Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery

Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery

A study on the microscopic and macroscopic pictures of 32 samples from patients with rectal cancer who received the rectostomy has shown that most of patients were lately detected in which DUKES A (3%), DUKES B (50%), DUKES C (38%), DUKES D (9%). 3 cases detected to have cancer cells was under the incision about 1cm. For cancer located far from the anal edge about 5 cm, the operation can conservate the sphincter muscle
Rectal Neoplasms ; Surgery

Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery

Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms ; pathology ; surgery ; Rectum ; surgery

In the radical resection of mid-low rectal cancer, due to the narrow pelvic space and thick mesorectum, it is difficult to expose the operation field. In recent years, with the development of laparoscopic surgery and surgical instruments, the surgeons' requirements for precise anatomical planes, neuroprotection, and functional preservation have become higher and higher. Colorectal surgeons will face more "difficult pelvic" challenges during surgery. Therefore, this article reviews the related research progress of "difficult pelvis" in radical resection of rectal cancer, analyzes the possible anatomical factors leading to the occurrence of "difficult pelvis", and explains the clinical significance of the researches on "difficult pelvis".
Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Pelvis/surgery* ; Rectal Neoplasms/surgery*

PURPOSE: A diverting stoma is known to reduce the consequences of distal anastomotic failure following colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a diverting stoma after an ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR) for rectal cancer. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2007, 836 patients who underwent an uLAR were divided into two groups, depending on the fecal diversion: 246 received fecal diversion, and 590 had no diversion. Patient- and disease-related variables were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Thirty-two of the 836 patients (3.8%) had immediate anastomosis-related complications and required reoperation. Anastomosis leakage comprised 72% of the complications (23/32). The overall immediate complication rate was significantly lower in patients with a diverting stoma (0.8%, 2/246) compared to those without a diverting stoma (5.1%, 30/590; P = 0.005). The fecal diversion group had lower tumor location, lower anastomosis level, and more preoperative chemo-radiation therapy (P < 0.001). In total, 12% of patients in the diverting stoma group had complications either in making or reversing the stoma (30/246). CONCLUSION: The diverting stoma decreased the rate of immediate anastomosis-related complications. However, the rate of complications associated with the diverting stoma was non-negligible, so strict criteria should be applied when deciding whether to use a diverting stoma.
Colorectal Surgery ; Humans ; Ileostomy ; Rectal Neoplasms ; Reoperation

Humans ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is rapidly gaining acceptance for the management of colorectal cancer. However, laparoscopic colorectal surgery is technically more challenging than conventional surgery. This challenge is more profound for laparoscopic rectal cancer, where there is a need to perform a total mesorectal excision (TME), in the confines of the pelvis, with the limitations of the laparoscopic system. The Da Vinci robotic surgical system was designed to overcome the pitfalls of laparoscopic surgery, hence the use of this novel system in colorectal surgery seems logical, in particular with regards to rectal cancer surgery. Recently, there have been an increasing number of reports in the literature on robotic colorectal surgery. The advantages of the robotic surgical system include; 7 degrees of movement, 3 dimensional views, tremor filtration, motion scaling and superior ergonomics. These advantages when applied to robotic TME for rectal cancer surgery may potentially translate to better outcomes. The aim of this review is to summarise the current evidence on clinical and oncological outcomes of robotic rectal cancer surgery.
Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery ; Robotics ; Surgery, Computer-Assisted

Anal Canal ; surgery ; Humans ; Postoperative Complications ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery