Abstract:Objective: To investigate the effect of pelvic peritoneum reconstruction on the prognosis of patients underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 97 patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma in General Surgery Department, the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University from January 2017 to June 2021. According to the implementation of pelvic peritoneum reconstruction, the subjects were divided into study group (48 patients underwent pelvic peritoneum reconstruction after laparoscopic resection) and control group (49 patients not underwent pelvic peritoneum reconstruction). The two groups were compared in terms of Wexner score of anal function, anorectal manometry results, normal rate of defecation sensation, pelvic floor anatomical structure and postoperative complications. Five-year survival analysis was performed. Results: Patients in the study group and the control group were (61.25±10.38) years old and (59.47±11.40) years old (P>0.05). The proportions of male patients were 60.4% (29 cases) and 55.1% (27 cases) (P>0.05) in the study group and control group, respectively. At 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery, Wexner scores of anal function in the study group were lower than those in the control group [(14.29±2.07) vs (16.33±2.18), P<0.001; (9.57±2.34) vs (11.26±2.85), P=0.002; (5.41±1.36) vs (7.86±1.95), P<0.001, respectively]. The anal resting pressure and anal systolic pressure of the study group were higher than those of the control group [(56.29±7.31) mmHg vs (52.88±6.65) mmHg, P=0.018; (129.33±17.36) mmHg vs (110.45±15.22) mmHg, P<0.001, respectively] (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa). The rectal sensory volume, rectal maximum tolerance volume, and the length of anal high-pressure area in the study group were greater than those in the control group [(32.15±4.38) vs (29.76±4.29), P=0.008; (209.57±40.27) vs (184.39±37.56), P=0.002; (3.07±0.52) vs (2.80±0.49), P=0.010, respectively]. At 3 and 6 months after surgery, the normal rates of defecation sensation in the study group were 47.9% (23 cases) and 70.8% (34 cases), respectively, higher than those in the control group [26.5% (13 cases) and 51.0% (25 cases)] (P=0.029 and 0.046, respectively). The detection rate of intestinal tube accumulation in the study group was lower than that in the control group [12.5% (6 cases) vs 38.9% (19 cases)] (P=0.003). There was no significant difference in the total incidence of complications (anastomotic leakage, abdominal infection, intestinal obstruction, pendant pneumonia and urinary tract infection) between the two groups [18.8% (9 cases) vs 24.5% (12 cases)] (P=0.493). There was no significant difference in 5-year cumulative survival rate between the study group and the control group (71.6% vs 68.2%, P=0.309). Conclusion: Pelvic peritoneum reconstruction can improve postoperative anal function and reduce intestinal tube accumulation in patients underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma with high safety and feasibility.

A Study of Laparoscopic Extraperitoneal Sigmoid Colostomy after Abdomino-Perineal Resection for Rectal Cancer

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

[Manufacture and Application of Laparoscopic Extraperitoneal Sigmoid Colostomy].

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

The experience in laparoscopic extraperitoneal sigmoidostomy

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

[Effect of pelvic peritoneum reconstruction on the prognosis of patients underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal adenocarcinoma]

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal colostomy has a lower risk of parastomal hernia and bowel obstruction than transperitoneal colostomy

Clinical application of artificial anal reconstruction after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection in low rectal cancer patients]

A case of pelvic huge solitary fibrous tumor with rectum and retroperitoneum invasion

Laparoscopic Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection Versus Laparoscopic Abdominoperineal Resection for Lower Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Comparative Study from China

Standardized pelvic drainage of anastomotic leaks following anterior resection without diversional stomas.

Impact of ileostomy on postoperative wound complications in patients after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: A meta-analysis

Analysis of risk factors for the sigmoid stoma complications in patients after abdominoperineal resection surgery: An observational study

Comparison of specimen extraction site and another site for protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection: a retrospective comparative study

Low Anterior Laparoscopic Resection of Rectal Cancer with Specimen Removal Through a Preventive Ostomy Incision

Lone-Star retractor perineal exposure method for laparoscopic abdominal perineal resection of rectal cancer

Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Control Trials

Multicenter Study of Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes of Extra-Levator Versus Conventional Abdominoperineal Excision for Lower Rectal Cancer

The Clinical Application of Oversleeve Anastomosis in Laparoscopic Sphincter-Preserving Surgery for Ultra-Low Rectal Cancer

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