Gelişmiş Arama

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorGezen, Cem
dc.contributor.authorAltuntas, Yunus E.
dc.contributor.authorKement, Metin
dc.contributor.authorAksakal, Nihat
dc.contributor.authorOkkabaz, Nuri
dc.contributor.authorVural, Selahattin
dc.contributor.authorOncel, Mustafa
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-09T19:41:46Z
dc.date.available2021-11-09T19:41:46Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.identifier.issn1092-6429
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2011.0479
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12440/3063
dc.description.abstractBackground: This study aims to compare the results of laparoscopic and conventional techniques in patients with low rectal cancers. Subjects and Methods: A retrospective data analysis was initiated in patients underwent laparoscopic or conventional surgery for cancers located in the low (<6 cm) rectum. Patient and tumor-related information, outcomes of operations, and survival were compared between the groups. Results: Among 142 patietns (91 men [64.1%]; mean +/- standard deviation age, 57.7 +/- 14.6 years) who had tumors located <6 cm from the dentate line, 92 (64.8%) were operated on with the laparoscopic technique. Demographics, tumor stage, and localization (2.9 +/- 2.0 versus 2.9 +/- 2.1 cm from the dentate line in laparoscopic and conventional arms, respectively; P = .968) were similar. However, there were more patients in the laparoscopic group who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (92.4% versus 80.0%; P = .03), since there were significantly fewer cases with stage I tumors in this group (3.3% versus 14%; P = .33). The conversion rate was 14.1% (n = 13). The amount of bleeding and the requirement for transfusion decreased (P < .05 for both), and the possibility of sphincter-saving procedures (66.3% versus 34.0%; P < .001) increased, in the laparoscopy group. Other parameters were identical. In the laparoscopy group, the number of harvested lymph nodes (10.2 +/- 5.4 versus 12.4 +/- 6.0; P = .025) and the rate of vascular invasion (27.5% versus 47.8%; P = .021) were less, and Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed an improved survival (P = .042), although the follow-up period was significantly shorter in this group (P < .001). Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancers may be technically feasible and oncologically safe. Laparoscopy may increase the possibility of sphincter preservation.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMary Ann Liebert Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniquesen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectTotal Mesorectal Excisionen_US
dc.subjectAbdominoperineal Resectionen_US
dc.subjectOpen Surgeryen_US
dc.subjectIntersphincteric Resectionen_US
dc.subjectAnterior Resectionen_US
dc.subjectColorectal-Canceren_US
dc.subjectRandomized-Trialen_US
dc.subjectClasicc Trialen_US
dc.subjectCarcinomaen_US
dc.subjectSafetyen_US
dc.titleLaparoscopic and Conventional Resections for Low Rectal Cancers: A Retrospective Analysis on Perioperative Outcomes, Sphincter Preservation, and Oncological Resultsen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.description.wospublicationidWOS:000308700400002en_US
dc.description.scopuspublicationid2-s2.0-84866999468en_US
dc.departmentGümüşhane Üniversitesien_US
dc.identifier.volume22en_US
dc.identifier.issue7en_US
dc.identifier.startpage625en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1089/lap.2011.0479
dc.identifier.endpage630en_US
dc.authorwosidAksakal, Nihat / ABB-5338-2020
dc.authorwosidOncel, Mustafa / AAP-3650-2020
dc.authorwosidOkkabaz, Nuri / U-4054-2019
dc.authorscopusid15042141900
dc.authorscopusid6701650512
dc.authorscopusid23091117100
dc.authorscopusid15047587100
dc.authorscopusid35102954000
dc.authorscopusid6603956441
dc.authorscopusid56238025500
dc.description.pubmedpublicationidPubMed: 22731804en_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster