Original Article
Comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic-assisted and open complete mesocolic excision (CME) for the treatment of transverse colon cancer
Abstract
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide. Although laparoscopic-assisted complete mesocolic excision (LCME) is a superior treatment, there are few studies available on it owe to the low incidence and technical difficulty of LCME in transverse colon cancer.
Methods: The clinical data of 78 patients with transverse colon cancer who were treated by LCME and open complete mesocolic excision (OCME) were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 39 cases had been treated by LCME, compared with 39 cases treated by OCME. The patient characteristics and short-term outcomes including operation time, intra-operative blood loss, length of incision, time to first flatus, first postoperative ambulation, postoperative hospitalization time, number of harvested lymph nodes, length of resected specimen and incidence of complications were evaluated.
Results: There was no case converted to OCME in LCME group. LCME had significantly shorter length of incision, shorter operation time, less intra-operative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospitalization time (P<0.05). The length of resected specimen and the numbers of harvested lymph nodes were (26.5±5.4 cm) and (16.2±3.1) in LCME group, and (24.8±4.9 cm) and (15.1±3.5) in OCME group, with no differences between two groups. The incidence of wound infection was lower while the incidence of lymphatic leakage, anastomotic leakage, urinary tract infection and wound dehiscence had no significant differences between two groups. None of patients in these two groups developed urinary retention, anastomotic bleeding and postoperative intestinal obstruction.
Conclusions: Our findings suggested that LCME is a safe, feasible and effective treatment method for the treatment of transverse colon cancer due to it can provide superior short-term outcomes including less intra-operative blood loss, faster recovery and lower incidence of wound infection.
Methods: The clinical data of 78 patients with transverse colon cancer who were treated by LCME and open complete mesocolic excision (OCME) were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 39 cases had been treated by LCME, compared with 39 cases treated by OCME. The patient characteristics and short-term outcomes including operation time, intra-operative blood loss, length of incision, time to first flatus, first postoperative ambulation, postoperative hospitalization time, number of harvested lymph nodes, length of resected specimen and incidence of complications were evaluated.
Results: There was no case converted to OCME in LCME group. LCME had significantly shorter length of incision, shorter operation time, less intra-operative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospitalization time (P<0.05). The length of resected specimen and the numbers of harvested lymph nodes were (26.5±5.4 cm) and (16.2±3.1) in LCME group, and (24.8±4.9 cm) and (15.1±3.5) in OCME group, with no differences between two groups. The incidence of wound infection was lower while the incidence of lymphatic leakage, anastomotic leakage, urinary tract infection and wound dehiscence had no significant differences between two groups. None of patients in these two groups developed urinary retention, anastomotic bleeding and postoperative intestinal obstruction.
Conclusions: Our findings suggested that LCME is a safe, feasible and effective treatment method for the treatment of transverse colon cancer due to it can provide superior short-term outcomes including less intra-operative blood loss, faster recovery and lower incidence of wound infection.
