Comparison of short-term efficacy between laparoscopic surgery with natural orifice specimen extraction and laparoscopic-assisted surgery for radical resection of rectal cancer

Xiaopeng LI; Jing LI; Wei Wang; Mingchao MU; Chenye Zhao; Zilu Chen; Junhui YU; Xiongwei Huo; Xuejun Sun

Return

Comparison of short-term efficacy between laparoscopic surgery with natural orifice specimen extraction and laparoscopic-assisted surgery for radical resection of rectal cancer

VernacularTitle:经自然腔道取标本的腹腔镜手术与腹腔镜辅助手术在直肠癌根治术中的近期疗效比较
Author: Xiaopeng LI ¹ ; Jing LI ^{1
,

2} ; Wei WANG ¹ ; Mingchao MU ¹ ; Chenye ZHAO ¹ ; Zilu CHEN ¹ ; Junhui YU ¹ ; Xiongwei HUO ¹ ; Xuejun SUN ¹
Author Information

1. Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710061, China
2. Department of General Surgery, Xi’an XD Group Hospital, Xi’an 710077, China
Publication Type:Journal Article
Keywords: rectal cancer; natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE); natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES); auxiliary incision; laparoscopic surgery
From: Journal of Xi'an Jiaotong University(Medical Sciences) 2023;44(6):990-995
CountryChina
Language:Chinese
Abstract: 【Objective】 To explore the feasibility, safety and clinical application value of laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) by comparing the postoperative pathological data, surgery-related variables and postoperative recovery between laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery with NOSE and laparoscopic-assisted radical rectal cancer surgery. 【Methods】 A retrospective analysis was conducted on 74 patients who underwent radical rectal cancer surgery with anus preservation in the Department of General Surgery of The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University from July 2017 to April 2022. Among them, 38 cases underwent surgery with specimen extraction through an abdominal auxiliary incision (auxiliary incision group), and 36 cases underwent surgery with specimen extraction through a natural orifice (NOSES group). The differences in the efficacy of the two surgeries were evaluated by comparing the postoperative pathological data, surgical variables, and postoperative recovery of the two groups. 【Results】 There were no statistically significant differences in general data and postoperative pathological data between the two groups (all P>0.05). The NOSES group exhibited significantly shorter operative time, time to first flatus, time to first oral intake postoperatively, and postoperative hospital stay compared to the auxiliary incision group (all P<0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, and whether secondary surgeries were performed (all P>0.05). 【Conclusion】 Laparoscopic surgery with NOSE for rectal cancer is safe and feasible with minimally invasive and accelerated recovery, which is worth promoting and applying in clinical practice.