ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The aim of this study is to evaluate the risk factors for mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival in elderly patients with colorectal cancer when compared to younger patients. METHODOLOGY: Patients operated on with colorectal cancer were divided into 2 groups according to age: Group 1 (75 years old or older, n=90) and group 2 (<75 years, n=430). RESULTS: Preoperative hemoglobin levels were lower in group 1 (p = 0.008). Poorer clinical status defined by ASA score (p = 0.008) results and blood transfusions (p = 0.003) were more frequent in group 1 when compared to group 2. Group 1 had a significantly higher operative mortality rate than group 2 (p = 0.01). Regarding cancer-related survival after 1, 2, and 4 years, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Poorer clinical conditions with special regard to anemia are more frequent among patients of 75 years and older and this finding may lead to an increase in operative mortality when compared to younger patients. Even though, senior patients with colorectal cancer should not be denied surgical and adjuvant therapy on account of age alone since cancer-related survival remains comparable to younger patients' results.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Postoperative Complications/mortality , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Colectomy , Colorectal Neoplasms/pathology , Colostomy , Disease-Free Survival , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Geriatric Assessment , Hemoglobinometry , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection compared to conventional approach for surgical treatment of patients with distal rectal cancer presenting with incomplete response after chemoradiation. METHOD: Twenty eight patients with distal rectal adenocarcinoma were randomized to undergo surgical treatment by laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection or conventional approach and evaluated prospectively. Thirteen underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and 15 conventional approach. RESULTS: There was no significant difference (p<0,05) between the two studied groups regarding: gender, age, body mass index, patients with previous abdominal surgeries, intra and post operative complications, need for blood transfusion, hospital stay after surgery, length of resected segment and pathological staging. Mean operation time was 228 minutes for the laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection versus 284 minutes for the conventional approach (p=0.04). Mean anesthesia duration was shorter (p=0.03) for laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection when compared to conventional approach : 304 and 362 minutes, respectively. There was no need for conversion to open approach in this series. After a mean follow-up of 47.2 months and with the exclusion of two patients in the conventional abdominoperineal resection who presented with unsuspected synchronic metastasis during surgery, local recurrence was observed in two patients in the conventional group and in none in the laparoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection is feasible, similar to conventional approach concerning surgery duration, intra operative morbidity, blood requirements and post operative morbidity. Larger number of cases and an extended follow-up are required to adequate evaluation of oncological results for patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection after chemoradiation for radical treatment of distal rectal cancer.
