Is laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery equal to open surgery? An evidence based perspective

被引:16
作者
Kuenzli, Beat M. [1 ]
Friess, Helmut [1 ]
Shrikhande, Shailesh V. [2 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Munich, Dept Gen Surg, D-81675 Munich, Germany
[2] Tata Mem Hosp, Dept Gastrointestinal Surg Oncol, Ernest Borges Marg, Bombay 400012, Maharashtra, India
关键词
Anterior resection; Total mesorectal excision; Rectal cancer; Laparoscopy; Colorectal cancer; Surgery;
D O I
10.4240/wjgs.v2.i4.101
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCS) is an evolving subject. Recent studies show that LCS can not only offer safe surgery but evidence is growing that this new technique can be superior to classical open procedures. Fewer perioperative complications and faster postoperative recovery are regularly mentioned when studies of LCS are presented. Even though the learning curve of LCS is frequently debated when limitations of laparoscopic surgeries are reviewed, studies show that in experienced hands LCS can be a safe procedure for colorectal cancer treatment. The learning curve however, is associated with high conversion rates and economical aspects such as higher costs and prolonged hospital stay. Nevertheless, laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery (LCCR) offers several advantages such as less co-morbidity and less postoperative pain in comparison with open procedures. Furthermore, the good exposure of the pelvic cavity by laparoscopy and the magnification of anatomical structures seem to facilitate pelvic dissection laparoscopically. Moreover, recent studies describe no difference in safety and oncological radicalness in LCCR compared to the open total mesorectal excision (TME). The oncological adequacy of LCCR still remains unproven today, because long-term results do not yet exist. To date, only a few studies have described the results of laparoscopic TME combined with preoperative adjuvant treatment for colorectal cancer. The aim of this review is to examine the various areas of development and controversy of LCCR in comparison to the conventional open approach. (C) 2010 Baishideng. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:101 / 108
页数:8
相关论文
共 84 条
[1]   Hand-assisted or laparoscopic-assisted approach in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Aalbers, A. G. J. ;
Biere, S. S. A. Y. ;
Henegouwen, M. I. van Berge ;
Bemelman, W. A. .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2008, 22 (08) :1769-1780
[2]   Laparoscopic colorectal surgery - Do we get faster? [J].
Agachan, F ;
Joe, JS ;
Sher, M ;
Weiss, EG ;
Nogueras, JJ ;
Wexner, SD .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 1997, 11 (04) :331-335
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1985, N ENGL J MED, V312, P1465
[4]   Hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: Evolution to a clinically useful technique [J].
Ballantyne, GH ;
Leahy, PF .
DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2004, 47 (05) :753-765
[5]   Functional recovery after open versus laparoscopic colonic resection - A randomized, blinded study [J].
Basse, L ;
Jakobsen, DH ;
Bardram, L ;
Billesbolle, P ;
Lund, C ;
Mogensen, T ;
Rosenberg, J ;
Kehlet, H .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2005, 241 (03) :416-423
[6]  
Bennett CL, 1997, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V132, P41
[7]   SUBCUTANEOUS METASTASES AFTER LAPAROSCOPIC COLECTOMY [J].
BERENDS, FJ ;
KAZEMIER, G ;
BONJER, HJ ;
LANGE, JF .
LANCET, 1994, 344 (8914) :58-58
[8]   Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery [J].
Birbeck, KF ;
Macklin, CP ;
Tiffin, NJ ;
Parsons, W ;
Dixon, MF ;
Mapstone, NP ;
Abbott, CR ;
Scott, N ;
Finan, PJ ;
Johnston, D ;
Quirke, P .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2002, 235 (04) :449-457
[9]   Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision: a case-control study [J].
Breukink, SO ;
Pierie, JPEN ;
Grond, AJK ;
Hoff, C ;
Wiggers, T ;
Meijerink, WJHJ .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2005, 20 (05) :428-433
[10]  
Carlsen E, 1998, BRIT J SURG, V85, P526