Assessing appropriateness for elective colorectal cancer surgery: clinical, oncological, and quality-of-life short-term outcomes employing different treatment approaches

Purpose In recent years, colorectal cancer surgery has benefitted from new techniques such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery. However, many treatment disparities exist among different centers for patients affected by the same kind of tumors. Methods Forty-five (41%) open (OCO) vs. 30 (28%) laparosc...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of colorectal disease 2011-10, Vol.26 (10), p.1317-1327
Hauptverfasser: Bertani, Emilio, Chiappa, Antonio, Biffi, Roberto, Bianchi, Paolo Pietro, Radice, Davide, Branchi, Vittorio, Cenderelli, Elena, Vetrano, Irene, Cenciarelli, Sabine, Andreoni, Bruno
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose In recent years, colorectal cancer surgery has benefitted from new techniques such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery. However, many treatment disparities exist among different centers for patients affected by the same kind of tumors. Methods Forty-five (41%) open (OCO) vs. 30 (28%) laparoscopic (LCO) vs. 34 (31%) robotic-assisted (RCO) colectomies and 34 (40%) open (ORR) vs. 52 (60%) robotic (ROR) rectal resections performed during a 15-month period, in elective setting, were compared. Patients presenting contraindications for minimally invasive procedures were excluded from the study, so that all the enrolled patients were suitable for either of the surgical procedures. Results Overall morbidity rates were similar among groups. Perioperative mortality was nil. No significant differences were noted as for total number of lymph nodes harvested between arms. Mean time (days) to first bowel movement to gas was 3.3 vs. 2.3 vs. 2.6 for OCO, LCO, and RCO, respectively ( p  
ISSN:0179-1958
1432-1262
DOI:10.1007/s00384-011-1270-0