Prone or Lithotomy Positioning During an Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer Results in Comparable Oncologic Outcomes

BACKGROUND: There is debate whether performing the perineal part of the abdominoperineal resection in a prone position in comparison with a lithotomy position optimizes circumferential resection margins and, subsequently, cancer outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of patients undergoing abdominoperineal in a prone vs a lithotomy position. DESIGN: A single-center, prospectively maintained colorectal cancer database was queried for patients with stages I to III rectal cancer undergoing abdominoperineal resection in a prone vs a lithotomy position from 1997 to 2007. Patients were compared with respect to demographics, tumor and treatment characteristics, perioperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes. Oncologic outcomes were adjusted for age, ASA class, tumor stage, and use of adjuvant treatments. chi(2), Fisher exact probability test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, Kaplan-Meier estimates, log-rank sum test, and Cox regression models were used for the analysis. P < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The query returned 168 patients (81 prone and 87 lithotomy), with a median age of 63 (interquartile range, 52-74) years and a median follow-up of 42 (interquartile range, 23-69) months. Prone and lithotomy patients were not statistically different regarding demographics, tumor stage, rates of R0 resection, number of harvested nodes, perioperative morbidity, follow-up time, and oncologic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical positioning during the perineal part of the abdominoperineal resection does not affect perioperative morbidity or oncologic outcomes and should be left to the surgeon's discretion.