Extralevator with vs nonextralevator abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer: the RELAPe randomized controlled trial

被引:22
|
作者
Bianco, F. [1 ,2 ]
Romano, G. [2 ]
Tsarkov, P. [3 ]
Stanojevic, G. [4 ]
Shroyer, K. [5 ]
Giuratrabocchetta, S. [1 ]
Bergamaschi, R. [1 ]
机构
[1] SUNY Stony Brook, Div Colorectal Surg, Stony Brook, NY USA
[2] Natl Canc Inst, Dept Colorectal Surg, Naples, Italy
[3] Sechenov First Moscow State Med Univ, Dept Colorectal Surg, Moscow, Russia
[4] Sch Univ Nis, Dept Colorectal Surg, Nish, Serbia
[5] SUNY Stony Brook, Dept Pathol, Stony Brook, NY USA
关键词
Randomized controlled trial; circumferential resection margin; extralevator abdominoperineal excision; TOTAL MESORECTAL EXCISION; FLAP RECONSTRUCTION; RESECTION; OUTCOMES; STANDARD; INFECTIONS; CARCINOMA; SCIENCE; SURGERY; CARE;
D O I
10.1111/codi.13436
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Aim A randomized controlled trial was conducted to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference in circumferential resection margin (CRM) between extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) and non-ELAPE for rectal cancer. Method This was a multicentre, randomized controlled trial registered as NCT01702116. Patients with rectal cancer involving the external anal sphincter were randomized to ELAPE or non-ELAPE following neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Randomization was performed according to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guidelines. The primary end-point was CRM (in mm), defined as the shortest distance between the tumour and the cut edge of the specimen. Pathologists and centralized pathology were blinded to the patients' study arm. Interrater reliability (IRR) was assessed using Kendall's coefficient. Intra-operative perforation (IOP) was any rectal defect determined at pathology. Complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Participating surgeons were retrained and credentialed. A sample size calculation showed that 34 subjects would provide sufficient power to reject the null hypothesis. Results Thirty-four patients underwent the allocated intervention. Seventeen patients treated with ELAPE were comparable with 17 patients treated with non-ELAPE regarding age, gender, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class and pre-existing comorbidities. CRM depth (7.14 +/- 5.76 mm vs 2.98 +/- 3.28 mm, P = 0.016) and involvement rates (5.8% vs 41.0%, P = 0.04) were significantly increased in patients treated with ELAPE. The IRR for CRM was 0.78. There were no significant differences in IOP (5.8% vs 11.7%, P = 0.77) and complication rates (29% vs 29%, P = 0.97). Conclusions ELAPE was associated with statistically improved CRM with no difference in IOP and complication rates compared with non-ELAPE for rectal cancer involving the external anal sphincter.
引用
收藏
页码:148 / 157
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Biological Mesh Closure of the Pelvic Floor After Extralevator Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (the BIOPEX-study)
    Musters, Gijsbert D.
    Klaver, Charlotte E. L.
    Bosker, Robbert J. I.
    Burger, Jacobus W. A.
    van Duijvendijk, Peter
    van Etten, Boudewijn
    van Geloven, Anna A. W.
    de Graaf, Eelco J. R.
    Hoff, Christiaan
    Leijtens, Jeroen W. A.
    Rutten, Harm J. T.
    Singh, Baljit
    Vuylsteke, Ronald J. C. L. M.
    de Wilt, Johannes H. W.
    Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.
    Bemelman, Willem A.
    Tanis, Pieter J.
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2017, 265 (06) : 1074 - 1081
  • [42] Perineal closure following extralevator abdominoperineal excision for cancer of the rectum
    Barrie, J.
    Haque, A.
    Evans, D. A.
    COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2018, 20 (11) : 981 - 985
  • [43] Oncological outcomes before and after the extralevator abdominoperineal excision era in rectal cancer patients treated with abdominoperineal excision in a single centre, high volume unit
    Lehtonen, T.
    Rasanen, M.
    Carpelan-Holmstrom, M.
    Lepisto, A.
    COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2019, 21 (02) : 183 - 190
  • [44] SITE OF CIRCUMFERENTIAL RESECTION MARGIN INVOLVEMENT IN STANDARD VERSUS EXTRALEVATOR ABDOMINOPERINEAL EXCISION OF RECTAL CANCER.
    Patel, A.
    Bowley, D.
    Geh, I.
    Hendrickse, C.
    McArthur, D.
    Budhoo, M.
    Langman, G.
    Karandikar, S.
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2013, 56 (04) : E267 - E268
  • [45] A century of abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer
    Wallace, William D.
    White, Timothy J.
    Lynch, A. Craig
    Heriot, Alexander G.
    COLORECTAL CANCER, 2012, 1 (01) : 25 - 35
  • [46] Standard Versus Extralevator Abdominoperineal Low Rectal Cancer Excision Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Paola De Nardi
    Valeria Summo
    Andrea Vignali
    Giovanni Capretti
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2015, 22 : 2997 - 3006
  • [47] Comparison of the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) and non-ELAPE for low rectal cancer
    He, Zheng
    Yang, Xi yang
    Yang, Xing-guang
    Zhao, Peng-ju
    Li, Yi
    Yang, Ji-wu
    UPDATES IN SURGERY, 2023, 75 (03) : 611 - 617
  • [48] Comparison of the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) and non-ELAPE for low rectal cancer
    Zheng He
    Xi yang Yang
    Xing-guang Yang
    Peng-ju Zhao
    Yi Li
    Ji-wu Yang
    Updates in Surgery, 2023, 75 : 611 - 617
  • [49] Extralevator vs conventional abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer-A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Negoi, Ionut
    Hostiuc, Sorin
    Paun, Sorin
    Negoi, Ruxandra I.
    Beuran, Mircea
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 212 (03): : 511 - 526
  • [50] PERINEAL RECONSTRUCTION AFTER EXTRALEVATOR ABDOMINOPERINEAL EXCISION FOR LOW RECTAL CANCER: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.
    De Nardi, P.
    Summo, V.
    Capretti, G.
    Vignali, A.
    Klinger, M.
    Staudacher, C.
    DISEASES OF THE COLON & RECTUM, 2014, 57 (05) : E220 - E220