nach oben

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

Erschienen in:

18.04.2016 | Original Article

Ten-year outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal resection: results of a randomized controlled trial

verfasst von: Nicolò Pecorelli, Salvatore Amodeo, Matteo Frasson, Andrea Vignali, Walter Zuliani, Marco Braga

Erschienen in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease | Ausgabe 7/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of laparoscopy compared to open surgery on long-term outcomes in a large series of patients who participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing short-term results of laparoscopic (LPS) versus open colorectal resection.

Methods

This is a retrospective review of a prospective database including 662 patients with colorectal disease (526, 79 % cancer patients) who were randomly assigned to LPS or open colorectal resection and followed every 6 months by office visits. The primary endpoint of the study was long-term morbidity. Secondary outcomes included 10-year overall, cancer-specific, and disease-free survivals. All patients were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis.

Results

Fifty-eight (8.8 %) patients were lost to follow-up. Median follow-up was 131 (IQR 78–153) months in the LPS group and 126 (IQR 52–152) months in the open group (p = 0.121). Overall, long-term morbidity rate was 11.8 % (36/309) in the LPS versus 12.6 % (37/295) in the open group (p = 0.770). Incisional hernia rate was 5.8 % (18/309) in the LPS group versus 8.1 % (24/295) in the open group (p = 0.264). Adhesion-related small-bowel obstruction occurred in five (1.6 %) patients in the LPS versus four (1.4 %) patients in the open group (p = 1.000). In 497 cancer patients, 10-year overall survival was 45.3 % in the LPS group and 40.9 % in the open group (p = 0.160). No difference was found in cancer-specific and disease-free survivals, also when patients were stratified according to cancer stage.

Conclusion

In this series, LPS colorectal resection was not associated with a lower long-term morbidity rate when compared to open surgery. Overall, cancer-specific and disease-free survivals were similar in cancer patients who were treated with LPS and open surgeries.

Phillips EH, Franklin M, Carroll BJ, Fallas MJ, Ramos R, Rosenthal D (1992) Laparoscopic colectomy. Ann Surg 216:703–707CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Schwenk W, Haase O, Neudecker J, Muller JM (2005) Short term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev:Cd003145

Buunen M, Veldkamp R, Hop WC, Kuhry E, Jeekel J, Haglind E, Pahlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Lacy A, Bonjer HJ (2009) Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 10:44–52CrossRefPubMed

Green BL, Marshall HC, Collinson F, Quirke P, Guillou P, Jayne DG, Brown JM (2013) Long-term follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of conventional versus laparoscopically assisted resection in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 100:75–82CrossRefPubMed

Kuhry E, Schwenk WF, Gaupset R, Romild U, Bonjer HJ (2008) Long-term results of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev:Cd003432

Bartels SA, Vlug MS, Hollmann MW, Dijkgraaf MG, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, van Wagensveld BA, Engel AF, Gerhards MF, Bemelman WA, Collaborative LSG (2014) Small bowel obstruction, incisional hernia and survival after laparoscopic and open colonic resection (LAFA study). Br J Surg 101:1153–1159CrossRefPubMed

Ng SS, Leung KL, Lee JF, Yiu RY, Li JC, Hon SS (2009) Long-term morbidity and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted anterior resection for upper rectal cancer: ten-year results of a prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum 52:558–566CrossRefPubMed

Taylor GW, Jayne DG, Brown SR, Thorpe H, Brown JM, Dewberry SC, Parker MC, Guillou PJ (2010) Adhesions and incisional hernias following laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer in the CLASICC trial. Br J Surg 97:70–78CrossRefPubMed

Scholin J, Buunen M, Hop W, Bonjer J, Anderberg B, Cuesta M, Delgado S, Ibarzabal A, Ivarsson ML, Janson M, Lacy A, Lange J, Pahlman L, Skullman S, Haglind E (2011) Bowel obstruction after laparoscopic and open colon resection for cancer: results of 5 years of follow-up in a randomized trial. Surg Endosc 25:3755–3760CrossRefPubMed

10.

Mudge M, Hughes LE (1985) Incisional hernia: a 10 year prospective study of incidence and attitudes. Br J Surg 72:70–71CrossRefPubMed

11.

Braga M, Frasson M, Vignali A, Zuliani W, Di Carlo V (2007) Open right colectomy is still effective compared to laparoscopy: results of a randomized trial. Ann Surg 246:1010–1014, Discussion 1014–1015CrossRefPubMed

12.

Braga M, Frasson M, Zuliani W, Vignali A, Pecorelli N, Di Carlo V (2010) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open left colonic resection. Br J Surg 97:1180–1186CrossRefPubMed

13.

Braga M, Frasson M, Vignali A, Zuliani W, Capretti G, Di Carlo V (2007) Laparoscopic resection in rectal cancer patients: outcome and cost-benefit analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 50:464–471CrossRefPubMed

14.

Braga M, Vignali A, Zuliani W, Radaelli G, Gianotti L, Toussoun G, Carlo V (2002) Training period in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 16:31–35CrossRefPubMed

15.

Braga M, Vignali A, Gianotti L, Zuliani W, Radaelli G, Gruarin P, Dellabona P, Di Carlo V (2002) Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: a randomized trial on short-term outcome. Ann Surg 236:759–766, Discussion 767CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Greene FL, American Joint Committee on Cancer, American Cancer Society (2002) AJCC cancer staging handbook: from the AJCC cancer staging manual, 6th edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRef

17.

Laurent C, Leblanc F, Bretagnol F, Capdepont M, Rullier E (2008) Long-term wound advantages of the laparoscopic approach in rectal cancer. Br J Surg 95:903–908CrossRefPubMed

18.

Llaguna OH, Avgerinos DV, Lugo JZ, Matatov T, Abbadessa B, Martz JE, Leitman IM (2010) Incidence and risk factors for the development of incisional hernia following elective laparoscopic versus open colon resections. Am J Surg 200:265–269CrossRefPubMed

19.

Ihedioha U, Mackay G, Leung E, Molloy RG, O’Dwyer PJ (2008) Laparoscopic colorectal resection does not reduce incisional hernia rates when compared with open colorectal resection. Surg Endosc 22:689–692CrossRefPubMed

20.

Kellokumpu IH, Kairaluoma MI, Nuorva KP, Kautiainen HJ, Jantunen IT (2012) Short- and long-term outcome following laparoscopic versus open resection for carcinoma of the rectum in the multimodal setting. Dis Colon Rectum 55:854–863CrossRefPubMed

21.

Winslow ER, Fleshman JW, Birnbaum EH, Brunt LM (2002) Wound complications of laparoscopic vs open colectomy. Surg Endosc 16:1420–1425CrossRefPubMed

22.

Duepree H-J, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Fazio VW (2003) Does means of access affect the incidence of small bowel obstruction and ventral hernia after bowel resection? J Am Coll Surg 197:177–181CrossRefPubMed

23.

Andersen LP, Klein M, Gogenur I, Rosenberg J (2008) Incisional hernia after open versus laparoscopic sigmoid resection. Surg Endosc 22:2026–2029CrossRefPubMed

24.

Lee L, Mappin-Kasirer B, Sender Liberman A, Stein B, Charlebois P, Vassiliou M, Fried GM, Feldman LS (2012) High incidence of symptomatic incisional hernia after midline extraction in laparoscopic colon resection. Surg Endosc 26:3180–3185CrossRefPubMed

25.

Samia H, Lawrence J, Nobel T, Stein S, Champagne BJ, Delaney CP (2013) Extraction site location and incisional hernias after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: should we be avoiding the midline? Am J Surg 205:264–267, Discussion 268CrossRefPubMed

26.

Parker MC, Wilson MS, Menzies D, Sunderland G, Clark DN, Knight AD, Crowe AM, Surgical, Clinical Adhesions Research G (2005) The SCAR-3 study: 5-year adhesion-related readmission risk following lower abdominal surgical procedures. Colorectal Dis 7:551–558CrossRefPubMed

27.

Holmdahl L, Eriksson E, Eriksson BI, Risberg B (1998) Depression of peritoneal fibrinolysis during operation is a local response to trauma. Surgery 123:539–544CrossRefPubMed

28.

Dowson HM, Bong JJ, Lovell DP, Worthington TR, Karanjia ND, Rockall TA (2008) Reduced adhesion formation following laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 95:909–914CrossRefPubMed

29.

Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, Jeekel J, Kazemier G, Bonjer HJ, Haglind E, Påhlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, Morino M, Lacy AM, COlon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (COLOR) (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477–484CrossRefPubMed

30.

Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059CrossRef

31.

Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr, Hellinger M, Flanagan R Jr, Peters W, Nelson H (2007) Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg 246:655–662, Discussion 662–654CrossRefPubMed

32.

Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM (2007) Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol 25:3061–3068CrossRefPubMed

33.

Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown JM, Guillou PJ (2010) Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:1638–1645CrossRefPubMed

34.

Lacy AM, Delgado S, Castells A, Prins HA, Arroyo V, Ibarzabal A, Pique JM (2008) The long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopy-assisted versus open surgery for colon cancer. Ann Surg 248:1–7CrossRefPubMed

35.

Whelan RL, Franklin M, Holubar SD, Donahue J, Fowler R, Munger C, Doorman J, Balli JE, Glass J, Gonzalez JJ, Bessler M, Xie H, Treat M (2003) Postoperative cell mediated immune response is better preserved after laparoscopic vs open colorectal resection in humans. Surg Endosc 17:972–978CrossRefPubMed

36.

Wichmann MW, Huttl TP, Winter H, Spelsberg F, Angele MK, Heiss MM, Jauch KW (2005) Immunological effects of laparoscopic vs open colorectal surgery: a prospective clinical study. Arch Surg 140:692–697CrossRefPubMed

37.

Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Lacy AM, Bemelman WA, Andersson J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J, Fuerst A, Haglind E, COLOR II Study Group (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372(14):1324–1332CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Ten-year outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal resection: results of a randomized controlled trial
verfasst von: Nicolò Pecorelli
Salvatore Amodeo
Matteo Frasson
Andrea Vignali
Walter Zuliani
Marco Braga
Publikationsdatum: 18.04.2016
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease / Ausgabe 7/2016
Print ISSN: 0179-1958
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1262
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2587-5

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Wie sieht der OP der Zukunft aus?

04.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Der OP in der Zukunft wird mit weniger Personal auskommen – nicht, weil die Technik das medizinische Fachpersonal verdrängt, sondern weil der Personalmangel es nötig macht.

Umsetzung der POMGAT-Leitlinie läuft

03.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.

Recycling im OP – möglich, aber teuer

02.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Auch wenn sich Krankenhäuser nachhaltig und grün geben – sie tragen aktuell erheblich zu den CO₂-Emissionen bei und produzieren jede Menge Müll. Ein Pilotprojekt aus Bonn zeigt, dass viele Op.-Abfälle wiederverwertet werden können.

Ambulantisierung: Erste Erfahrungen mit dem Hybrid-DRG

02.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Hybrid-DRG-Verordnung soll dazu führen, dass mehr chirurgische Eingriffe ambulant durchgeführt werden, wie es in anderen Ländern schon länger üblich ist. Die gleiche Vergütung im ambulanten und stationären Sektor hatten Niedergelassene schon lange gefordert. Aber die Umsetzung bereitet ihnen doch Kopfzerbrechen.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2016

UbcH10 overexpression is less pronounced in older colorectal cancer patients

Letter to the editor: stercoral perforation of the sigmoid colon possibly associated with anticholinergic drugs or opiates: a case series

Intravesical electromotive botulinum toxin type A administration for management of concomitant neuropathic bowel and bladder dysfunction in children

Laparoscopic resection of right colon cancer—a matched pairs analysis

Wound infection following stoma reversal: a prospective comparative study between primary closure and partial closure with intervening silver dressings

Erectile and urinary function in men with rectal cancer treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone: a randomized trial report

Update Chirurgie