TY - JOUR
T1 - Resection of rectal cancer via an abdominal single-port access
T2 - Short-term results and comparison with standard laparoscopy
AU - Sourrouille, Isabelle
AU - Dumont, Frédéric
AU - Goéré, Diane
AU - Honoré, Charles
AU - Elias, Dominique
PY - 2013/11/1
Y1 - 2013/11/1
N2 - BACKGROUND: Rectal surgery via a single-port access is complex with unknown benefits. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the short-term outcome between single-port and multiport procedures. DESIGN: We undertook a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in a large, tertiary care cancer center in France. PATIENTS: From November 2008 to June 2012, 45 patients underwent a sphincter-saving rectal resection through a single-port (n = 13) or a multiport (n = 32) approach. The single-port approach used an abdominal single port (n = 6) alone or a combined abdominal and transanal single port (n = 7). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: This study analyzed the morbidity, mortality, pain, and quality of the oncologic resection. RESULTS: The groups had a similar median operative time (290 vs 280 minutes, p = 0.54) and conversion rates (8% vs 6%, p = 0.90). No mortality occurred, and there was no difference in major morbidity (23% vs 16%, p = 0.50), anastomotic leakage (8% vs 9%, p = 1), or the length of the hospital stay (12 vs 14 days, p = 0.23). The median pain score was lower on postoperative day 2 in the single-port group (1.5 vs 4, p = 0.01). The 2 groups had similar quality criteria for oncologic resection, namely the median number of harvested lymph nodes (14 vs 15, p = 0.63), a good mesorectal dissection rate (85% vs 75%, p = 0.56), and positive resection margins (0% vs 6%, p = 0.10). LIMITATIONS: This study's limitations include the retrospective nature of the data and the small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer surgery through a singleport access is feasible with similar outcomes and less postoperative pain than with multiport laparoscopy.
AB - BACKGROUND: Rectal surgery via a single-port access is complex with unknown benefits. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the short-term outcome between single-port and multiport procedures. DESIGN: We undertook a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data in a large, tertiary care cancer center in France. PATIENTS: From November 2008 to June 2012, 45 patients underwent a sphincter-saving rectal resection through a single-port (n = 13) or a multiport (n = 32) approach. The single-port approach used an abdominal single port (n = 6) alone or a combined abdominal and transanal single port (n = 7). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: This study analyzed the morbidity, mortality, pain, and quality of the oncologic resection. RESULTS: The groups had a similar median operative time (290 vs 280 minutes, p = 0.54) and conversion rates (8% vs 6%, p = 0.90). No mortality occurred, and there was no difference in major morbidity (23% vs 16%, p = 0.50), anastomotic leakage (8% vs 9%, p = 1), or the length of the hospital stay (12 vs 14 days, p = 0.23). The median pain score was lower on postoperative day 2 in the single-port group (1.5 vs 4, p = 0.01). The 2 groups had similar quality criteria for oncologic resection, namely the median number of harvested lymph nodes (14 vs 15, p = 0.63), a good mesorectal dissection rate (85% vs 75%, p = 0.56), and positive resection margins (0% vs 6%, p = 0.10). LIMITATIONS: This study's limitations include the retrospective nature of the data and the small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer surgery through a singleport access is feasible with similar outcomes and less postoperative pain than with multiport laparoscopy.
KW - Laparoscopy
KW - Postoperative pain
KW - Rectal cancer
KW - Single-port access
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84888356592&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/DCR.12345678787890
DO - 10.1007/DCR.12345678787890
M3 - Article
C2 - 24104993
AN - SCOPUS:84888356592
SN - 0012-3706
VL - 56
SP - 1203
EP - 1210
JO - Diseases of the Colon and Rectum
JF - Diseases of the Colon and Rectum
IS - 11
ER -