TY - JOUR
T1 - Surgical outcome after standard abdominoperineal resection
T2 - A 15-year cohort study from a single cancer centre
AU - Wilkins, S.
AU - Yap, R.
AU - Loon, K.
AU - Staples, M.
AU - Oliva, K.
AU - Ruggiero, B.
AU - McMurrick, P.
AU - Carne, P.
PY - 2018/12/1
Y1 - 2018/12/1
N2 - Background: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) is associated with a poorer oncological outcome than anterior resection. This may be due to higher rates of intra-operative perforation and circumferential resection margin involvement. The aim of this study was to audit our short and long-term results of abdominoperineal resection performed using conventional techniques and to compare this with other published series. Materials and methods: A retrospective review of all patients who had standard APR between January 2000 and December 2016 in a single institution, Cabrini Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. A total of 163 cases performed by nine different colorectal surgeons for primary rectal adenocarcinoma were identified, with their clinicopathological data analysed. Results: Using standard APR, only six patients (3.7%) were found to have a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM). There were two cases of intra-operative perforation (1.2%). Local recurrence rate was 5.6% of patients, with distant recurrence found in 24.9%. Disease-free survival at five years was 73.1%. Five-year overall survival was 66.7%, 67.9% of all deaths were cancer-related. Conclusion: Short and long-term outcomes after standard APR in this study were comparable to previous published studies. The CRM rate of 3.7% compares favourably to published positive CRM rates for standard APR which ranged from 6 to 18%. Standard APR remains a viable technique for the treatment of rectal cancer. Patient selection and adequate training remain important factors.
AB - Background: Abdominoperineal resection (APR) is associated with a poorer oncological outcome than anterior resection. This may be due to higher rates of intra-operative perforation and circumferential resection margin involvement. The aim of this study was to audit our short and long-term results of abdominoperineal resection performed using conventional techniques and to compare this with other published series. Materials and methods: A retrospective review of all patients who had standard APR between January 2000 and December 2016 in a single institution, Cabrini Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. A total of 163 cases performed by nine different colorectal surgeons for primary rectal adenocarcinoma were identified, with their clinicopathological data analysed. Results: Using standard APR, only six patients (3.7%) were found to have a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM). There were two cases of intra-operative perforation (1.2%). Local recurrence rate was 5.6% of patients, with distant recurrence found in 24.9%. Disease-free survival at five years was 73.1%. Five-year overall survival was 66.7%, 67.9% of all deaths were cancer-related. Conclusion: Short and long-term outcomes after standard APR in this study were comparable to previous published studies. The CRM rate of 3.7% compares favourably to published positive CRM rates for standard APR which ranged from 6 to 18%. Standard APR remains a viable technique for the treatment of rectal cancer. Patient selection and adequate training remain important factors.
KW - Abdominoperineal
KW - Colorectal
KW - Outcomes
KW - Surgery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055906943&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amsu.2018.10.029
DO - 10.1016/j.amsu.2018.10.029
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85055906943
SN - 2049-0801
VL - 36
SP - 83
EP - 89
JO - Annals of Medicine and Surgery
JF - Annals of Medicine and Surgery
ER -