ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety and advantages of modified Bacon one-time operation in laparoscopic radical resection for ultra-low rectal cancer.MethodsThe medical records of all patients who underwent laparoscopic modified Bacon procedure for ultra-low rectal cancer treated by Professor SONG Junmin Medical Group of our department from August 2018 to June 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the different methods during the operation, the patients were divided into a modified Bacon one-time operation group (modified Bacon group, n=26) and a Bacon secondary operation group (traditional Bacon group, n=33). The perioperative period data and follow-up results were observed and compared.ResultsA total of 59 ptients were collected, including 26 cases in the modified Bacon group and 33 cases in the traditional Bacon group. There were no significant differences in gender composition, age, etc. baseline data between the two groups (P>0.05). All surgery were successfully completed. There were no conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative or postoperative massive bleeding, severe infection and other serious complications and perioperative period death. The incidence of anastomotic leakage in the modified Bacon group was lower than that of the traditional Bacon group [0.0% (0/26) versus 18.2% (6/33), P=0.030]. There were no significant differences in the incidences of postoperative anastomotic bleeding, anastomotic stricture, rectal irritation, and external intestinal necrosis between the two groups (P>0.05). And the number of dissected lymph nodes, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, the first exhaust time, and postoperative hospital stay had no significant differences between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in the severity degree and total score of low anterior rectectomy syndrome (LARS) between the two groups at 3 and 6 months after operation (P>0.05). However, the total LARS score at 6 months after operation was lower than that at 3 months in the same group (P<0.001). By the end of the last follow-up (January 2021), there was no obvious difference in the anal shape between the two kinds of surgery. There was no recurrence or death during the follow-up period.ConclusionModified Bacon one-time operation for ultra-low rectal cancer is safe and feasible, which could achieve natural orififice specimen extraction surgery and ultra-low limit sphincter preservation, reduce occurrence of postoperative anastomotic leakage and external intestinal necrosis, times of operation, and shorten total length of stay and reduce total cost of hospitalization.
ObjectiveTo compare and analyze the therapeutic effect of robotic and laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer for obese patients with rectal adenocarcinoma. MethodsThe retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinicopathologic data of 217 obese patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from October 2017 to January 2020 were collected, 104 patients received radical resection of rectal cancer assisted by Da Vinci robotic surgical system and were assigned to the robot group, 113 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted radical resection of rectal cancer and were assigned to the laparoscope group. The perioperative indexes, pathological examination, and postoperative recovery of urogenital function were compared. ResultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in the gender, age, body mass index, distance from lower edge of tumor to anal edge, tumor diameter, American Association of Anesthesiologists classification, preoperative complications, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level, tumor differentiation, and TNM stage (P>0.05). The operations were successfully completed in all patients and there was no conversion to laparotomy and perioperative death. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the operation time, first exhaust time, first eating liquid food time, first getting out of bed activity time, drainage tube placement time, prophylactic stoma rate, and postoperative complications (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss and total hospital stay in the robot group were less than those of the laparoscope group (P<0.05). The International Prostate Symptom Score of the robot group was lower than that of the laparoscope group at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation (P<0.05). The International Index of Erectile Function-15 score of male patients and Female Sexual Function Index-19 score of female patients in the robot group were higher than those in the laparoscope group at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation (P<0.05). ConclusionsRobotic surgery is safe and effective in treatment of obese patients with rectal adenocarcinoma. Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery could benefit patients more in protecting postoperative genitourinary function.