Published in:
01-07-2019 | Rectal Cancer | Original Article
Hybrid minimally invasive/open approach versus total minimally invasive approach for rectal cancer resection: short- and long-term results
Authors:
Simona Deidda, Jacopo Crippa, Emilie Duchalais, Scott R. Kelley, Kellie L. Mathis, Eric J. Dozois, David W. Larson
Published in:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease
|
Issue 7/2019
Login to get access
Abstract
Objectives
To reduce the technical challenges of a totally minimally invasive approach (TMA) and to decrease the morbidity associated with open surgery, a hybrid minimally invasive/open approach (HMOA) has been introduced as a surgical technique for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare postoperative results and long-term oncologic outcomes between hybrid minimally invasive/open approach and totally minimally invasive approach in patients who underwent rectal resection for cancer.
Methods
All patients with rectal cancer undergoing a totally minimally invasive approach or hybrid minimally invasive/open approach proctectomy between 2012 and 2016 were analyzed. Preoperative and postoperative outcomes were collected from a prospectively maintained institutional database.
Results
Among 283 patients, 138 (48.8%) underwent a hybrid minimally invasive/open approach and 145 (51.2%) a totally minimally invasive approach. Preoperative characteristics were similar between groups except for distance from the anal verge, which was lower in totally minimally invasive approach group (50.7% vs 29%; p = 0.0008). Length of stay (LOS) was significantly longer in the hybrid minimally invasive/open approach group (6.4 vs 4.3; p = < 0.0001). The median follow-up was 29.6 (14–40.6) months. Overall survival and disease-free survival were not significantly different between groups.
Conclusions
Compared with a hybrid minimally invasive/open approach, a totally minimally invasive approach has a shorter length of stay and may improve short-term outcomes in patients undergoing proctectomy for cancer.