Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Open Surgery for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer: Short-term Results

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer.

Materials and methods. This prospective clinical study, carried out between 2008-2011, included 260 patients with rectal cancer, of which 60 were treated by laparoscopic surgery and 200 by open surgery. The parameters measured for comparison between the two groups were represented by: epidemiological features, operative details, histopathological characteristics, postoperative outcomes, postoperative morbidity and mortality rate.

Results. Rectal cancer situated in the lower third was more frequent in the laparoscopic group (laparoscopic 55% vs 27.9% open, p=0.001). Blood loss was lower for patients treated by laparoscopic surgery (250 ml vs 300 ml in open surgery, p=0.001) but operative time was longer (laparoscopic 300 min vs 150 min classic, p=0.001). Time to first flatus (laparoscopic 2 days vs 3 days open, p=0.001) and time to oral intake (laparoscopic 2 days vs 3 days open, p=0.001) was shorter in the laparoscopic group. The overall postoperative complications did not differ between the two groups (laparoscopic 28.8% vs 29% open, p=0.932).

Conclusions. Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is safe and effective, offering a faster recovery and a similar postoperative morbidity and mortality compared with open surgery.