Short-term and long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a propensity-matched cohort study with conventional laparoscopic surgery

被引:3
|
作者
Wu, Mingyi [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Hao [3 ]
Zhang, Xuehua [1 ,2 ]
Shi, Jiaolong [1 ,2 ]
Lan, Xiaoliang [1 ,2 ]
Mou, Tingyu [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Yanan [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Southern Med Univ, Nanfang Hosp, Dept Gen Surg, 1838 North Guangzhou Ave, Guangzhou 510515, Peoples R China
[2] Southern Med Univ, Nanfang Hosp, Guangdong Prov Key Lab Precis Med Gastrointestinal, 1838 North Guangzhou Ave, Guangzhou 510515, Peoples R China
[3] Hainan Med Univ, Hainan Gen Hosp, Hainan Affiliated Hosp, Dept Gastrointestinal Surg 1, Haikou 570311, Peoples R China
关键词
Colorectal cancer; Minimally invasive surgery; Single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery; Conventional laparoscopic surgery; Propensity-score match; OPEN D3 DISSECTION; COLON-CANCER; REDUCED-PORT; ANTERIOR RESECTION; RANDOMIZED-TRIAL; RECTAL-CANCER; CLASICC TRIAL; COLECTOMY; MULTICENTER; SURVIVAL;
D O I
10.1186/s12876-023-03058-x
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
BackgroundSingle-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1) has been demonstrated to be minimally invasive while possessing better cosmesis and less pain compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). However, SILS + 1 as an alternative to CLS for colorectal cancer is still controversial.MethodsA total of 1071 patients who underwent curative laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer between 2015 and 2018 were included. Of these patients, 258 SILS + 1 cases and 516 CLS cases were analyzed using propensity score matching. The baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, pathologic findings and recovery course, morbidity and mortality within postoperative 30 days and 3-year disease-free and overall survival were compared.ResultsBaseline characteristics were balanced between the groups. The mean operating time was significantly shorter in SILS + 1 group, with less estimated blood loss. Tumor size, tumor differentiation, number of harvested lymph nodes, resection margin and pathologic T, N, TNM stage was similar between the groups. There was no significant difference in overall perioperative complications. Uni- and multivariate analyses revealed that SILS + 1 was not a risk factor for complications. Postoperatively, SILS + 1 group showed faster recovery than CLS group in terms of ambulation, bowel function, oral intake and discharge. The 3-year disease-free survival rates of SILS + 1 and CLS groups were 90.1% and 87.3%(p = 0.59), respectively and the 3-year overall survival rates were 93.3% vs. 89.8%(p = 0.172).DiscussionOur study revealed that SILS + 1 is safe, feasible, oncologically efficient, and may be considered as a surgical option for selected patients with colorectal cancer.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Short-term and long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a propensity-matched cohort study with conventional laparoscopic surgery
    Mingyi Wu
    Hao Wang
    Xuehua Zhang
    Jiaolong Shi
    Xiaoliang Lan
    Tingyu Mou
    Yanan Wang
    BMC Gastroenterology, 23
  • [2] Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Single-Incision Plus One-Port Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer
    Yasumitsu Hirano
    Chikashi Hiranuma
    Masakazu Hattori
    Kenji Douden
    Indian Journal of Surgery, 2021, 83 : 691 - 695
  • [3] Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Single-Incision Plus One-Port Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer
    Hirano, Yasumitsu
    Hiranuma, Chikashi
    Hattori, Masakazu
    Douden, Kenji
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2021, 83 (03) : 691 - 695
  • [4] Long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a randomized controlled trial
    Xuehua Zhang
    Haitao Yuan
    Zilin Tan
    Gaohua Li
    Zhenzhao Xu
    Jinfan Zhou
    Jie Fu
    Mingyi Wu
    Jiafei Xi
    Yanan Wang
    BMC Cancer, 23
  • [5] Short-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a randomized controlled trial
    Yanan Wang
    Haijun Deng
    Tingyu Mou
    Junmeng Li
    Hao Liu
    Haipeng Zhou
    Guoxin Li
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2019, 33 : 840 - 848
  • [6] Long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a randomized controlled trial
    Zhang, Xuehua
    Yuan, Haitao
    Tan, Zilin
    Li, Gaohua
    Xu, Zhenzhao
    Zhou, Jinfan
    Fu, Jie
    Wu, Mingyi
    Xi, Jiafei
    Wang, Yanan
    BMC CANCER, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [7] Short-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a randomized controlled trial
    Wang, Yanan
    Deng, Haijun
    Mou, Tingyu
    Li, Junmeng
    Liu, Hao
    Zhou, Haipeng
    Li, Guoxin
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2019, 33 (03): : 840 - 848
  • [8] Single-incision or Single-incision Plus One-Port Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer
    Hirano, YAsumrrsu
    Hiranuma, Chikashi
    Douden, Kenji
    Hattori, Masakazu
    Yamaguchi, Shigeki
    SURGICAL TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL-INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN SURGERY AND SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2020, 36
  • [9] Comparison of short-term outcomes between single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for distal gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial
    Teng, Wenhao
    Liu, Jingfu
    Liu, Wenju
    Jiang, Jianping
    Chen, Meimei
    Wei, Cheng
    Chong, Choon Seng
    Zang, Weidong
    TRANSLATIONAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2022, 11 (02) : 358 - 366
  • [10] Assessment of treatment options for rectosigmoid cancer: single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, and conventional laparoscopic surgery
    Liu, Ruoyan
    Wang, Yanan
    Zhang, Ze
    Li, Tingting
    Liu, Hao
    Zhao, Liying
    Deng, Haijun
    Li, Guoxin
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2017, 31 (06): : 2437 - 2450