We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of posterior rectal dissection techniques during rectosigmoid colon resection as part of cytoreductive surgery in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: Close rectal dissection versus total mesorectal excision.
Gynecologic Oncology 2019 May
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of close rectal dissection (CRD) compared with those of total mesorectal excision (TME) as the posterior rectal dissection procedure during rectosigmoid colectomy performed as part of cytoreductive surgery in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 163 patients who underwent posterior rectal dissection for rectosigmoid resection, including low anterior resection or subtotal colectomy, as part of ovarian cancer surgery from 2006 to 2018. The TME technique was mainly performed by colorectal surgeons, and the CRD technique preserving the mesorectal tissue was performed by an experienced gynecologic oncology surgeon. The patients were divided into the TME group and the CRD group, and their clinical outcomes were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 163 patients with ovarian cancer underwent rectosigmoid colon resection. Among the patients, 87 (53.4%) underwent CRD and 76 (46.6%) underwent TME as the posterior rectal dissection technique. The disease severity according to FIGO stage (p = .390) and the residual disease status (p = .412) were not statistically different between the 2 groups. However, the postoperative incidences of anastomotic leakage (p = .045) and prolonged ileus (>7 days, p = .055) were higher in the TME group. The pelvic recurrence rate and progression-free survival did not differ between the 2 groups (p = .663 and .790, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Considering the perioperative outcomes, CRD may be an alternative technique for rectal dissection in ovarian cancer with less perioperative morbidity and equivalent oncologic outcomes.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 163 patients who underwent posterior rectal dissection for rectosigmoid resection, including low anterior resection or subtotal colectomy, as part of ovarian cancer surgery from 2006 to 2018. The TME technique was mainly performed by colorectal surgeons, and the CRD technique preserving the mesorectal tissue was performed by an experienced gynecologic oncology surgeon. The patients were divided into the TME group and the CRD group, and their clinical outcomes were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 163 patients with ovarian cancer underwent rectosigmoid colon resection. Among the patients, 87 (53.4%) underwent CRD and 76 (46.6%) underwent TME as the posterior rectal dissection technique. The disease severity according to FIGO stage (p = .390) and the residual disease status (p = .412) were not statistically different between the 2 groups. However, the postoperative incidences of anastomotic leakage (p = .045) and prolonged ileus (>7 days, p = .055) were higher in the TME group. The pelvic recurrence rate and progression-free survival did not differ between the 2 groups (p = .663 and .790, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Considering the perioperative outcomes, CRD may be an alternative technique for rectal dissection in ovarian cancer with less perioperative morbidity and equivalent oncologic outcomes.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Anti-Arrhythmic Effects of Heart Failure Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy and Their Role in the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death: From Beta-Blockers to Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors and Beyond.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 Februrary 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app