Users Online : 409 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 ¤   Next article
 ¤   Previous article
 ¤   Table of Contents

 ¤   Similar in PUBMED
 ¤  Search Pubmed for
 ¤  Search in Google Scholar for
 ¤Related articles
 ¤   Citation Manager
 ¤   Access Statistics
 ¤   Reader Comments
 ¤   Email Alert *
 ¤   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2188    
    Printed45    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded59    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 

 ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 14  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 27-32

Comparison of single-port and conventional laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection


Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Kettegaards allé 30, DK-2650 Hvidovre, Denmark

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Nikolaj Nerup
Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet
Denmark
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_38_17

Rights and Permissions

Background: Within the last two decades, surgical treatment of colorectal cancer has changed dramatically from large abdominal incisions to minimal access surgery. In the recent years, single port (SP) surgery has spawned from conventional laparoscopic surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare conventional with SP laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (LAPR) for rectal cancer. Patients and Methods: This was a single-center non-randomised retrospective comparative study of prospectively collected data on 53 patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer; 41 with conventional laparoscopy and 12 with SP surgery. Results: Patients' characteristics were in general comparable, but patients in the conventional laparoscopy-group had a significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists-score. The operative time was slightly shorter in the conventional laparoscopy-group, but no differences were found in oncological margins of the resected specimen, in length of stay or readmission rate. Conclusions: SP LAPR appeared to be safe and feasible in selected patients. Adequate oncologic resections can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Larger randomised controlled trials with longer follow-up are needed to determine the beneficial role of this new procedure.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article

© 2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04