articleJAMAOct 6, 2015Closed access

Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection vs Open Resection of Stage II or III Rectal Cancer on Pathologic Outcomes

Baylor University Medical Center · Mayo Clinic · +20 more institutions

PubMed
Indexed incrossrefpubmed

Abstract

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.

Citation impact

1,090
total citations
FWCI
47.04
Percentile
100%
References
20
Citations per year

Authors

25

Topics & keywords

Keywords
  • Medicine
  • Resection margin
  • Abdominoperineal resection
  • Surgery
  • Colorectal cancer
  • Stage (stratigraphy)
  • Laparoscopy
  • Randomized controlled trial
UN Sustainable Development Goals
  • Good health and well-being
No related works found for this paper.