» Articles » PMID: 9660024

A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Laparoscopic Versus Conventional Techniques in Colorectal Cancer Surgery: a Preliminary Report

Overview
Journal J Am Coll Surg
Date 1998 Jul 11
PMID 9660024
Citations 173
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Uncontrolled studies using laparoscopic techniques in colorectal surgery have not demonstrated clear advantages to these procedures compared with conventional ones, and surgeons are concerned about unusual early recurrences reported after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.

Study Design: We conducted a prospective, randomized trial in one surgical department comparing laparoscopic (LAP) and conventional (CON) techniques in 109 patients undergoing bowel resection for colorectal cancers or polyps. Postoperatively, all patients underwent measurement of pulmonary function tests every 12 hours, and were treated identically on a highly controlled protocol with regard to analgesic administration, feeding, and postoperative care.

Results: Of the 55 patients assigned to LAP and 54 to the CON group, there were 42 and 38 with cancer, respectively (the other patients had large adenomas). Overall recovery of 80% of forced expiratory volume in 1 second and forced vital capacity was a median of 3 days for LAP and 6.0 days for CON (p = 0.01). LAP patients used significantly less morphine than CON patients up to the second day after surgery (0.78 +/- 0.32 versus 0.92 +/- 0.34 mg/kg per day, p = 0.02). Flatus returned a median of 3.0 days after LAP versus 4.0 days after CON surgery (p = 0.006). Tumor margins were clear in all patients. After a median followup of 1.5 years (LAP) and 1.7 years (CON), there were no port site recurrences in the LAP group. Seven cancer-related deaths have occurred (three in the LAP group, four in the CON group).

Conclusions: Within this prospective, randomized trial, laparoscopic techniques were as safe as conventional surgical techniques and offered a faster recovery of pulmonary and gastrointestinal function compared with conventional surgery for selected patients undergoing large bowel resection for cancer or polyps. There were no apparent shortterm oncologic disadvantages. Longer followup is needed to fully assess oncologic outcomes.

Citing Articles

Trends and outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter cross-sectional study of minimally invasive versus open techniques in Germany.

Krieg A, Kolbe E, Kaspari M, Krieg S, Loosen S, Roderburg C Surg Endosc. 2024; 38(11):6338-6346.

PMID: 39210061 PMC: 11525431. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-11210-1.


A systematic review of oncosurgical and quality of life outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer.

Maudsley J, Clifford R, Aziz O, Sutton P Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2024; 107(1):2-11.

PMID: 38362800 PMC: 11658885. DOI: 10.1308/rcsann.2023.0031.


Clinical outcomes of single incision laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis between well-experienced and novice surgeons.

Tei M, Suzuki Y, Ohtsuka M, Iwamoto K, Naito A, Imasato M Ann Gastroenterol Surg. 2023; 7(1):102-109.

PMID: 36643373 PMC: 9831886. DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12607.


Clinical practice guidelines for enhanced recovery after colon and rectal surgery from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons.

Irani J, Hedrick T, Miller T, Lee L, Steinhagen E, Shogan B Surg Endosc. 2022; 37(1):5-30.

PMID: 36515747 PMC: 9839829. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09758-x.


Comparison of clinical outcomes of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for descending colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Tei M, Suzuki Y, Sueda T, Iwamoto K, Naito A, Nomura M BMC Gastroenterol. 2022; 22(1):511.

PMID: 36494780 PMC: 9738018. DOI: 10.1186/s12876-022-02597-z.