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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |