Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection vs Open Resection of Stage II or III Rectal Cancer on Pathologic Outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Clinical Trial.
نویسندگان
چکیده
IMPORTANCE Evidence about the efficacy of laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is incomplete, particularly for patients with more advanced-stage disease. OBJECTIVE To determine whether laparoscopic resection is noninferior to open resection, as determined by gross pathologic and histologic evaluation of the resected proctectomy specimen. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A multicenter, balanced, noninferiority, randomized trial enrolled patients between October 2008 and September 2013. The trial was conducted by credentialed surgeons from 35 institutions in the United States and Canada. A total of 486 patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer within 12 cm of the anal verge were randomized after completion of neoadjuvant therapy to laparoscopic or open resection. INTERVENTIONS Standard laparoscopic and open approaches were performed by the credentialed surgeons. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome assessing efficacy was a composite of circumferential radial margin greater than 1 mm, distal margin without tumor, and completeness of total mesorectal excision. A 6% noninferiority margin was chosen according to clinical relevance estimation. RESULTS Two hundred forty patients with laparoscopic resection and 222 with open resection were evaluable for analysis of the 486 enrolled. Successful resection occurred in 81.7% of laparoscopic resection cases (95% CI, 76.8%-86.6%) and 86.9% of open resection cases (95% CI, 82.5%-91.4%) and did not support noninferiority (difference, -5.3%; 1-sided 95% CI, -10.8% to ∞; P for noninferiority = .41). Patients underwent low anterior resection (76.7%) or abdominoperineal resection (23.3%). Conversion to open resection occurred in 11.3% of patients. Operative time was significantly longer for laparoscopic resection (mean, 266.2 vs 220.6 minutes; mean difference, 45.5 minutes; 95% CI, 27.7-63.4; P < .001). Length of stay (7.3 vs 7.0 days; mean difference, 0.3 days; 95% CI, -0.6 to 1.1), readmission within 30 days (3.3% vs 4.1%; difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%), and severe complications (22.5% vs 22.1%; difference, 0.4%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%) did not differ significantly. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen in 462 operated and analyzed surgeries was complete (77%) and nearly complete (16.5%) in 93.5% of the cases. Negative circumferential radial margin was observed in 90% of the overall group (87.9% laparoscopic resection and 92.3% open resection; P = .11). Distal margin result was negative in more than 98% of patients irrespective of type of surgery (P = .91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with stage II or III rectal cancer, the use of laparoscopic resection compared with open resection failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for pathologic outcomes. Pending clinical oncologic outcomes, the findings do not support the use of laparoscopic resection in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00726622.
منابع مشابه
COLOR: a randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open resection for colon cancer.
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic surgery has proven to be safe and effective. However, the value of laparoscopic resection for malignancy in terms of cancer outcome can only be assessed by large prospective randomized clinical trials with sufficient follow-up. METHODS COLOR (COlon carcinoma Laparoscopic or Open Resection) is a European multicenter randomized trial that began in 1997. In 27 hospitals i...
متن کاملComparison of Short and Long Term Outcomes for Open vs. Laparoscopic Assisted Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer
The abdominoperineal resection (APR) has been regarded as the gold standard for the surgical treatment of lower-lying rectal cancer (also for cases of sphincter or puborectal muscle invasion) [1]. APRs require the total mesorectal excision of the rectum and anal sphincters, resulting in the formation of a permanent colostomy. Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is being performed increas...
متن کاملLong-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Middle and Lower Rectal Cancer
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic surgery for middle and lower rectal cancer remain controversial because anatomical and complex surgical procedures specifically influence oncologic outcomes. This study analyzes the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for middle and lower rectal cancer. METHODS Patients (laparoscopic: n = 129, open: n = 152) who underwent curative resection for middl...
متن کاملHand-assisted laparoscopic surgery compared with open resection for mid and low rectal cancer: a case-matched study with long-term follow-up
BACKGROUND This study was designed to compare the long-term surgical outcomes of patients with mid and low rectal cancer after open or hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS). METHODS A case-matched controlled prospective analysis of 116 patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) for stage I to III mid and low rectal cancer from 2005 to 2010 was performed. Contemporary...
متن کاملDifferences in clinical features between laparoscopy and open resection for primary tumor in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer
PURPOSE To identify differences in clinical features between laparoscopy and open resection for primary tumor in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. We also evaluated short-term and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopy and open surgery. METHODS A total of 100 consecutive stage IV patients undergoing open (n=61) or laparoscopic (n=39) major resection were analyzed. There were four cases ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- JAMA
دوره 314 13 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2015