Hybrid laparoscopic flexure takedown and open procedure for rectal resection is associated with significantly shorter length of stay than equivalent open resection. Laparoscopic vs open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an evaluation of the mesorectum's macroscopic quality. Results of laparoscopic versus open resections for non-early rectal cancer in patients with a minimum follow-up of four years. Laparoscopic total mesorectum excision. Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: outcomes in 194 patients and review of the literature. Comparative evaluation of immune response after laparoscopical and open total mesorectal excisions with anal sphincter preservation in patients with rectal cancer. Laparoscopic-assisted approach in rectal cancer patients: lessons learned from >200 patients. Abdominoperineal resection: laparoscopic versus conventional. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation. Laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection combined with per anum intersphincteric rectal dissection for lower rectal cancer. Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation for low rectal cancer. Does laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection of the rectum compromise long-term survival? Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection: early postoperative results of a prospective study involving 116 patients. The Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group. Prospective comparison of laparoscopic and conventional anterior resection. Early experience with laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. Laparoscopic assisted abdominoperineal resection. Laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision of the rectum. Laparoscopic vs. open abdominoperineal resection for cancer. Laparoscopic-assisted total mesorectal excision and colonic J pouch reconstruction in the treatment of rectal cancer. The oncological safety of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation for rectal carcinoma. A comparison between open versus laparoscopic assisted colonic pouches for rectal cancer. Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and anterior resection with curative intent for carcinoma of the rectum. Laparoscopic low anterior resection using a triple stapling technique. Safety of laparoscopic intracorporeal rectal transection with double-stapling technique anastomosis. Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection with coloplasty and coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal cancer. Laparoscopic versus conventional open resection of rectal carcinoma: A clinical comparative study. Prospective evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoidal and rectal carcinoma. A preliminary comparison of a consecutive series of open versus laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection for rectal adenocarcinoma. Early postoperative results of a prospective series of laparoscopic vs. Open anterior resections for rectosigmoid cancers. Long-term results of laparoscopic versus open resections for rectal cancer for 124 unselected patients. Early outcomes of 100 patients with laparoscopic resection for rectal neoplasm. Systemic cytokine response after laparoscopic-assisted resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: A prospective randomized trial. Laparoscopic-assisted abdominoperineal resection for low rectal adenocarcinoma. A case-control-study comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectosigmoidal and rectal cancer. Prospective evaluation of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction for mid and low rectal cancers. Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trial. Hand-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection: initial experience with a new procedure. Local recurrence and survival after laparoscopic mesorectal resection forrectal adenocarcinoma. Laparoscopic rectal resection with anal sphincter preservation for rectal cancer: long-term outcome. Outcome of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer in 101 patients. Laparoscopic resection of the colon and rectum for cancer. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a consecutive series of 100 patients.
Laparoscopic-assisted, sphincter-saving resection (largest incision < 7 cm) of the middle and distal rectum is technically very difficult and, with regard to cancers, has not been demonstrated to be oncologically safe. The hypothesis of this retrospective study is that a hybrid operation that combines laparoscopic and open methods would be associated with short-term outcome benefits compared with open surgery results for patients undergoing sphincter-saving proctectomy.
                A total of 31 hybrid and 25 fully open rectal resection patients were compared in this retrospective review. All patients had splenic flexure takedown and rectal anastomosis. The hybrid approach consisted of laparoscopic splenic flexure takedown (with or without partial rectal mobilization and devascularization) followed by completion of the procedure via infraumbilical midline laparotomy. The indication was neoplasm in 87 percent of hybrid patients and in 68 percent of open patients. The majority of tumors were located between 4 and 10 cm from the dentate line.
                Fifty-eight percent of hybrid and 68 percent of open patients had low anterior or coloanal resections, and 48 percent of hybrid and 64 percent of open patients underwent temporary diversion via ileostomy. The mean hybrid midline incision length was 11 cm compared with 24 cm for open patients (P < 0.0001). The neoplastic specimens were similar with regard to margins and lymph node harvest. Similar complication rates were noted in both groups. Nonsignificant benefits for hybrid patients (0.9-1.2 days) were seen with regard to length of time until toleration of liquid or solid diet and first flatus. Hybrid patients experienced their first bowel movements 4.1 days vs. 5.7 days for the open group (P = 0.03). Mean length of stay was significantly shorter for hybrid patients (6.1. days) than for open patients (11.1 days; P = 0.0006).
                This preliminary retrospective study suggests that a combined hybrid laparoscopic and open approach to sphincter-saving proctectomy permits a similar resection as open methods and may be associated with a length-of-stay benefit and more rapid return of bowel function. Prospective studies will be needed before any firm conclusions can be drawn. Next to surgical margins, yield of lymph nodes, and length of bowel resected, macroscopic completeness of mesorectal excision may serve as another quality control of total mesorectal excision (TME). In this study, the macroscopic completeness of laparoscopic TME was evaluated.
                A series of 25 patients with rectal cancer were managed laparoscopically (LTME) and included in this study. The pathologic specimens of the LTME group were prospectively examined and matched with a historical group of resection specimens from patients who had undergone open TME (OTME). The two groups were matched for gender and type of resection (low anterior or abdominoperineal resection). Special care was given to the macroscopic judgment concerning the completeness of the mesorectum.
                A three-grade scoring system showed no differences between the LTME and OTME groups.
                The current study supports the hypothesis that oncologic resection using laparoscopic TME is feasible and adequate. Laparoscopic rectal resection for malignancy is still debated. Concern has been expressed regarding the lack of significant data from larger patient series with longer periods of follow-up. The aims of this study were to compare long-term outcome with a minimum follow-up of four years in unselected patients undergoing either laparoscopic rectal resection or open rectal resection for cancer.
                From May 1992 to August 1997 all electively admitted patients with rectal cancer were included in a prospective non-randomized study. Written information was submitted to each patient and the location in each group (laparoscopic or open) was related to the patient's choice. The inclusion protocol criteria excluded T1 tumors. All 68 T2-T4 patients underwent preoperative radiotherapy (5.040 cGy), completed with chemotherapy in selected cases (patients below 70 years of age). Long-term results were compared between the two groups. Follow-up time of both groups ranged between 48 and 96 months (mean, 49.4 months).
                Excluding patients who underwent a palliative resection or conversion to open surgery and deaths not related to cancer, 53 pts (29 laparoscopic rectal resection, 24 open rectal resection) out of 68 are available and are the object of this study. No patient was lost to follow-up. No wound recurrence was observed. The local recurrence rate after laparoscopic rectal resection was 24.1% vs. 25% after open rectal resection (P = 0.799). Distant metastases occurred in 20.7% of patients in the LLR group (laparoscopic rectal resection) vs. 25% in the ORR group (open rectal resection) (P = 0.980). Cumulative survival probability after laparoscopic rectal resection and open rectal resection was 0.690 and 0.625 (P = 0.492), respectively. Cumulative survival probability for Duke's stage A, B and C in the LRR group vs. the ORR group was 1.000 vs. 0.900 (P = 0.585), 0.667 vs. 0.636 (P = 0.496) and 0.429 vs. 0.445 (P = 0.501), respectively. Sixteen laparoscopic rectal resection patients (55.2%) and 12 open rectal resection patients (50%) are presently disease free (P = 0.979).
                Long-term results after laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer were comparable to those after conventional resection, with a trend in favor of the laparoscopic approach that does not reach a statistically significant difference, possibly due to the limited size of the sample. The main controversy of colon-rectal laparoscopic surgery comes from its use as a cancer treatment. Two points deserve special attention: the incidence of port-site tumor implantation and the possibility of performing radical cancer surgery, such as total mesorectum excision. Once these points are addressed, the laparoscopic approach will be used routinely to treat rectal cancer. To clarify these points, 32 patients with cancer of the lower rectum participated in a special protocol that included preoperative radiotherapy and laparoscopic total mesorectum excision. All data were recorded. At the same time, all data recorded from the experience of a multicenter laparoscopic group (Brazilian Colorectal Laparoscopic Surgeons - 130 patients with tumor of the lower rectum) were analyzed and compared with the data provided by our patients. Analysis of the results suggests that a laparoscopic approach allows the same effective resection as that of conventional surgery and that preoperative irradiation does not influence the incidence of intraoperative complications. The extent of lymph nodal excision is similar to that obtained with open surgery, with an average of 12.3 lymph nodes dissected per specimen. The rate of local recurrence was 3.12%. No port site implantation of tumor was noted in this series of patients with cancer of the lower rectum. There are few reports on laparoscopic rectum resection demonstrating its feasibility and efficacy in patients with rectal cancer. Most patient series are small, and results must be considered preliminary and medium-term. Our large prospective conducted study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a totally laparoscopic resection for rectum carcinoma with emphasis on perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes.
                Between November 1992 and July 2003, 194 unselected patients were resected laparoscopically for rectal carcinoma. Patients with locally advanced rectum carcinoma (uT3/uT4) and no evidence of distant metastases were candidates for neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Adjuvant treatment was administered to patients with UICC stage II/III disease. All patients were followed up prospectively to evaluate complications and late outcomes. Survival probability analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Study selection was made by Medline search using the following key words: rectal cancer, rectal neoplasms, laparoscopy, and resection. Single case reports and abstracts were excluded. When surgical series were reported more than once, only the most recent reports were considered and listed.
                The most common procedures were low anterior resection with total mesorectum excision in 65.5% of patients and high anterior resection in 25.3%. Average operative time was 174 min. Average number of lymph nodes removed was 25.4 and length of specimen resected was 27.6 cm. Resection was curative in 145 patients and palliative in 49 cases. UICC tumor stages were as follows: stage I: 25.2%, stage II: 27.3%, stage III: 30.4%, and stage IV: 17%. Intraoperative complications were <1% for lesions of the ureter, urinary bladder, and deferent duct. Conversion to conventional surgery was necessary in two cases (1%). The most common postoperative complication was anastomotic leakage in 13.5% of patients. There was no postoperative mortality. Follow-up evaluation ranged from 1 to 128 months with a mean of 46.1 months. The most common late complication was incisional hernia in 3.6% of patients. Port-site metastases occurred in one patient (0.5%). Tumor recurrence developed in 23 of the 145 curative resected patients (11.7% distant metastases and 4.1% local recurrence). Overall local recurrence rate was 6.7% (4.1% after curative resection and 14.3% after palliative resection). Overall survival rate was 90.6% at 1 year, 74.5% at 3 years, and 66.3% at 5 years. Overall 5-year survival rate was 76.9% after curative resection and 31.8% after palliative resection. Cancer-related survival rate was 94% at 1 year, 82.4% at 3 years, and 78.9% at 5 years. At 5 years it was 87.7% after curative resection and 48.5% after palliative resection. At 5 years, the survival rate was 100% for stage I, 94.4% for stage II, 66.6% for stage III, and 44.6% for stage IV.
                Our results and the literature review clearly demonstrate that laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer is not associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Established oncological and surgical principles are respected and long-term outcomes are at least as good as those after open surgery. The study of immune response of open versus laparoscopical total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation in patients with rectal cancer has not been reported yet. The dissected retroperitoneal area that contacts directly with carbon dioxide is extensive in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation surgery. It is important to clarify whether the immune response of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation (LTME with ASP) in patients with rectal cancer is suppressed more severely than that of open surgery (OTME with ASP). This study was designed to compare the immune functions after laparoscopic and open total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation for rectal cancer.
                This study involved 45 patients undergoing laparoscopic (n=20) and open (n=25) total mesorectal excisions with anal sphincter preservation for rectal cancer. Serum interleukin-2 (IL-2), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNFalpha) were assayed preoperatively and on days 1 and 5 postoperatively. CD3+ and CD56+ T lymphocyte count, CD3- and CD56+ natural killer cell (NK) count and immunoglobulin (IgG/IgM/IgA) were assayed preoperatively and on day 5 postoperatively. The numbers of CD3+ and CD56+ T lymphocytes and CD3- and CD56+ NK cells were counted using flow cytometry. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used for IL-2, IL-6 and TNFalpha determination. And IgG, IgM, and IgA were assayed using immunonephelometry.
                The demographic data of the two groups had no difference. The preoperative levels of CD3+ and CD56+ T lymphocyte count, CD3- and CD56+ NK count, serum IgG, IgM, IgA, IL-2, IL-6 and TNFalpha also had no significant difference in the two groups (P>0.05). The CD3+ and CD56+ T lymphocyte counts had no obvious changes after surgery in laparoscopic (d=-0.79 +/- 3.83%) and open (d=0.42 +/- 2.09%) groups. The CD3- and CD56+ NK counts were decreased postoperatively in both laparoscopic (d=-7.23 +/- 11.33%) and open (d=-9.21 +/- 13.93%) groups. The differences of the determined values of serum IgG, IgM and IgA on the fifth day after operation subtracted those before operation were -2.56 +/- 2.14 g/L, -252.35 +/- 392.94 mg/L, -506.15 +/- 912.24 mg/L in laparoscopic group, and -1.81 +/- 2.10 g/L, -282.72 +/- 356.75 mg/L, -252.20 +/- 396.28 mg/L in open group, respectively. The levels of IL-2 were decreased after operation in both groups. However, the levels of IL-6 were decreased after laparoscopic surgery (d1=-23.14 +/- 263.97 ng/L and d5=-40.08 +/- 272.03 ng/L), and increased after open surgery (d1=27.38 +/- 129.14 ng/L and d5=21.67 +/- 234.31 ng/L). The TNFalpha levels were not elevated after surgery in both groups. There were no significant differences in the numbers of CD3+ and CD56+ T lymphocytes and CD3- and CD56+ NK cells, the levels of IgG, IgM, IgA, IL-2, IL-6 and TNFalpha between the two groups (P>0.05).
                There are no differences in immune responses between the patients having laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation and those undergone open surgery for rectal cancer. The applicability of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of colorectal diseases is still controversial. Early reports on laparoscopic-assisted colectomy in patients with colon cancer suggested that it minimizes surgical trauma, decreases perioperative complications, and leads to a more rapid recovery. To our knowledge, no previous studies have compared the laparoscopic vs the open approach in rectal cancer. The aim of this paper was to assess the results of laparoscopic techniques in patients with rectal cancer.
                From March 1998 to February 2003, all patients admitted to our unit with adenocarcinoma of the rectum were evaluated for surgery by the laparoscopic approach.
                A total of 220 patients with a mean age of 67.3 years were included in the study. One hundred thirty patients (59%) were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In >75% of the patients, a surgical procedure with sphincter preservation was performed. The rate of conversion to the open approach was 20%. Ten patients had intraoperative complications. Fifty-eight patients (26.3%) developed postoperative complications. The length of hospital stay was 6.8 days. The distribution of tumor stages was as follows: stage I, 16.81%; stage II, 33.6%; stage III, 26.36%; stage IV, 19.09%. The mean number of lymph nodes was 13.8. The incidence of local relapse was 5.3%, with a follow-up of 18 months.
                Laparoscopic surgery can be safely performed in patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum with good short-term results. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results. A prospective comparison of laparoscopic (Group 1 = 18 patients) and conventional (Group 2 = 18 patients) abdominoperineal resection in patients with low rectal cancer was carried out. Parameters studied included the length of the procedure, ileus, and hospitalization; the rate of conversion; and the morbidity and mortality rates. The mean (SD) operating time was slightly longer for laparoscopic than for standard surgery: 229 (SD = 56) versus 208 (SD = 45) min; p = 0.47. Moreover, the mean (SD) time to reintroduction of diet of 2.5 (SD = 1.1) days versus 3.8 (SD = 2.1, p < 0.005) and the length of hospital stay of 7.4 (SD = 4.1) days versus 12.9 (SD = 3.9, p < 0.005) were statistically lower in Group 1. Histopathological examination of the resection specimens (length of specimen, lateral margins, and number of lymph nodes retrieved) showed similar results in the two groups. Major complications were few and occurred in a similar proportion in the two groups (4 x 3). The conversion rate was 10% (2/20). One death (5.5%) and two reoperations (11.1%) occurred in group 2. Local recurrence was also similar (1 x 3). There were no port sites or abdominal incisions recurrences. This clinical study indicates that oncologic laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection is not only technically feasible and safe but also provides better postoperative recovery and the same rate of early recurrence and survival as the open technique. Laparoscopy has greatly influenced abdominal surgery. We hypothesize that the benefits of minimally invasive surgery are applicable to rectal cancer. A cadaver model of laparoscopic rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) and autonomic nerve preservation was utilized to explore this hypothesis. The principles of TME were followed, including high vascular ligation, sharp mesorectal dissection, and identification and preservation of the autonomic pelvic nerves. After proving feasibility in the cadaver model, a clinical study was performed on patients with mid to low rectal cancers. We observed acceptable morbidity with this minimally invasive technique of rectal resection and TME. We conclude that there is growing evidence that laparoscopic methods can be applied to patients with rectal cancer. Rectal resection with total mesorectal excision is perhaps the most technically challenging of laparoscopic procedures, and the purpose of this study was to show that laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection is feasible for lower rectal cancer. Seven patients with lower rectal cancer were treated in this way with a satisfactory outcome in each case, and on the basis of this limited study, we suggest that extension of laparoscopy to the treatment of very low rectal lesions may be of advantage. The Laparoscopic approach has been applied to colorectal surgery for many years; however, there are only a few reports on laparoscopic low and ultralow anterior resection with construction of coloanal anastomosis. This study compares open versus laparoscopic low and ultralow anterior resections, assesses the feasibility and efficacy of the laparoscopic approach of total mesorectal excision (TME) with anal sphincter preservation (ASP), and analyzes the short-term results of patients with low rectal cancer.
                We analyzed our experience via a prospective, randomized control trail. From June 2001 to September 2002, 171 patients with low rectal cancer underwent TME with ASP, 82 by the laparoscopic procedure and 89 by the open technique. The lowest margin of tumors was below peritoneal reflection and 1.5-8 cm above the dentate line (1.5-4.9 cm in 104 cases and 5-8 cm in 67 cases). The grouping was randomized.
                Results of operation, postoperative recovery, and short-term oncological follow-up were compared between 82 laparoscopic procedures and 89 controls who underwent open surgery during the same period. In the laparoscopic group, 30 patients in whom low anterior resection was performed had the anastomosis below peritoneal reflection and more than 2 cm above the dentate line, 27 patients in whom ultralow anterior resection was performed had anastomotic height within 2 cm of the dentate line, and 25 patients in whom coloanal anastomosis was performed had the anastomosis at or below the dentate line. In the open group, the numbers were 35, 27, and 27, respectively. There was no statistical difference in operation time, administration of parenteral analgesics, start of food intake, and mortality rate between the two groups. However, blood loss was less, bowel function recovered earlier, and hospitalization time was shorter in the laparoscopic group.
                Totally laparoscopic TME with ASP is feasible, and it is a minimally invasive technique with the benefits of much less blood loss during operation, earlier return of bowel function, and shorter hospitalization. Laparoscopic techniques for bowel resection have not enjoyed widespread popularity. Of concern is that long-term follow-up data of cancer specific outcomes is not yet available. The aim of our study was to examine the long-term outcome of abdominoperineal resection for cancer done laparoscopically compared with a similar cohort who underwent open surgery.
                A retrospective review was performed of all abdominoperineal resections done in our center between 1992 and 2000, comparing the cancer-specific outcomes of the laparoscopic cohort with the open cohort. The analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis and survival analysis was calculated by the techniques of Kaplan-Meier.
                Eighty-nine patients were reviewed. Twenty-eight operations were done laparoscopically, and 61 were open. The two groups were matched for age and stage of disease. There was no difference in mean length of overall survival (open = 30.3 months; laparoscopic = 40.8 months; P = 0.355 log rank). No difference in overall recurrence rate, isolated recurrence rate, or distant recurrence rates was seen nor was there any difference in the disease-free period. There was no difference in the number of lymph nodes harvested from the resected specimens, and the distance to the lateral margins or involvement of tumor in the lateral margins between the two groups was the same. The laparoscopic cohort did have a significantly shorter length of stay (mean, 13 days) compared with the open cohort (mean, 18 days), P = 0.008 Mann-Whitney U test.
                Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection of the rectum for cancer does not compromise cancer-specific survival outcomes. The patients avoid a large abdominal wound, which improves cosmesis and presumably is responsible for the significantly shorter length of stay. Although laparoscopic colorectal surgery is attracting ever more attention, its use for curative treatment of colorectal carcinoma in particular continues to be controversial. The present study was an attempt to analyze the results of the perioperative course, oncologic quality, and preliminary long-term results.
                The data considered here were collected within the framework of a prospective, observational study initiated on August 1, 1995, and involving a total of 18 institutions in Germany and Austria. At the end of three years, the results are now being presented selectively, i.e., focusing only on abdominoperineal resection.
                A total of 116 patients underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resections, 98 (84.5 percent) of which were performed with curative intent. The mean operating time was 226 (confidence interval, 140-365) minutes. Seven patients (6 percent) experienced an intraoperative complication, which in more than one-half of the cases was a vascular injury involving the presacral venous plexus; the conversion rate was 3.4 percent. Postoperatively, 40 patients developed 97 complications--including those of a very minor nature--giving an overall morbidity rate of 34.4 percent. Reoperation in six patients (5.2 percent) had to be performed for an afterbleed in one-half of the cases and ileus in the other one-half. Postoperative mortality was a low 1.7 percent. In most of the curative resections, an oncologically radical operation with high transection of the inferior mesenteric artery and a complete dissection of the pelvis down to the floor was performed. The median number of lymph nodes investigated was 11.5, and there was wide fluctuation in the numbers among the individual institutions. Tumor cell dissemination occurred intraoperatively in five patients. In the meantime, 79 patients (81 percent) underwent at least one follow-up examination, the mean follow-up period being 491 days. Seven patients developed a local recurrence, and a further six patients developed distant metastases. For recurrence-free survival rate, the Kaplan-Meier estimation calculated a probability of 71 percent.
                Not all of the reservations about laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection, in particular with regard to resection with curative intent, have yet been eliminated. The present study does, however, show that a laparoscopic approach can in principle meet oncologic requirements of radicality and, with regard to the postoperative course, is associated with considerable benefits to the patient. A prospective comparison of laparoscopically assisted (n = 11) and conventional (n = 14) anterior resection in patients with sigmoid colon or upper rectal cancer was carried out. Patients were not randomized; age and the presence of metastases determined the type of surgery. Laparoscopic assistance was used to mobilize the tumour and minimize the abdominal incision. This was achieved in all patients and six of the 11 required only a muscle-splitting incision. The mean(s.d.) operating time was longer for laparoscopic than conventional surgery (205(31) versus 123(26) min, P = 0.01). The mean(s.d.) time to reintroduction of normal diet (2.5(0.2) versus 3.6(0.3) days, P = 0.01), postoperative analgesia requirement (2.6(0.4) versus 7.4(2.1) doses of pethidine, P = 0.01) and length of hospital stay (12.3(3) versus 14.3(6) days, P = 0.08) were less in the laparoscopic group. Histopathological examination of the resection specimens showed similar results for the two procedures. Major complications were few and occurred in a similar proportion of patients treated laparoscopically or conventionally. Laparoscopically assisted anterior resection is technically feasible, adequate tumour excision can be achieved and recovery after operation is enhanced. Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (LAPR) has not been fully evaluated as a technique in the treatment of rectal and anal cancer or inflammatory bowel disease. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the early experience with laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection at Washington University Medical Center.
                A prospective analysis was performed on the first 21 patients undergoing the procedure at Washington University Medical Center. Indications for surgery included rectal cancer (14 patients), anal squamous cell cancer (four patients), inflammatory bowel disease (two patients), and anal melanoma (one patient).
                The procedure was converted to open procedure in four patients (19%). The mean (+/-SEM) operative time and blood loss for completed and converted LAPR were 239 +/- 11 min and 424 +/- 43 ml, respectively. Postoperative hematocrit dropped a mean of 8.3% +/- 1.2% SEM; five patients required blood transfusion (24%). Wound complication occurred in four patients (19%; three perineal, one trocar site). Bowel function returned after a mean of 3 days, and mean postoperative hospital stay for the completed LAPR group was 5 days. Mild pain was experienced by 81% of patients (17/21) while 19% (4/21) noted moderate pain, usually of the perineal wound. The mean duration of patient-controlled analgesia use was 2 days. During the 1-44-month follow-up, six patients (29%) died from cancer (stage III or IV at operation) and only one patient developed local recurrence in the pelvis (5%). There were no trocar-site implants of cancer. Furthermore, there was no relationship between prior abdominal operations, the amount of blood loss, postoperative drop of hematocrit, or blood transfusion requirement and the length of hospitalization or complication rates.
                Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection is a feasible alternative to the conventional open technique in both cancer and colitis patients. A technique is described for laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR). Three of four such cases could be successfully completed laparoscopically. One major complication was directly related to the laparoscopic approach, an enterotomy caused by the Babcock clamp, which was discovered at the time of conversion to laparotomy for bleeding. A minor complication related to the laparoscopic procedure, subcutaneous emphysema, required no treatment. There was one postoperative death unrelated to the laparoscopic technique. The intraoperative advantage was enhanced visualization; the intraoperative disadvantages were increased operative time and cost. Postoperative advantages were earlier mobilization, oral intake, and discharge; decreased pain; and improved cosmesis. Laparoscopic APR is both feasible and safe and with more experience should prove to be cost effective. In laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection of the rectum (LAP-AP) an abdominal incision is completely avoided as the tumor is delivered through the perineal incision. It is our belief that the view provided in the pelvis by laparoscopy is significantly better than at laparotomy and allows excellent anatomical definition and meticulous dissection. In this study we compared the adequacy of excision of the first 12 patients undergoing LAP-AP to the last 16 patients undergoing open abdominoperineal resection (OP-AP). In all patients the procedure was carried with curative intent for adenocarcinoma and the Dukes staging and Jass score's were similar in both groups. [table: see text] The data demonstrate similar nodal harvest in both groups as well as extent of radial excision. However, two patients in the open group had microscopic radial margin involvement despite being microscopically clear at surgery. We conclude that although long-term follow-up is required to address the issue of local cancer recurrence, laparoscopic rectal dissection appears as good as open surgery and may allow a more precise assessment of excision margins. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and open abdominoperineal resection for cancer.
                Records of 194 patients who underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (42 patients) or open abdominoperineal resection (152 patients) at three institutions between 1991 and 1997 were reviewed. Follow-up was through office charts, American College of Surgeons cancer registry, or telephone contact. Tumors included (laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and open abdominoperineal resection, respectively) adenocarcinoma (86 and 92 percent), squamous (12 and 7 percent), and gastrointestinal stromal (2 and 1.4 percent) types; Stages I (17 and 26 percent), II (24 and 33 percent), III (43 and 32 percent), and IV (14 and 9 percent); and those with invasion of pelvic structures (14 and 16 percent).
                Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection was converted to open abdominoperineal resection in 21 percent because of vessel injury (33 percent), poor exposure (22 percent), adhesions (22 percent), inguinal hernia (11 percent), or radiation fibrosis (11 percent). Perineal infections occurred more often in the laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection group (24 vs. 8 percent; P=0.02). Late stoma complications were similar. Mean hospital stay was shorter after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (7 vs. 12 days). Radial margins were positive in 12 percent of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and 12.5 percent of open abdominoperineal resection specimens. Tumor recurrence was similar for both local (19 and 14 percent) and distant (38 and 26 percent) recurrence. Survival rates were similar by Kaplan-Meier curves, with median follow-up of 19 and 24 months, respectively (P=0.22; log rank).
                Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection can be performed safely and results in a shorter hospital stay. A randomized, prospective trial is needed to determine the long-term outcome of cancer treatment. Total mesorectal excision (TME) and colonic J pouch reconstruction has been widely practiced for mid- or low-rectal cancer. However, the laparoscopic version of TME has never been described.
                Five patients suffering from newly diagnosed mid- to low-rectal cancer were seen between March and July 1999. These five patients were selected for laparoscopic TME and colonic J pouch reconstruction because preoperative investigations revealed resectable tumor without extrarectal disease.
                There were three men and two women with a mean age of 61 years. The average body weight was 69 kg (range, 57-80). None of the patients had had previous abdominal operations. In all five patients, the tumor was located within 9 cm from anal verge. The average size of the main incision was 5 cm. All patients had a covering ileostomy at the end of the procedure. The mean operating time was 208 min; average blood loss was 158 ml; and mean hospital stay was 10.6 days. Three patients had Dukes' B disease and two had Dukes' C disease. The resection margins (proximal, circumferential, and distal) were all clear. There were no deaths or major complications. Two patients suffered from transient urinary retention. After ileostomy closure, the median frequency of bowel motion was twice per day at 6-month follow-up. Neither incontinence nor nocturnal soiling was reported.
                To the best of our knowledge, this is the first published series of such an operation. With good patient selection, laparoscopic-assisted TME and colonic J pouch-anal anastomosis is safe and feasible. Although experience of laparoscopic treatment of rectal carcinoma has been reported, there is no evidence of its oncological safety because most procedures included partial mesorectal excision or abdominoperineal excision and quality of surgery is lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the oncological results of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation for rectal carcinoma.
                From 2000 to 2003, 144 patients underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal adenocarcinoma. There were 88 men and 56 women, with a median age of 65 years. The tumor was located at 5.5 cm (range 1-12) from the anal verge and was classified uT1T2 in 25 cases and uT3 in 119 cases. One hundred twenty patients received preoperative radiotherapy.
                Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 1% and 34% respectively. Conversion was 14% (n = 20). Macroscopic assessment of the specimen (n = 92) showed an intact mesorectum in 88% of the cases. The distal margin and the circumferential margin were safe in 98% and 94% of the cases, respectively. A complete microscopic excision, i.e., R0 resection, was achieved in 134 cases (93%). Pathological data were similar to those of an open match group. With a median follow-up of 18 months, there was no port-site recurrence and two patients had local recurrence (1.4%). The 3-year overall and disease- free survival rates were 89% and 77%, respectively.
                A high quality of surgical excision can be achieved by the laparoscopic dissection, suggesting that this approach in treatment of rectal carcinoma is oncologically safe. The aim of this prospective study was to compare the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic assisted vs. open ultralow anterior resection (ULAR) with the creation of a colonic pouch-anal anastomosis. Patients undergoing ULAR with creation of a colonic pouch and who either had conventional open (CO) or laparoscopic assisted (LA) surgery in colorectal cancer were studied and compared. There were 33 patients, 22 in CO group and 11 in LA group. The groups were comparable for age, sex, tumour and anastomotic heights from anal verge, stage of disease, length of specimen removed and duration of surgery. Incisions were significantly shorter in the LA group (median, 9 cm vs. 16 cm, p = 0.01). Less parenteral analgesia was required in the LA group (2 days vs. 3 days, p = 0.05), but there were no significant differences in the time to passage of flatus, commencement of oral fluids or solid foods and length of hospital stay. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality. With regards to patients with Dukes A to C disease only, at a median of 12 months of follow-up, there was no patient with local or port site recurrence in the LA group. In the CO group, there was one local recurrence and two with distal metastases. In conclusion, laparoscopic assisted ULAR with colonic J pouch anal anastomosis is feasible, easy to perform and safe. It s advantages include significantly shorter incision and lower analgesic requirements postoperatively. Return of bowel function and length of hospital stay, however, are comparable to those of conventional open surgery. Within a 5-year period, 380 rectal carcinoma patients undergoing laparoscopic abdominoperineal excision or laparoscopic anterior resection were recruited to a multicenter study by 23 institutions in Germany and Austria. This study was initiated by the Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group.
                One hundred forty-nine patients (39.2%) underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR), and 231 patients (60.8%) were treated by anterior resection (AR). The mean operating time was 208 min, and the conversion rate was 6.1%. Intraoperative complications, mostly vascular or bowel injuries, were observed in 22 patients (5.8%). Overall, a total of 257 postoperative complications and problems occurred in 143 patients, resulting in a morbidity rate of 37.6%. In the AR group, the anastomotic leakage rate increased as the distance of the tumor from the anal verge decreased. The perioperative mortality rate was low (6/1.6%). Most of the patients received a high transsection of the inferior mesenteric artery with radical lymph node dissection (342/90.0%); the mean number of recovered lymph nodes was 13.0, with considerable variation among the individual institutions. Intraoperative tumor cell spillage was reported in 12 patients (3.2%). Sufficient follow-up findings are available for 288 (77%) patients. To date, 19 patients have sustained a local recurrence (6.6%), and 30 (10.4%) have developed distant metastases. Within the (admittedly limited) mean follow-up of 24.8 months, the overall survival rate is 86.6%, the disease-free survival (freedom from both local recurrence and distant metastases) rate is 62.4% for APR, with the corresponding rates for AR being 71.7 and 54.8%, respectively, as established by the Kaplan-Meier function. These data show no alarmingly high recurrence rates at this time.
                In principle, laparoscopic anterior resection with curative intent generates considerably more reservations than laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection, which is technically much easier to perform. Laparoscopic low anterior resections using a triple stapling technique in five patients with rectal cancers (four Dukes A and one Dukes C) were performed. The location of the tumors was between 5 and 18 cm from the anal verge. For easy maneuverability, a 33-mm suprapubic port was used. In this technique, the Endo TA (the first stapler) is applied at the distal margin of the rectum to occlude the bowel. The bowel is irrigated with povidone-iodine solution and transected by an endolinear (the second) stapler. Anastomosis is completed by firing the circular (the third) stapler. The operative time was 177 +/- 28.0 minutes, estimated blood loss was 41.7 +/- 28.6 g, and flatus appeared 1.8 +/- 0.8 days after surgery. Follow-up studies have showed no local recurrence or distant metastasis. This procedure is safe and useful for performing laparoscopic low anterior resection. To assess the feasibility and analyze the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic intracorporeal rectal transection with double-stapling technique anastomosis, a review was performed of a prospective registry of 67 patients who underwent laparoscopic sigmoidectomy and anterior resection with intracorporeal rectal transection and double-stapling technique anastomosis between July 2001 and January 2004. Patients were divided into 3 groups: sigmoid colon/rectosigmoid carcinoma, upper rectal carcinoma, and middle/lower rectal carcinoma. A comparison was made of the short-term outcomes among the groups. The number of cartridges required in bowel transection was significantly increased in patients with middle/lower rectal carcinoma, and significant differences were observed in the length of the first stapler cartridge fired for rectal transection. Furthermore, mean operative time and blood loss were also significantly greater in the middle/lower rectum group; however, complication rates and postoperative course were similar among the 3 groups. No anastomotic leakage was observed. Laparoscopic intracorporeal rectal transection with double-stapling technique anastomosis can be performed safely without increased morbidity or mortality. The feasibility of laparoscopic rectal resection in patients with mid or low rectal cancer was studied prospectively with regard to quality of mesorectal excision, autonomic pelvic nerve preservation and anal sphincter preservation.
                Laparoscopic rectal excision was performed in 32 patients (21 men) with rectal carcinoma located 5 cm from the anal verge. Most patients had T3 disease and received preoperative radiotherapy. The surgical procedure was performed 6 weeks after radiotherapy and included total mesorectal excision, intersphincteric resection, transanal coloanal anastomosis with coloplasty and loop ileostomy.
                Three patients needed conversion to a laparotomy. Postoperative morbidity occurred in ten patients, related mainly to coloplasty. Macroscopic evaluation showed an intact mesorectal excision in 29 of 32 excised specimens; microscopically, 30 of the 32 resections were R0. Sphincter preservation was achieved in 31 patients. The hypogastric nerves and pelvic plexuses were identified and preserved in 24 of the 32 patients. Sexual function was preserved in ten of 18 evaluable men.
                A laparoscopic approach can be considered in most patients with mid or low rectal cancer.
                Copyright 2003 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. To evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic resection of rectal carcinoma and to compare the short-term outcome of laparoscopic procedure with conventional open surgery for rectal cancer.
                Thirty-eight patients with rectal cancer were included in a prospective non-randomized study. The patients were assigned to laparoscopic (n=18) or open (n=18) colorectal resection. Case selection, surgical technique, and clinical and pathological results were reviewed.
                The operative time was longer in laparoscopic resection group (LAP) than in open resection group (189+/-18 min vs 146+/-22 min, P<0.05). Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were less in LAP resection group than in open resection group. An earlier return of bowel motility was observed after laparoscopic surgery. The overall postoperative morbidity was 5.6% in the LAP resection group and 27.8% in open resection group (P<0.05). No anastomotic leakage was found in both groups. The pathologic examination showed that the length of the resected specimen, the mean number of harvested lymph nodes in laparoscopic resection group were comparable to those in open resection group.
                Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer is a feasible but technically demanding procedure. The present study demonstrates the safety of the procedure, while oncologic results are comparable to the open surgery, with a favorable short-term outcome. This study was designed to examine the short-term results of laparoscopy in the treatment of curative cases of rectosigmoidal and rectal carcinoma.
                A review was performed of a prospective registry of 70 patients who underwent curative laparoscopic resection for rectosigmoidal and rectal carcinoma between July 1993 and April 2001. Before 1997, only patients with early (Tis or T1) cancers located in the rectosigmoid and upper rectum that required bowel resection were candidates for laparoscopy. In 1997, we expanded the application of laparoscopy to include T2 cancers located anywhere in the rectum. Mesorectal transection was performed at least 5 cm below the tumor for rectosigmoidal and upper rectal lesions, and total mesorectal excision was performed for lower tumors. Primary anastomosis was performed by a double-stapling technique, or a handsewn coloanal anastomosis was performed. Patient demographics and outcomes were recorded prospectively.
                The median follow-up was 23 months. An anastomosis was performed in 92.9 percent of the operations. Oral intake was started on median postoperative Day 1, and the median length of hospitalization was 8 days. Two patients needed conversion to conventional open surgery. A total of 15 postoperative complications occurred in 13 patients (18.6 percent), including anastomotic leakage in 6 (8.6 percent) and bowel obstruction in 3 (4.3 percent). Reoperation was required in six patients. Two patients developed recurrence of cancer at the anastomotic site. The expected 5-year survival and disease-free survival rates were 100 and 92.1 percent, respectively.
                The findings of the present study demonstrate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for selected patients with rectal carcinoma. Morbidity and mortality rates and oncologic outcome appear to be comparable with conventional surgery. To compare a consecutive series of patients who underwent laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection (LAPR) versus conventional open abdomino-perineal resection (CAPR).
                Sixteen patients (8 females) and 11 patients (4 females) underwent LAPR and CAPR respectively.
                The median operative time was 110 (65-210) mins and 100 (80-185) mins for LAPR and CAPR respectively (P = 0.43). The median amount of blood loss were 200 (100-1000) mls and 100 (60-800) mls for LAPR and CAPR respectively. There was no significant difference in the need for post operative analgesics and time to first stoma function but the LAPR group showed significant improvement in starting fluids, diet, ambulation and discharge from hospital.
                The laparoscopic technique may be an acceptable alternative to conventional abdomino-perineal resection for the patient requiring anal resection for rectal cancer. This study was undertaken to compare postoperatively laparoscopic (LAR) with open (OAR) anterior resection in patients with rectosigmoid cancers.
                Forty consecutive patients were divided into two groups: 20 patients (9 males) were allocated to LAR and 20 patients (6 males) to OAR.
                Median age in the LAR group was 62 (range, 39-77) years, and in the OAR group, it was 61 (range, 43-84) years (P = 0.9). Median lengths of the distal margin of clearance beyond the tumor were 4 (range, 2-8) cm and 4.5 (range, 3-7.5) cm in the LAR and OAR groups, respectively (P = 0.35). Median numbers of lymph nodes harvested were 20 (range, 7-49) and 19 (range, 7-97) for the LAR and OAR groups, respectively (P = 0.44). Median operating times were 90 (range, 55-185) minutes and 73 (range, 40-140) minutes in the LAR and OAR groups, respectively (P = 0.08). Blood losses were 50 (range, 50-800) ml and 50 (range, 50-1,500) ml in the LAR and OAR groups, respectively. There was no intraoperative complication in either group, and no laparoscopic patient was converted to an open procedure. Median length of extraction site incision in the LAR group was 5.5 (4-13) cm, and length of incision in the OAR group was 18 (8-25) cm (P < 0.002).
                There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to duration of parenteral analgesia, starting of fluid and solid diet after surgery, or time to first bowel movement and time to discharge from the hospital. Controversy continues to surround laparoscopic rectal resection for malignancy. A longer follow-up period is required to evaluate the long-term efficacy of the procedure and its impact on survival. Furthermore, no data from ongoing randomized controlled trials are yet available. The aims of this study were to compare long-term outcomes for unselected patients undergoing either laparoscopic or open rectal resection for cancer.
                A series of 124 unselected consecutive patients with rectal cancer, who underwent surgery by the same surgical team, have been included in this study. Patients with T1N0 tumors underwent local excision, and emergency cases were excluded from the study. Written consent was submitted by each patient, and inclusion in either group (laparoscopic or open) was left to the patient's choice. The laparoscopic approach was chosen by 81 patients, and 43 patients chose open surgery. All the patients underwent preoperative radiotherapy (5,040 cGy), performed in selected cases with chemotherapy (for patients younger than 70 years). The following parameters were compared between the two groups: length of the surgical specimen, clearance of the margins of the specimen, number of lymph nodes identified, local recurrence rate, incidence of distant metastases, and survival probability analysis. The mean follow-up period for both groups was 43.8 months (range, l-9 years).
                We performed 60 laparoscopic and 27 open anterior resections, as well as 21 laparoscopic and 16 open abdomino perineal resections, respectively. No mortality occurred in either group. The mean length of the resected specimens was 24.3 cm in the laparoscopic group and 23.8 cm in the open group ( p = 0.47). The mean tumor-free margin was 3.0 cm in the laparoscopic group and 2.8 cm in the open group ( p = 0.57), and the mean number of lymph nodes identified was 10.3 in the laparoscopic group and 9.8 in the open group ( p = 0.63). Of the 124 patients, 86 (52 laparoscopic and 34 open) were included in out study. We excluded patients who underwent a palliative resection (6 laparoscopic and 6 open patients) or conversion to open surgery ( n = 10) and patients who had undergone surgery in the past year ( n = 16). One laparoscopic patient was lost to follow-up evaluation, whereas three laparoscopic patients and one open patient died of causes not related to cancer. No wound recurrence was observed. The local recurrence rate after laparoscopic resection was 20.8%, as compared with 16.6% after open resection ( p = 0.687). Distant metastases occurred in 18.2% of the patients in the laparoscopic group, as compared with 21.2% in the open group ( p = 0.528). Cumulative survival probability was 0.709 after laparoscopic resection after LR and 0.606 after open resection ( p = 0.162), whereas for Dukes' stages A, B, and C in the laparoscopic group versus the open group, it was 0.875 vs 0.889 ( p = 0.392), 0.722 vs 0.584 ( p = 0.199), and 0.500 vs 0.417 ( p = 0.320), respectively. At this writing 20 laparoscopic patients (62.5%) and 20 open patients (60.6%) are disease free ( p = 0.623).
                Oncologic surgical principles were respected. Long-term outcome after laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer was comparable with that after conventional resection. We should wait to draw conclusive scientific statements until the completion of ongoing international randomized controlled trials. Laparoscopic resection has been shown to be a feasible option in patients with colorectal diseases. However, there have been only a few studies on laparoscopic resection for rectal neoplasm. This report aimed to evaluate the early outcomes of patients treated by laparoscopic rectal resection for neoplasm.
                From May 2000 to April 2003, 100 patients underwent laparoscopic resection for rectal neoplasm with mesorectal excision. Data on the patients' demographics, operative details, and outcomes were collected prospectively. In those with successful laparoscopic resection, comparison was made between patients with predominantly intracorporeal surgery (ICS) and those with anterior resection performed with extracorporeal rectal transection and anastomosis following intracorporeal bowel mobilization and vessel ligation (IECS).
                Sixty-six men and 34 women (median age, 69 years; range, 40-85) were included. Operations included 91 anterior resections, eight abdominoperineal resections, and one Hartmann's procedure. Conversion was required in 15 patients and no conversion was needed in patients treated by laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. One patient died 30 days after surgery because of liver failure. Postoperative complications occurred in 31 patients. Among them, three had anastomotic leakage and all of them could be treated conservatively. Reoperation was required in one patient with intestinal obstruction. Patients with conversion were found to have significantly more blood loss, longer time to resume diet, a longer hospital stay, and a higher morbidity rate when compared to those with successful laparoscopic surgery. Among those with successful laparoscopic procedures, no difference was observed between patients with ICS (n = 57) and those with IECS (n = 28), except that a shorter incision and less blood loss were found in patients in the former group.
                Laparoscopic rectal resection with mesorectal dissection is feasible. The operating mortality and reoperation rates were low. Conversion was associated with an increased morbidity rate, leading to a longer hospital stay. Laparoscopically assisted anterior resection with rectal transection by a transverse stapler through the abdominal incision produced similar results when compared to a procedure that was predominantly intracorporeally performed. To compare the systemic cytokine response in patients after laparoscopic-assisted resection with those after open resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma.
                Laparoscopic resection of colorectal carcinoma is technically feasible, but objective evidence of its benefit is scarce. Systemic cytokines are accepted as markers of postoperative tissue trauma and mediators of the host immune response.
                Thirty-four patients with rectosigmoid carcinoma, without evidence of metastatic disease and suitable for laparoscopic resection, were randomized to undergo either laparoscopic (n = 17) or conventional open (n = 17) resection of the tumor. Clinical parameters were recorded. Sera were collected before surgery and at appropriate time points afterward and assayed for interleukin-1beta, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin-6, and C-reactive protein. The primary end points were the cytokine and C-reactive protein levels. Data were analyzed by intention to treat.
                The demographic data of the two groups were comparable. The clinical outcome of both groups was satisfactory, with no surgical deaths and a reasonable complication rate. Both interleukin-1beta and interleukin-6 levels peaked 2 hours after surgery, with the responses in the laparoscopic group significantly less than those in the open group. C-reactive protein levels peaked at 48 hours, and the difference was also statistically significant. Levels of tumor necrosis factor-alpha were not elevated after surgery, and there was no difference between the groups.
                Tissue trauma, as reflected by systemic cytokine response, was less after laparoscopic resection than after open resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma. The difference in the systemic cytokine response may have implications on the long-term survival. Laparoscopic-assisted resection for colorectal lesions is feasible, but most reported series are heterogeneous and noncomparative. The aim of this study was to investigate whether laparoscopic-assisted resection was better than open abdominoperineal resection for low rectal adenocarcinoma.
                Twenty-five (study group) of 59 consecutive patients who were considered suitable were selected for laparoscopic-assisted abdominoperineal resection based on the availability of informed consent, laparoscopic instruments, and experienced surgeons. The results in these patients were compared with the other 34 patients operated on by the open method (control group).
                The median follow-up times for the study and control groups were 30.1 and 28.3 months, respectively. The operation time was significantly longer (t-test, p < 0.001), while operative blood loss (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.02), postoperative analgesic requirement (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.02), time to resume normal diet (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.04), and total hospital stay (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.02) were significantly less in the study than in the control group. The oncological clearance, complication rate, disease-free interval, and survival were comparable in the two groups.
                Laparoscopic-assisted abdominoperineal resection allowed earlier postoperative recovery, with equal oncological clearance, morbidity, mortality, disease-free interval, and survival. This study compared laparoscopic with open surgery for the cure of cancer of the rectosigmoid and rectum. Results of surgery, postoperative recovery, and oncological follow-up were compared between 32 laparoscopic curative procedures (19 laparoscopic-assisted anterior resections for cancer of the rectosigmoid or upper rectum and 13 laparoscopic abdominoperineal resections for low rectal cancer) and 32 controls matched for age, UICC stage, tumor site, and type of resection who underwent open surgery during the same observation period. Morbidity was identical after laparoscopic and open resection (31.3%). Surgery was equally radical in the two groups regarding yield of lymph nodes and lateral and distal margins. Survival, recurrence, and cancer-related mortality showed no statistical differences. There was no port-site recurrence. The benefits of laparoscopic surgery were shown with a reduction in perioperative blood transfusion and earlier return of bowel function. However, the operative time was significantly increased in the laparoscopic group. This study shows that laparoscopic surgery for the cure of colorectal cancer is technically feasible, and that oncological short-term outcome does not differ from the results achieved by open techniques. However, prospective randomized trials are mandatory to evaluate the definite role of laparoscopic surgery for malignancy. Results of laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision and colonic J-pouch reconstruction are few. The aim of this study was to examine outcomes after this procedure.
                Patients with mid or low rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with construction of a colonic J pouch, performed by a single surgeon. The patients were evaluated prospectively.
                From March 1999 to January 2002, 44 patients underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction. There were 21 men and 23 women of median age 65.5 years. The median operating time was 180 min and median blood loss 80 ml. There was no conversion to an open procedure. The median distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge was 4 cm. No procedure-related death occurred. Four patients developed significant complications that required reoperation. With a median follow-up period of 15 months, no port-site recurrence was noted. Five patients developed distant metastases, and two had local recurrence in the pelvis. Bowel function was satisfactory at 6, 12 and 18 months after ileostomy closure.
                Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction is safe, with a reasonable operating time. Early results suggest satisfactory oncological control and functional outcomes.
                Copyright 2003 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Although laparoscopic resection of colorectal carcinoma improves post-operative recovery, long-term survival and disease control are the determining factors for its application. We aimed to test the null hypothesis that there was no difference in survival after laparoscopic and open resection for rectosigmoid cancer.
                From Sept 21, 1993, to Oct 21, 2002, 403 patients with rectosigmoid carcinoma were randomised to receive either laparoscopic assisted (n=203) or conventional open (n=200) resection of the tumour. Survival and disease-free interval were the main endpoints. Patients were last followed-up in March, 2003. Perioperative data were recorded and direct cost of operation estimated. Data were analysed by intention to treat.
                The demographic data of the two groups were similar. After curative resection, the probabilities of survival at 5 years of the laparoscopic and open resection groups were 76.1% (SE 3.7%) and 72.9% (4.0%) respectively. The probabilities of being disease free at 5 years were 75.3% (3.7%) and 78.3% (3.7%), respectively. The operative time of the laparoscopic group was significantly longer, whereas postoperative recovery was significantly better than for the open resection group, but these benefits were at the expense of higher direct cost. The distal margin, the number of lymph nodes found in the resected specimen, overall morbidity and operative mortality did not differ between groups.
                Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma does not jeopardise survival and disease control of patients. The justification for adoption of laparoscopic technique would depend on the perceived value of its effectiveness in improving short-term post-operative outcomes. Laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer has never gained wide acceptance among general surgeons, mainly due to the technical difficulties encountered during pelvic dissection. It has therefore been stated that these patients should undergo open rather than laparoscopic surgery. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is a new technique that has the potential to overcome many of the existing limitations of pure laparoscopy. In the treatment of rectal cancer, HALS could reproduce an operative setting similar to that of the open approach.
                To assess the technical feasibility of hand-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer and evaluate potential benefits and drawbacks of this new procedure, a pilot study was conducted at a university hospital on 16 consecutive patients during a 12-month period. Only patients with extraperitoneal rectal cancer were included in this series. Patients' clinical data, operative time, conversion rate, complications, and early outcome measures were prospectively examined.
                There were 9 men and 7 women. The average +/- SD operation time was 238 +/- 38 min. Conversion to open surgery was never required. Ten of 16 patients were off pain medication on the third postoperative day. Eight were able to walk the day after surgery. Three minor postoperative complications were recorded. Mean postoperative stay for patients without complications was 5.6 +/- 1.4 days.
                From a technical standpoint, the reported hand-assisted procedure makes pelvic dissection during laparoscopic low anterior resection almost equivalent to the laparotomic operation. The incision for hand access that is needed with this technique does not seem to compromise the quick recovery of patients undergoing purely laparoscopic procedures. Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer is controversial. Actuarial survival and local recurrence rates have not been determined.
                A prospective database containing 80 consecutive unselected laparoscopic resections of rectal cancers performed between November 1991 and 1999 was reviewed. Local recurrence was defined as any detectable local disease at follow-up assessment occurring either alone or in conjunction with generalized recurrence. The tumor node metastases (TNM) classification for colorectal cancers and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to determine staging and survival curves. The mesorectal excision technique was used during surgery.
                The median follow-up period was 31 months for patients with stages I, II, and III cancer, and 15.5 months for patients with stage IV cancer. The overall 5-year survival rate was 65.1% for all cancer stages and 72.1% for stages I, II, and III cancer. No trocar-site recurrence was observed. The overall local recurrence rate was 3.75% (3/80) for all cancer stages, and 4.3% (3/70) for stages I, II, and III cancer.
                The survival and local recurrence rates for patients with rectal cancer treated by laparoscopic mesorectal excision do not differ negatively from those in the literature for open mesorectal excision. Further validation is needed. Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the surgical gold standard treatment for middle and low third rectal carcinoma. Laparoscopy has gradually become accepted for the treatment of colorectal malignancy after a long period of questions regarding its safety. The purposes of this study were to examine prospectively our experience with laparoscopic TME and high rectal resections, to evaluate the surgical outcomes and oncologic adequacy, and to discuss the role of this procedure in the treatment of rectal cancer.
                Between December 1992 and December 2004, all patients who underwent elective laparoscopic sphincter preserving rectal resection for rectal cancer were enrolled prospectively in this study. Data collection included preoperative, operative, postoperative and oncologic results with long-term follow-up.
                A total of 218 patients were operated on during the study period: 142 patients underwent laparoscopic TME and 76 patients underwent anterior resection. Of the TME patients, 122 patients were operated using the double-stapling technique, and 20 patients underwent colo-anal anastomosis with hand-sewn sutures. Mean operative time was 138 min (range, 107-205), and mean blood loss was 120 ml (range, 30-350). Conversion to open surgery occurred in 26 cases (12%). Mortality rate during the first 30 days was 1%. Anastomotic leaks were observed in 10.5% of the patients. Of these, 61.9% needed reoperation and diverting stoma, and the rest were treated conservatively. Three patients had postoperative bleeding requiring relaparoscopy. Other minor complications (infection and urinary retention) occurred in 9.1% of patients. Mean ambulation time and mean hospital stay were 1.6 days (range, 1-5) and 6.4 days (range, 3-28) , respectively. Patients were followed for a mean period of 57 months. No port site metastases were observed during follow-up. The recurrence rate was 6.8 %. Overall survival rate was 67% after 5 years and 53.5% after 10 years.
                Laparoscopic anterior resection and TME with anal sphincter preservation for rectal cancer is feasible and safe. The short- and long-term outcomes reported in this series are comparable with those of conventional surgery. This study was conducted to investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer and to compare early outcome data with the results of the conventional technique.
                From January 1996 to March 2002, 435 patients with primary rectal cancer were operated on at our institution. Low-risk, small rectal tumors treatable by local excision, rectal cancer recurrences, and emergency cases were excluded from the analysis. Three hundred thirty-four patients were operated on by the conventional open approach. One hundred one selected patients underwent surgery by the laparoscopic technique.
                Because of the selection process, significantly more patients with early tumor stages were operated on by laparoscopy. There were no differences in mean operation time, morbidity, mortality, or the anastomotic leakage rate; however, the need for intraoperative transfusion, mean stay in the intensive care unit, and length of hospital stay were reduced significantly.
                In terms of the intraoperative and early postoperative course, the laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer in a selected cohort of patients compares favorably with the open technique. Because follow-up time is limited to date, only very preliminary information can be given on tumor-related outcome data. However, these preliminary data appear to suggest that rectal cancer resection can be performed by laparoscopy in accordance with established principles of cancer therapy and that port-site metastases are not a relevant clinical problem. Prospective, randomized trials are required to determine whether the laparoscopic approach will play a significant role in the treatment of rectal cancer in the future. Laparoscopically-assisted resection for large bowel cancer is technically feasible. Sixty-six patients who had resection of the colon or rectum for cancer have been audited prospectively.
                Clinical and pathological data were collected prospectively as part of the ongoing Concord Hospital colorectal cancer project. Patients were followed up for a median of 29 months.
                In 57 of 66 patients in whom laparoscopic resection was attempted the operation was completed laparoscopically. Three patients died from perioperative myocardial infarction. The median postoperative stay was 14 days. There was a high incidence of postoperative respiratory and cardiac complications. One patient developed a port-site metastasis.
                There was no obvious benefit from laparoscopically-assisted resection of large bowel cancer in these patients. To analyze total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer by the laparoscopic approach during a prospective nonrandomized trial.
                Improved local control and survival rates in the treatment of rectal cancer have been reported after TME.
                The authors conducted a prospective consecutive series of 100 laparoscopic TMEs for low and mid-rectal tumors. All patients had a sphincter-saving procedure. Case selection, surgical technique, and clinical and oncologic results were reviewed.
                The distal limit of rectal neoplasm was on average 6.1 (range 3-12) cm from the anal verge. The mean operative time was 250 (range 110-540) minutes. The conversion rate was 12%. Excluding the patient who stayed 104 days after a severe fistula and reoperation, the mean postoperative stay was 12.05 (range 5-53) days. The 30-day mortality was 2% and the overall postoperative morbidity was 36%, including 17 anastomotic leaks. Of 87 malignant cases, 70 (80.4%) had a minimum follow-up of 12 months, with a median follow-up of 45.7 (range 12-72) months. During this period 18.5% (13/70) died of cancer and 8.5% (6/70) are alive with metastatic disease. The port-site metastasis rate was 1.4% (1/70): a rectal cancer stage IV presented with a parietal recurrence at 17 months after surgery. The locoregional pelvic recurrence rate was 4.2% (3/70): three rectal cancers stage III at 19, 13, and 7 postoperative months.
                Laparoscopic TME is a feasible but technically demanding procedure (12% conversion rate). This series confirms the safety of the procedure, while oncologic results are at present comparable to the open published series with the limitation of a short follow-up period. Further studies and possibly randomized series will be necessary to evaluate long-term clinical outcome in cancer patients.
Based on evidence mainly from non-randomized studies, LTME appears to have clinically measurable short-term advantages in patients with primary resectable rectal cancer. The long-term impact on oncological endpoints awaits the findings from large on-going randomized trials.