A propensity score-matching analysis comparing the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with Stage I/II colon and upper rectal cancers

Numata, Masakatsu; Hasuo, Kimiatsu; Hara, Kentaro; Maezawa, Yukio; Kazama, Keisuke; Inari, Hitoshi; Takata, Ken; Jin, Yasuyuki; Yukawa, Norio; Oshima, Takashi; Rino, Yasushi; Taguri, Masataka; Masuda, Munetaka

doi:10.1007/s00595-014-0954-9

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 34 publications

(42 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As we reported previously, in the surgical groups at our associated hospitals, we employ standardized operative procedures and hold periodic meetings to discuss improving LAC procedures (22,23). In obese patients, assistants should recognize that the effective point to grasp tissue in order to obtain adequate surgical views is strictly limited, and the surgeon should recognize that the length of tissue that can be cut in one task is very narrow.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m²

Kazama

Numata

Aoyama

et al. 2020

In Vivo

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To compare long-and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with those of open surgery for patients with colorectal cancer and body mass index over 25 kg/m 2. Patients and Methods: This multicentre, retrospective study analysed clinical records and identified 178 patients with body mass index over 25 kg/m 2 who underwent surgery for colon and rectosigmoid cancer between 2000 and 2016. After applying propensity score matching, 96 patients were finally included. The primary outcome was the 3-year recurrence-free survival rate, and the secondary outcomes were short-term results during and after surgery. Results: The 3-year recurrence-free survival rates were similar for the laparoscopic and open surgery groups. The laparoscopic surgery group had longer operative times but less blood loss and shorter periods of hospital stay. There were no differences in incidence of postoperative complications. Conclusion: Laparoscopic and open surgeries had similar longterm outcomes for obese patients. Laparoscopic surgery is an effective option for this population.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m²

Kazama

Numata

Aoyama

et al. 2020

In Vivo

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our results are consistent with previously published studies. 41–43 The mean number of lymph nodes harvested in our cohort (21) is higher than in most published articles. Odermatt et al 44 reported a mean number of 12 lymph nodes, and Wang et al 45 reported an average of 12.8 examined lymph nodes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Long-term Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Single Specialized Center Experience

Segev¹,

Schtrechman

Kalady

et al. 2022

Diseases of the Colon &Amp; Rectum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Randomized studies have validated laparoscopic proctectomy for the treatment of rectal cancer as noninferior to an open proctectomy, but most of those studies have included sphincter-preserving resections along with abdominoperineal resection. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes between minimally invasive and open abdominoperineal resection.DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. SETTINGS:The study was conducted in a single specialized colorectal surgery department. PATIENTS:All patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection for primary rectal cancer between 2000 and 2016 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcomes measured were the perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes. RESULTS: We included 452 patients, 372 in the open group and 80 in the minimally invasive group, with RESULTADOS A LARGO PLAZO DE LA RESECCIÓN ABDOMINOPERINEAL MÍNIMAMENTE INVASIVA VERSUS ABIERTA PARA EL CÁNCER DE RECTO: EXPERIENCIA DE UN SOLO CENTRO ESPECIALIZADO ANTECEDENTES: Estudios aleatorizados han validado la proctectomía laparoscópica para el tratamiento del cáncer Funding/Support: None reported.

show abstract

“…Our results also revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Numata and colleagues 27) examined the long-term outcomes in patients with Stage I/II colon cancer. They also reported that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups, although the study was relatively small.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Propensity Score Analysis in the Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes for Locally Advanced Colon Cancer Between Laparoscopic Colectomy and Open Colectomy

Sugimoto

Sakamoto

Ichikawa

et al. 2017

Juntendo Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: It is difficult to conduct a randomised control trial in a single institution because of the small number of cases. The current study was conducted to investigate if there is any difference in long-term outcome between laparoscopic surgery (LAC) and open surgery (OC) using propensity-score matching analysis based on prognostic factors. Materials:Two hundred and sixteen patients with locally-advanced colon cancer who underwent surgery with curative intent at our department between 2002 and 2010 were enrolled in the current study. Methods:Propensity score matching analysis and Inverse Probability Weighting (IPW) estimator were used to adjust for differences in the clinicopathological severity between LAC and OC.Results: Before propensity score matching analysis recurrence-free survival in LAC was statistically better than that in OC (Hazard ratio = 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.98, p = 0.04), and no statistically significant difference was recognized for cancer-specific survival (Hazard ratio = 0.63, 95% CI 0.27-1.37, p = 0.25). After propensity score matching analysis there were no statistically significant differences for recurrence-free (Hazard ratio = 0.91, 95% CI 0.41-2.01, p = 0.81) or cancer-specific survival (Hazard ratio = 1.38, 95% CI 0.41-4.82, p = 0.59). In addition, the IPW estimator revealed that the difference for recurrence-free survival was not significant between the two groups. Conclusion:The one-to-one pair propensity score matching successfully balanced the clinicopathological factors between LAC and OC. The propensity score matching analysis demonstrated no significant difference between LAC and OC.

show abstract

A propensity score-matching analysis comparing the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with Stage I/II colon and upper rectal cancers

Abstract: The outcomes of the laparoscopic approach were comparable to those for open surgeries accompanied by radical lymph node dissection.

Cited by 8 publications

References 34 publications

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m²

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m²

Long-term Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Single Specialized Center Experience

Propensity Score Analysis in the Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes for Locally Advanced Colon Cancer Between Laparoscopic Colectomy and Open Colectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

A propensity score-matching analysis comparing the oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with Stage I/II colon and upper rectal cancers

Abstract: The outcomes of the laparoscopic approach were comparable to those for open surgeries accompanied by radical lymph node dissection.

Cited by 8 publications

References 34 publications

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m2

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m2

Long-term Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Single Specialized Center Experience

Propensity Score Analysis in the Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes for Locally Advanced Colon Cancer Between Laparoscopic Colectomy and Open Colectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m²

Laparoscopic vs. Open Surgery for Stage II/III Colon Cancer Patients With Body Mass Index >25 kg/m²