Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery in Elderly Patients with Rectal Cancer
- PMID: 33906329
- PMCID: PMC8325135
- DOI: 10.31557/APJCP.2021.22.4.1325
Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery in Elderly Patients with Rectal Cancer
Abstract
Background: Laparoscopic colorectal resection has been gaining popularity over the past two decades-and the number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer treated with a surgical modality has gradually increased. However, studies about laparoscopic rectal surgery in elderly patients with long-term oncologic outcomes are limited. In this study, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic resection in patients with rectal cancer aged ≥80 y.
Methods: From 2007-2015, a total of 84 consecutive patients with rectal cancer from a single institution were included, 45 patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal resection were compared with 39 patients undergoing open rectal resection.
Results: The two groups were well balanced in terms of age, gender, body mass index, American society of anesthesiologists scores, previous abdominal surgery, neoadjuvant therapy, tumor stage, distance of tumor from the anal verge, and comorbidities. One (2.2%) patient in the laparoscopic group required conversion to open surgery. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly longer operating time (160.1±28.2 versus 148.2±41.3 min; P=0.031), less intraoperative blood loss (80.5±20.9 versus 160.3±42.4 mL; P=0.002), less need of blood transfusion (6.7% versus 20.5%; P=0.003), a shorter time to diet recovery (2.5±1.5 versus 4.9±1.1; P=0.015) and postoperative hospital stay (7.5±4.5 versus 10.8±4.2; P=0.035), lower overall postoperative complication rate (8.9% versus 20.5%; P=0.017), and wound-related complication rate (4.4% versus 10.2%; P=0.013) when compared with open surgery. Specimen length, no. of retrieced lymph nodes, positive distal and circumferential margin rate, mortality rate, and reoperation rate were not significantly different between two groups. The disease-free and overall 5-year survival rates were similar between two groups.
Conclusions: Laparoscopic rectal surgery is safe and feasible in patients aged≥80 y and is associated with similar long-term oncologic outcomes when compared with open surgery. <br />.
Keywords: Elderly patients; Laparoscopic Surgery; Open surgery; rectal cancer.
Conflict of interest statement
We declare that we have no financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that can inappropriately influence our work, there is no professional or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service and/or company that could be construed as influencing the position presented in, or the review of the manuscript entitled. The paper is not based on a previous communication to a society or meeting. The paper has gained ethics committee approval.
Similar articles
-
Outcome of laparoscopic versus open resection for rectal cancer in elderly patients.J Surg Res. 2015 Feb;193(2):613-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2014.08.012. Epub 2014 Aug 13. J Surg Res. 2015. PMID: 25214259
-
Comparison of short-term and oncologic outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic resection for mid- and distal rectal cancer.Surg Endosc. 2017 Jul;31(7):2798-2807. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5289-8. Epub 2016 Oct 26. Surg Endosc. 2017. PMID: 27785627
-
Laparoscopic versus open surgery for stage I rectal cancer: long-term oncologic outcomes.World J Surg. 2013 Mar;37(3):646-51. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1846-z. World J Surg. 2013. PMID: 23188532
-
Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018 Dec;33(12):1741-1753. doi: 10.1007/s00384-018-3145-0. Epub 2018 Sep 5. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018. PMID: 30187156
-
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Ann Surg. 2018 Jun;267(6):1034-1046. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002523. Ann Surg. 2018. PMID: 28984644
Cited by
-
Features and outcomes of rectal cancer patients treated in a hospital in Bogotá, Colombia: a retrospective cohort study.Sci Rep. 2023 Sep 8;13(1):14828. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41439-0. Sci Rep. 2023. PMID: 37684291 Free PMC article.
-
Continuing Care Bundle in Elderly Patients with Rectal Cancer after Radical Resection with Permanent Stoma.Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2022 Aug 8;2022:4065886. doi: 10.1155/2022/4065886. eCollection 2022. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2022. Retraction in: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2023 Jun 21;2023:9853258. doi: 10.1155/2023/9853258. PMID: 35979010 Free PMC article. Retracted.
-
Elderly Rectal Cancer: An Updated Review.Curr Oncol Rep. 2024 Feb;26(2):181-190. doi: 10.1007/s11912-024-01495-9. Epub 2024 Jan 25. Curr Oncol Rep. 2024. PMID: 38270849 Review.
-
Geriatric Approaches to Rectal Cancer: Moving Towards a Patient-Tailored Treatment Era.J Clin Med. 2025 Feb 11;14(4):1159. doi: 10.3390/jcm14041159. J Clin Med. 2025. PMID: 40004690 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1324–32. - PubMed
-
- Buunen M, Veldkamp R, Hop WC, et al. Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:44–52. - PubMed
-
- Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, et al. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg. 2007;246:655–62; discussion 62-4. - PubMed
-
- Frasson M, Braga M, Vignali A, et al. Benefits of laparoscopic colorectal resection are more pronounced in elderly patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008;51:296–300. - PubMed
-
- Green BL, Marshall HC, Collinson F, et al. Long-term follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of conventional versus laparoscopically assisted resection in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2013;100:75–82. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous