay in the minimally invasive surgery group was reported. RFS, OS, and recurrence rates were similar between both groups. This approach is for non-metastatic rectal cancer in referral centers in Peru.
RESUMEN Objetivo : El estudio tuvo como objetivo describir y comparar la cirugía mínimamente invasiva (CMI) y la cirugía abierta para el cáncer de recto en el Perú. Material y métodos : Se realizó un análisis retrospectivo unicéntrico de todos los pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía conservadora de esfínter por cáncer de recto no metastásico en el Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas de Perú entre enero de 2016 y diciembre de 2020. Clínica, perioperatoria, patológica y supervivencia se compararon los resultados entre ambos grupos. Se utilizó un método de emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión para minimizar el sesgo. Resultados : 162 pacientes fueron incluidos en el análisis final. 124 tuvieron cirugía abierta y 38 CMI. Los pacientes, el tumor clínico, las características patológicas y el perioperatorio fueron similares entre los grupos después del emparejamiento. Se describió un margen de resección circunferencial (MRC) similar con calidad óptima del mesorrecto (p=1,000) pero mayor número de ganglios linfáticos resecados en el grupo de cirugía abierta (p=0,741). La tasa de fuga fue ligeramente superior en el grupo CMI (p=0,358) con un 10,5%, mientras que la estancia hospitalaria postoperatoria fue mayor en el grupo de cirugía abierta tras el emparejamiento (p=0,001; OR 95% 5,2 IC: 1,8-15,6). La supervivencia libre de recidiva (SLR) estimada y la supervivencia global (SG) a los 3 años en cirugía abierta y CMI fue del 71,8% (IC 95%; 0,58-0,89) y del 70% (IC 95%; 0,56-0,88) (p=0,431) y 77,7% (IC 95%; 0,64-0,94) y 88,9% (IC 95%; 0,79-0,99) (p=0,5), respectivamente. Conclusiones : Se reportó menor estancia hospitalaria postoperatoria en el grupo de cirugía mínimamente invasiva. Las tasas de SLR, SG y recurrencia fueron similares entre ambos grupos. Este abordaje es para cáncer de recto no metastásico en centros de referencia en Perú.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Cancer patients are at higher risk of infection and severity of Coronavirus Disease-19 (COVID-19). Management of patients infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is challenging due to the scarce scientific information and treatment guidelines. In this work, we present our Institutional experience with our first 100 patients with oncological malignancies and COVID-19. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of the first 100 patients hospitalised at the Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplasicas (Lima, Peru) who were positive for SARS-CoV-2 by reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR during the period 30 March to 20 June. Clinicopathological variables of the oncological disease as well as risk factors, management and outcomes to COVID-19 were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean age was 43.5 years old (standard deviations: ±24.8) where 57% were male patients. In total, 44%, 37% and 19% were adult patients bearing solid tumours, adults with haematologic malignancies and paediatric patients, respectively. Hypertension was the most frequent comorbidity (23%) followed by chronic lung disease (10%). COVID-19-associated symptoms included cough (65%), fever (57%) and dyspnoea (56%). Twelve percent of patients were asymptomatic. Nosocomial infections were more frequent in paediatric patients (84.2%) than in adult patients (16.0%). Patients with uncontrolled oncological disease were most frequent (72%). Anaemia was present in 67% of patients, 68% had lymphopenia, 62% had ferritin value > 500 mcg/L, 85% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), 83% D-dimer > 500 ng/mL and 80% C-Reactive Protein > 8 mg/L. The most common complication was acute respiratory failure (42%). Overall fatality rate was 39% where the main cause of mortality was acute respiratory distress syndrome (64.1%). CONCLUSION: Paediatric patients had better outcomes than adult populations, and a high number of asymptomatic carriers and nosocomial infection, early diagnosis are recommended. Considering oncological treatments 30 days before COVID-19 diagnosis, our data did not reveal an increased mortality.
