Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Die laparoskopische Rektumkarzinomresektionen hat eine den offenen Verfahren vergleichbare Morbidität und onkologische Sicherheit bei jedoch deutlich höherer Morbidität nach Konversion. Zu den onkologischen Langzeitergebnisse nach Konversion liegen keine Daten vor.
Methode
Vom 01.01.2000–31.12.2002 in einer Beobachtungsstudie erfasste Patienten mit kurativ reseziertem Rektumkarzinom wurden hinsichtlich der postoperativen Morbidität, Letalität, des tumor- und lokalrezidivfreien Überlebens nach laparoskopischer vs. konvertierter vs. offener Resektion verglichen.
Ergebnisse
Von 7189 Patienten wurden 237 (3,3%) laparoskopisch (ITT) reseziert. Diese Patienten hatten signifikant häufiger T1/2-Tumore (p<0,001) in früheren UICC-Stadien (p<0,001) als die offen resezierten. Die Konversionsrate betrug 14,8% (n=35). Die Konversionsgruppe hatte signifikant mehr intraoperative (p<0,001) und allgemeine postoperative Komplikationen (p=0,003) sowie die höchste Gesamtmorbidität (p=0,031) im Vergleich zur laparoskopischen und offenen Resektion. Nach einem medianen Follow-up von 30.1 Monaten zeigten die konvertierten Patienten die höchste 5-J-Lokalrezidivrate (16.0%). Nach laparoskopischer sowie offener Resektion betrug diese 3.3% resp. 12.4% (p=0.082). Die tumorfreie 5-J-Üerlebensrate war vergleichbar (p=0.585).
Schlussfolgerungen
Die laparoskopische Rektumkarzinomresektion bietet gegenüber der offenen Resektion vergleichbare onkologische Ergebnisse, jedoch ist nach Konversion das frühpostoperative und das onkologische Langzeit-Outcome schlechter. Bei Konversionsraten um 15% ist eine strenge Patientenselektion und Durchführung der laparoskopischen Resektion an Zentren zu fordern.
Abstract
Background
The laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer shows morbidity and oncological safety comparable to the open approach, but morbidity increases after conversion to open resection. No oncological long-term results are available for the latter patients.
Methods
From 01/01/2000–31/12/2002, patients with curatively resected rectal cancer enrolled in a observational study were evaluated for morbidity, mortality, tumor- and local recurrence rate, paying attention to patients with conversion from laparoscopic to open resection.
Results
237 (3.3%) of 7,189 patients underwent laparoscopic resection (ITT). These patients showed significantly more T1/2 tumors (P<0.001) in earlier UICC stages (P<0.001) than open resected patients. 35 (14.8%) of 237 laparoscopic procedures were converted. Compared with patients receiving complete laparoscopic or open resection, these patients showed significantly higher frequencies of intraoperative (P<0.001) and general postoperative complications (P=0.003) as well as the highest overall morbidity (P=0.031). After a median follow-up of 30.1 months, the highest 5-year local recurrence rate was found in the converted group (16.0%). The laparoscopically resected patients showed a local recurrence rate of 3.3%, patients with open resection of 12.4% (P=0.082). The disease-free survival rate did not differ between the groups (P=0.585).
Conclusion
Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer provides oncological results similar to open resection. After conversion, the short and oncological long-term outcomes were worse. Considering a conversion rate of 15%, only a strict indication for the laparoscopic approach can be allowed, and laparoscopic resection should be performed at centers.
Literatur
Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ (2004) Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 91: 1111–1124
Bärlehner E, Benhidjeb T, Anders S et al. (2005) Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer: Outcomes in 194 patients and review of the literature. Surg Endosc 19: 757–766
Braga M, Vignali A, Gianotti L et al. (2002) Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: a randomized trail on short-term outcome. Ann Surg 236: 759–767
Breukink SO, Grond AJK, Pierie JPEN et al. (2005) Laparoscopic vs. open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: An evaluation of the mesorectum‘s macroscopic quality. Surg Endosc 19: 307–310
Bruch HP, Esnaashari H, Schwandner O (2005) Current Status of laparoscopic therapy of colorectal cancer. Dig Dis 23: 127–134
Dulucq JL, Wintringer P, Stabilini C et al. (2005) Laparoscopic rectal resection with anal sphincter preservation for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 19: 1468–1474
Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al. (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASSIC trail): multicentre, randomized controlled trail. Lancet 365: 1718–1726
Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RDH (1982) The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery – the clue to pelvic recurrence ? Br J Surg 69: 613–616
Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RD et al. (1998) Rectal cancer: The Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978–1997. Arch Surg 133: 894–899
Hohenberger W, Merkel S (2004) Die laparoskopische Chirurgie des Kolonkarzinoms. Chirurg 75: 1053–1055
Köckerling F, Reymond MA, Schneider C et al. (1998) Prospective multicenter study of the quality of oncologic resection in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 41: 963–970
Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S et al. (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of nonmetastatic colon cancer: A randomized trail. Lancet 359: 2224–2229
Leroy J, Jamali F, Forbes L et al. (2004) Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer surgery: Long-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 18: 281–289
Marusch, F, Koch A, Schmidt U et al. (2002) Prospektive Multizenterstudien „Kolon-/Rektumkarzinome“ als flächendeckende chirurgische Qualitätssicherung. Chirurg 73: 138–146
Morino M, Allaix ME, Giraudo G et al. (2005) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for extraperitoneal rectal cancer: A prospective comparative study. Surg Endosc 19: 1460–1467
Pikarsky AJ, Rosenthal R, Weiss EG et al. (2002) Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. Surg Endosc 16: 558–562
Poulin EC, Schlachta CM, Grégoire R et al. (2002) Local recurrence and survival after laparoscopic mesorectal resection for rectal adenocarcinoma. Surg Endosc 16: 989–995
Raue W, Haase O, Junghans T et al. (2004) Fast-track multimodal rehabilitation program improves outcome after laparoscopic sigmoidectomy. A controlled prospective evaluation. Surg Endosc 18: 1463–1468
Rullier E, Sa Cunha A, Couderc P et al. (2003) Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection with coloplasty and coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 90: 440–444
Scheidbach H, Schneider C, Konradt J et al. (2002) Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection and anterior resection with curative intent for carcinoma of the rectum. Surg Endosc 16: 7–13
Schwander O, Schiedeck THK, Killaitis C et al. (1999) A case-control-study comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectosigmoidal and rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 14: 158–163
Schwenk W, Neudecker J, Raue W et al. (2005) Fast-track rehabilitation after rectal cancer resection. Int J Colorectal Dis 9: 1–7
Slim K, Pezet D, Riff Y et al. (1995) High morbidity rate after converted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Br J Surg 82: 1406
The Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (2005) Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: Short-term outcomes of a randomized trail. Lancet Oncol: online publication: DOI 10.1016/S1470–2045(05)70–221–7
The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparision of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350: 2050–2059
Tomita H, Marcello PW, Milsom JW (1999) Laparoscopic Surgery of the Colon and Rectum. World J Surg 23: 397–405
Weeks JC, Nelson H, Gelber S et al. (2002) Short-term Quality-of-life outcomes following laparocopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: A randomized trail. JAMA 287: 321–328
Interessenkonflikt
Keine Angaben
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ptok, H., Steinert, R., Meyer, F. et al. Operative Behandlung von Rektumkarzinomen im Vergleich. Chirurg 77, 709–717 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-006-1199-y
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-006-1199-y