Cargando…

Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE: The efficacy of laparoscopic vs open surgery for patients with low rectal cancer has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for treatment of low rectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter, noninf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiang, Wei-Zhong, Xu, Jian-Min, Xing, Jia-Di, Qiu, Hui-Zhong, Wang, Zi-Qiang, Kang, Liang, Deng, Hai-Jun, Chen, Wei-Ping, Zhang, Qing-Tong, Du, Xiao-Hui, Yang, Chun-Kang, Guo, Yin-Cong, Zhong, Ming, Ye, Kai, You, Jun, Xu, Dong-Bo, Li, Xin-Xiang, Xiong, Zhi-Guo, Tao, Kai-Xiong, Ding, Ke-Feng, Zang, Wei-Dong, Feng, Yong, Pan, Zhi-Zhong, Wu, Ai-Wen, Huang, Feng, Huang, Ying, Wei, Ye, Su, Xiang-Qian, Chi, Pan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Medical Association 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36107416
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.4079
_version_ 1784790672172122112
author Jiang, Wei-Zhong
Xu, Jian-Min
Xing, Jia-Di
Qiu, Hui-Zhong
Wang, Zi-Qiang
Kang, Liang
Deng, Hai-Jun
Chen, Wei-Ping
Zhang, Qing-Tong
Du, Xiao-Hui
Yang, Chun-Kang
Guo, Yin-Cong
Zhong, Ming
Ye, Kai
You, Jun
Xu, Dong-Bo
Li, Xin-Xiang
Xiong, Zhi-Guo
Tao, Kai-Xiong
Ding, Ke-Feng
Zang, Wei-Dong
Feng, Yong
Pan, Zhi-Zhong
Wu, Ai-Wen
Huang, Feng
Huang, Ying
Wei, Ye
Su, Xiang-Qian
Chi, Pan
author_facet Jiang, Wei-Zhong
Xu, Jian-Min
Xing, Jia-Di
Qiu, Hui-Zhong
Wang, Zi-Qiang
Kang, Liang
Deng, Hai-Jun
Chen, Wei-Ping
Zhang, Qing-Tong
Du, Xiao-Hui
Yang, Chun-Kang
Guo, Yin-Cong
Zhong, Ming
Ye, Kai
You, Jun
Xu, Dong-Bo
Li, Xin-Xiang
Xiong, Zhi-Guo
Tao, Kai-Xiong
Ding, Ke-Feng
Zang, Wei-Dong
Feng, Yong
Pan, Zhi-Zhong
Wu, Ai-Wen
Huang, Feng
Huang, Ying
Wei, Ye
Su, Xiang-Qian
Chi, Pan
author_sort Jiang, Wei-Zhong
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: The efficacy of laparoscopic vs open surgery for patients with low rectal cancer has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for treatment of low rectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted in 22 tertiary hospitals across China. Patients scheduled for curative-intent resection of low rectal cancer were randomized at a 2:1 ratio to undergo laparoscopic or open surgery. Between November 2013 and June 2018, 1070 patients were randomized to laparoscopic (n = 712) or open (n = 358) surgery. The planned follow-up was 5 years. Data analysis was performed from April 2021 to March 2022. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible patients were randomized to receive either laparoscopic or open surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The short-term outcomes included pathologic outcomes, surgical outcomes, postoperative recovery, and 30-day postoperative complications and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1039 patients (685 in laparoscopic and 354 in open surgery) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median [range] age, 57 [20-75] years; 620 men [59.7%]; clinical TNM stage II/III disease in 659 patients). The rate of complete mesorectal excision was 85.3% (521 of 685) in the laparoscopic group vs 85.8% (266 of 354) in the open group (difference, −0.5%; 95% CI, −5.1% to 4.5%; P = .78). The rate of negative circumferential and distal resection margins was 98.2% (673 of 685) vs 99.7% (353 of 354) (difference, −1.5%; 95% CI, −2.8% to 0.0%; P = .09) and 99.4% (681 of 685) vs 100% (354 of 354) (difference, −0.6%; 95% CI, −1.5% to 0.5%; P = .36), respectively. The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 13.0 vs 12.0 (difference, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.1-1.9; P = .39). The laparoscopic group had a higher rate of sphincter preservation (491 of 685 [71.7%] vs 230 of 354 [65.0%]; difference, 6.7%; 95% CI, 0.8%-12.8%; P = .03) and shorter duration of hospitalization (8.0 vs 9.0 days; difference, −1.0; 95% CI, −1.7 to −0.3; P = .008). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications rate between the 2 groups (89 of 685 [13.0%] vs 61 of 354 [17.2%]; difference, −4.2%; 95% CI, −9.1% to −0.3%; P = .07). No patient died within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial of patients with low rectal cancer, laparoscopic surgery performed by experienced surgeons was shown to provide pathologic outcomes comparable to open surgery, with a higher sphincter preservation rate and favorable postoperative recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01899547
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9478880
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher American Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94788802022-09-29 Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial Jiang, Wei-Zhong Xu, Jian-Min Xing, Jia-Di Qiu, Hui-Zhong Wang, Zi-Qiang Kang, Liang Deng, Hai-Jun Chen, Wei-Ping Zhang, Qing-Tong Du, Xiao-Hui Yang, Chun-Kang Guo, Yin-Cong Zhong, Ming Ye, Kai You, Jun Xu, Dong-Bo Li, Xin-Xiang Xiong, Zhi-Guo Tao, Kai-Xiong Ding, Ke-Feng Zang, Wei-Dong Feng, Yong Pan, Zhi-Zhong Wu, Ai-Wen Huang, Feng Huang, Ying Wei, Ye Su, Xiang-Qian Chi, Pan JAMA Oncol Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: The efficacy of laparoscopic vs open surgery for patients with low rectal cancer has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for treatment of low rectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This multicenter, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted in 22 tertiary hospitals across China. Patients scheduled for curative-intent resection of low rectal cancer were randomized at a 2:1 ratio to undergo laparoscopic or open surgery. Between November 2013 and June 2018, 1070 patients were randomized to laparoscopic (n = 712) or open (n = 358) surgery. The planned follow-up was 5 years. Data analysis was performed from April 2021 to March 2022. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible patients were randomized to receive either laparoscopic or open surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The short-term outcomes included pathologic outcomes, surgical outcomes, postoperative recovery, and 30-day postoperative complications and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1039 patients (685 in laparoscopic and 354 in open surgery) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median [range] age, 57 [20-75] years; 620 men [59.7%]; clinical TNM stage II/III disease in 659 patients). The rate of complete mesorectal excision was 85.3% (521 of 685) in the laparoscopic group vs 85.8% (266 of 354) in the open group (difference, −0.5%; 95% CI, −5.1% to 4.5%; P = .78). The rate of negative circumferential and distal resection margins was 98.2% (673 of 685) vs 99.7% (353 of 354) (difference, −1.5%; 95% CI, −2.8% to 0.0%; P = .09) and 99.4% (681 of 685) vs 100% (354 of 354) (difference, −0.6%; 95% CI, −1.5% to 0.5%; P = .36), respectively. The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 13.0 vs 12.0 (difference, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.1-1.9; P = .39). The laparoscopic group had a higher rate of sphincter preservation (491 of 685 [71.7%] vs 230 of 354 [65.0%]; difference, 6.7%; 95% CI, 0.8%-12.8%; P = .03) and shorter duration of hospitalization (8.0 vs 9.0 days; difference, −1.0; 95% CI, −1.7 to −0.3; P = .008). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications rate between the 2 groups (89 of 685 [13.0%] vs 61 of 354 [17.2%]; difference, −4.2%; 95% CI, −9.1% to −0.3%; P = .07). No patient died within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial of patients with low rectal cancer, laparoscopic surgery performed by experienced surgeons was shown to provide pathologic outcomes comparable to open surgery, with a higher sphincter preservation rate and favorable postoperative recovery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01899547 American Medical Association 2022-09-15 2022-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9478880/ /pubmed/36107416 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.4079 Text en Copyright 2022 Jiang WZ et al. JAMA Oncology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Jiang, Wei-Zhong
Xu, Jian-Min
Xing, Jia-Di
Qiu, Hui-Zhong
Wang, Zi-Qiang
Kang, Liang
Deng, Hai-Jun
Chen, Wei-Ping
Zhang, Qing-Tong
Du, Xiao-Hui
Yang, Chun-Kang
Guo, Yin-Cong
Zhong, Ming
Ye, Kai
You, Jun
Xu, Dong-Bo
Li, Xin-Xiang
Xiong, Zhi-Guo
Tao, Kai-Xiong
Ding, Ke-Feng
Zang, Wei-Dong
Feng, Yong
Pan, Zhi-Zhong
Wu, Ai-Wen
Huang, Feng
Huang, Ying
Wei, Ye
Su, Xiang-Qian
Chi, Pan
Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial
title Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial
title_fullStr Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial
title_full_unstemmed Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial
title_short Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial
title_sort short-term outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted vs open surgery for patients with low rectal cancer: the lasre randomized clinical trial
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36107416
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.4079
work_keys_str_mv AT jiangweizhong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT xujianmin shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT xingjiadi shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT qiuhuizhong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT wangziqiang shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT kangliang shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT denghaijun shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT chenweiping shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT zhangqingtong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT duxiaohui shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT yangchunkang shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT guoyincong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT zhongming shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT yekai shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT youjun shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT xudongbo shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT lixinxiang shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT xiongzhiguo shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT taokaixiong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT dingkefeng shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT zangweidong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT fengyong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT panzhizhong shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT wuaiwen shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT huangfeng shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT huangying shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT weiye shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT suxiangqian shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial
AT chipan shorttermoutcomesoflaparoscopyassistedvsopensurgeryforpatientswithlowrectalcancerthelasrerandomizedclinicaltrial