Journal of Minimal Access Surgery (Jan 2018)

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted surgery, mini-laparotomy and conventional laparotomy in patients with Stage I-III colorectal cancer

  • Chin-Fan Chen,
  • Yi-Chieh Lin,
  • Hsiang-Lin Tsai,
  • Ching-Wen Huang,
  • Yung-Sung Yeh,
  • Cheng-Jen Ma,
  • Chien-Yu Lu,
  • Huang-Ming Hu,
  • Hsiang-Yao Shih,
  • Ying-Ling Shih,
  • Li-Chu Sun,
  • Herng-Chia Chiu,
  • Jaw-Yuan Wang

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_155_17
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 14, no. 4
pp. 321 – 334

Abstract

Read online

Background: Three operative techniques have been used for colorectal cancer (CRC) resection: Conventional laparotomy (CL) and the mini-invasive techniques (MITs)– laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS) and mini-laparotomy (ML). The aim of the study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing the three surgical approaches for Stage I–III CRC resection. Patients and Methods: This study enrolled 688 patients with Stage I–III CRC undergoing curative resection. The primary endpoints were perioperative quality and outcomes. The secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes including disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS) and local recurrence (LR). Results: Patients undergoing LAS had significantly less blood loss (P 0.05). During a median follow-up of 5.42 years, no significant difference was observed among the treatment groups in the rates of 3-year late morbidity, 3-year LR, 5-year LR, 5-year OS or 5-year DFS (all P > 0.05). Conclusions: Patients undergoing CL had higher post-operative morbidities. Moreover, the study findings confirm the favourable short-term and comparable long-term outcomes of LAS and ML for curative CRC resection. Therefore, both MITs may be feasible and safe alternatives to CL for Stage I-III CRC resection.

Keywords