Abstract:AIM:To evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection compared with the open procedure in multimodality management of rectal cancer.METHODS:A total of 106 rectal cancer patients who underwent open abdominoperineal resection (OAPR) were matched with 106 patients who underwent laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (LAPR) in a 1 to 1 fashion, between 2009 and 2013 at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center. Propensity score matching was carried out based on age, gender, pathological staging of the disease and administration of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Data regarding preoperative staging, surgical technique, pathological results, postoperative recovery and complications were reviewed and compared between the LAPR and OAPR groups. Perineal closure around the stoma and pelvic floor reconstruction were performed only in OAPR, not in LAPR. Therefore, abdominoperineal resection procedure-specific surgical complications including parastomal hernia and perineal wound complications were compared between the open and laparoscopic procedure. Regular surveillance of the two cohorts was carried out to gather prognostic data. Disease-free survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimate and log-rank test. Subgroup analysis was performed in patients with locally advanced disease treated with preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgical resection.RESULTS:No significant difference was found between the LAPR group and the OAPR group in terms of clinicopathological features. The operation time (180.8 ± 47.8 min vs 172.1 ± 49.2 min, P = 0.190), operative blood loss (93.9 ± 60.0 mL vs 88.4 ± 55.2 mL, P = 0.494), total number of retrieved lymph nodes (12.9 ± 6.9 vs 12.9 ± 5.4, P = 0.974), surgical complications (12.3% vs 15.1%, P = 0.549) and pathological characteristics were comparable between the LAPR and OAPR group, respectively. Compared with OAPR patients, LAPR patients showed significantly shorter postoperative analgesia (2.4 ± 0.7 d vs 2.7 ± 0.6 d, P < 0.001), earlier first flatus (57.3 ± 7.9 h vs 63.5 ± 9.2 h, P < 0.001), shorter urinary drainage time (6.5 ± 3.4 d vs 7.8 ± 1.3 d, P < 0.001), and shorter postoperative admission (11.2 ± 4.7 d vs 12.6 ± 4.0 d, P = 0.014). With regard to APR-specific complications (perineal wound complications and parastomal hernia), there were no significant differences between the two groups. Similar results were found in the 26 pairs of patients administered neoadjuvant chemoradiation in subgroup analysis. During the follow-up period, no port site recurrences were observed.CONCLUSION:Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer is safe, and is associated with earlier recovery and shorter admission time in combination with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Application of Rectal Eversion in Laparoscopic Low Rectal Operation

Clinical Analysis of 9 Cases of a Novel Stent Assisted Intestinal Bypass for Preventing Anastomotic Leakage in Laparoscopic Assisted Radical Resection of Rectal Cancer

Clinical Analysis of Laparoscopic Resection of Colorectal Cancer

The application of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with preservation of anal sphincter for rectal cancer

Clinical Evaluation of Laparoscopic Abdominoperineal Resection for Cancer of the Low Rectum

Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection And Eversion Technique Combined With A Nondog Ear Anastomosis For Mid- And Distal Rectal Neoplasms A Preliminary And Feasibility Study

[Application value of laparoscopic double stapler firings and double stapling technique combined with rectal eversion and total extra-abdominal resection in the sphincter-preserving resection of low rectal cancer]

[Evolution and Prospect of Colorectal Anastomosis].

Evaluation of Short-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Open Total Mesorectal Excision for Mid and Distal Rectal Cancer

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery Versus The Open Approach In Curative Resection Of Rectal Cancer

Analysis of Curative Effect of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Surgery and Open Resection for Low Rectal Cancer

Laparoscopy Combined with Transperineal Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision for Locally ;advanced Low Rectal Cancer

Laparoscopic-assisted Vs Open Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer: 5-Year Outcomes of the LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial.

[A study on the surgical efficacy of modified laparoscopic levator ani muscle external abdominoperineal resection for the treatment of ultra-low rectal cancer patients]

A novel incisionless laparoscopic technique for the surgical treatment of colorectal tumor

Laparoscopic Versus Open Abdominoperineal Resection in the Treatment of Low Rectal Cancer：a Clinical Comparative Study

Analysis of 17 cases underwent laparos copic rectal cancer surgery with transanal natural orifice specimen extraction and resection

Laparoscopic Vs Open Abdominoperineal Resection in the Multimodality Management of Low Rectal Cancers.

Colorectal eversion technique combined with modified single‐stapled double‐purse‐string low colorectal anastomosis

Anatomical Characteristics of the Rectal Cancers for Laparoscopic Radical Operation

[Application of Transperineal Single-Port Access Assisted Extralevator Abdominoperineal Excision in Low Rectal Cancer].