AIM:To evaluate corrective effect and stability of corneal morphology in patients with moderate to high myopia after 2a treatment of femtosecond laser assisted laser in situ keratomileusis(FS-LASIK)Xtra.METHODS:Retrospective case-control study. A total of 30 cases(58 eyes)Patients with moderate to high myopia combined with astigmatism who planned to undergo refractive surgery in our hospital from August 2019 to August 2020 were included, and different types of surgery were performed respectively based on the relevant index of keratoconus screening in the preoperative corneal topography. They were divided into FS-LASIK group and Xtra group, with 15 cases(29 eyes)in each group. Uncorrected visual acuity(UCVA), best corrected visual acuity(BCVA), spherical equivalent(SE)and the corneal curvature of the anterior and posterior surfaces of different diameters(3, 5 and 7 mm)measured by Sirius three-dimensional corneal topography were observed preoperatively and 3 mo, 1 and 2 a postoperatively.RESULTS: The UCVA of the two groups of patients at different time points after surgery was significantly increased compared with preoperatively(both P<0.01), and there was no difference in UCVA and SE between the two groups(P>0.05). After 2 a postoperatively, residual astigmatism was -0.25-0 D in 25 eyes(86%)of the FS-LASIK Xtra group and 24 eyes(83%)of the FS-LASIK group. The actual corrected SE and expected corrected SE of both groups were positively correlated(both P<0.05). There were differences in corneal curvature on the surface of different diameter areas(3, 5, and 7 mm)between the two groups at 3 mo, 1, and 2 a postoperatively compared with preoperatively. After 1 and 2 a postoperatively, the corneal posterior surface curvature of the FS-LASIK Xtra group with corneal diameter of 3 and 5 mm was higher than that of the FS-LASIK group(P<0.05).CONCLUSIONS:FS-LASIK Xtra has good safety, efficacy and predictability in correcting patients with moderate to high myopia.

Myopia is becoming more and more common all over the world, and the incidence of myopia is gradually increasing. Many treatments have been used to prevent and control myopia, including optics, drugs, environment or behavior, but the results are different and lack standardization. At present, many experiments have proved that peripheral defocus technology has a certain effect on myopia control. Based on this technology, three kinds of framed eyeglass lenses with peripheral defocus design, namely defocus incorporated multiple segments(DIMS), highly aspherical lenslets(HAL)and cylindrical annular reactive elements(CARE), are commonly used in medical and optometry institutions in China. These lenses provide not only clear vision in the central area, but also a certain amount of myopic defocus in the periphery to control the progression of myopia. This paper aims to focus on the design principle and myopia prevention and control effect of the above three peripheral defocus lenses, and evaluate their effectiveness in clinical practice.

Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant radiotherapy on anorectal function of patients with mid-low rectal cancer by means of high-resolution anorectal manometry.Methods:A retrospective observational study was conducted. Information on patients with mid-low rectal cancer was collected from the prospective registry database of Rectal Cancer at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) from June 2020 to April 2023. Anorectal functions were detected using three-dimensional high-resolution manometry system. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the changed anorectal manometry.Results:A total of 45 patients with mid-low rectal cancer were included in the study. Thirty-two (71.1%) patients were male, 13 (28.9%) patients were female. The mean age was 60±11 years, and the mean BMI was 23.4±3.7 kg/m 2. The mean distance between the lower edge of the tumor and the anal verge was 5.4±1.5 cm. The median size of the tumor was 3.4 (2.9-4.5) cm, and the median circumferential extent of the tumor was 66.0 (45.5-75.0) %. 41 (81.1%) patients were MRI T3-4 and 40 (88.9%) patients were MRI N positive. The resting pressure has a decreasing trend after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (55.3±32.0 mmHg vs. 48.0±28.5 mmHg, t=1.930, P=0.060). There was no significant change in maximum squeezing and the length of the high-pressure zone after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. All volumes describing rectal sensitivity (first sensation, desire to defecate, and maximum tolerance) were lower after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. And maximum tolerance was significantly lower (66.0 [49.0,88.0] ml vs. 52.0 [39.0,73.5] ml, Z=-2.481, P=0.013). Univariate analysis demonstrated that the downstage of N-stage was associated with the decrease in maximum tolerance (OR=6.533, 95%CI:1.254-34.051, P=0.026). Conclusion:Neoadjuvant radiotherapy damages anorectal function by decreasing the resting pressure and rectal sensory threshold of patients. The N-stage downstaging was associated with a decrease in maximum tolerance.

Objective:To analyze the differences in clinicopathological features of colon cancers and survival between patients with right- versus left-sided colon cancers.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study. Information on patients with colon cancer from January 2016 to August 2020 was collected from the prospective registry database at Peking Union Medical College Hospital . Primary tumors located in the cecum, ascending colon, and proximal two‐thirds of the transverse colon were defined as right-sided colon cancers (RCCs), whereas primary tumors located in the distal third of the transverse colon, descending colon, or sigmoid colon were defined as left‐sided colon cancers (LCCs). Clinicopathological features were compared using the χ 2 test or Mann‐Whitney U test. Survival was estimated by Kaplan‐Meier curves and the log‐rank test. Factors that differed significantly between the two groups were identified by multivariate survival analyses performed with the Cox proportional hazards function. One propensity score matching was performed to eliminate the effects of confounding factors. Results:The study cohort comprised 856 patients, with TNM Stage I disease, 391 (45.7%) with Stage II, and 336 (39.3%) with Stage III, including 442 (51.6%) with LCC and 414 (48.4%) with RCC and 129 (15.1%). Defective mismatch repair (dMMR) was identified in 139 patients (16.2%). Compared with RCC, the proportion of men (274/442 [62.0%] vs. 224/414 [54.1%], χ 2=5.462, P=0.019), body mass index (24.2 [21.9, 26.6] kg/m 2 vs. 23.2 [21.3, 25.5] kg/m 2, U=78,789.0, P<0.001), and well/moderately differentiated cancer (412/442 [93.2%] vs. 344/414 [83.1%], χ 2=22.266, P<0.001) were higher in the LCC than the RCC group. In contrast, the proportion of dMMR (40/442 [9.0%] vs. 99/414 [23.9%], χ 2=34.721, P<0.001) and combined vascular invasion (106/442[24.0%] vs. 125/414[30.2%], χ 2=4.186, P=0.041) were lower in the LCC than RCC group. The median follow‐up time for all patients was 48 (range 33, 59) months. The log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) ( P=0.668) or overall survival (OS) ( P=0.828) between patients with LCC versus RCC. Cox proportional hazards model showed that dMMR was significantly associated with a longer DFS (HR=0.419, 95%CI: 0.204?0.862, P=0.018), whereas a higher proportion of T3‐4 (HR=2.178, 95%CI: 1.089?4.359, P=0.028), N+ (HR=2.126, 95%CI: 1.443?3.133, P<0.001), and perineural invasion (HR=1.835, 95%CI: 1.115?3.020, P=0.017) were associated with poor DFS. Tumor location was not associated with DFS or OS (all P>0.05). Subsequent analysis showed that RCC patients with dMMR had longer DFS than did RCC patients with pMMR (HR=0.338, 95%CI: 0.146?0.786, P=0.012). However, the difference in OS between the two groups was not statistically significant (HR=0.340, 95%CI:0.103?1.119, P=0.076). After propensity score matching for independent risk factors for DFS, the log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in DFS ( P=0.343) or OS ( P=0.658) between patients with LCC versus RCC, whereas patient with dMMR had better DFS ( P=0.047) and OS ( P=0.040) than did patients with pMMR. Conclusions:Tumor location is associated with differences in clinicopathological features; however, this has no impact on survival. dMMR status is significantly associated with longer survival: this association may be stronger in RCC patients.

Objective:To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research.Methods:This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18–75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2–T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared.Results:The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m 2) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ 2=17.469, P<0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all P>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all P>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien–Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ 2=0.914, P=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ 2=0.011, P=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group ( Z=-10.608, P<0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group ( Z=-10.595, P<0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, P=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.

Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant radiotherapy on anorectal function of patients with mid-low rectal cancer by means of high-resolution anorectal manometry.Methods:A retrospective observational study was conducted. Information on patients with mid-low rectal cancer was collected from the prospective registry database of Rectal Cancer at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) from June 2020 to April 2023. Anorectal functions were detected using three-dimensional high-resolution manometry system. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the changed anorectal manometry.Results:A total of 45 patients with mid-low rectal cancer were included in the study. Thirty-two (71.1%) patients were male, 13 (28.9%) patients were female. The mean age was 60±11 years, and the mean BMI was 23.4±3.7 kg/m 2. The mean distance between the lower edge of the tumor and the anal verge was 5.4±1.5 cm. The median size of the tumor was 3.4 (2.9-4.5) cm, and the median circumferential extent of the tumor was 66.0 (45.5-75.0) %. 41 (81.1%) patients were MRI T3-4 and 40 (88.9%) patients were MRI N positive. The resting pressure has a decreasing trend after neoadjuvant radiotherapy (55.3±32.0 mmHg vs. 48.0±28.5 mmHg, t=1.930, P=0.060). There was no significant change in maximum squeezing and the length of the high-pressure zone after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. All volumes describing rectal sensitivity (first sensation, desire to defecate, and maximum tolerance) were lower after neoadjuvant radiotherapy. And maximum tolerance was significantly lower (66.0 [49.0,88.0] ml vs. 52.0 [39.0,73.5] ml, Z=-2.481, P=0.013). Univariate analysis demonstrated that the downstage of N-stage was associated with the decrease in maximum tolerance (OR=6.533, 95%CI:1.254-34.051, P=0.026). Conclusion:Neoadjuvant radiotherapy damages anorectal function by decreasing the resting pressure and rectal sensory threshold of patients. The N-stage downstaging was associated with a decrease in maximum tolerance.

Objective:To analyze the differences in clinicopathological features of colon cancers and survival between patients with right- versus left-sided colon cancers.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study. Information on patients with colon cancer from January 2016 to August 2020 was collected from the prospective registry database at Peking Union Medical College Hospital . Primary tumors located in the cecum, ascending colon, and proximal two‐thirds of the transverse colon were defined as right-sided colon cancers (RCCs), whereas primary tumors located in the distal third of the transverse colon, descending colon, or sigmoid colon were defined as left‐sided colon cancers (LCCs). Clinicopathological features were compared using the χ 2 test or Mann‐Whitney U test. Survival was estimated by Kaplan‐Meier curves and the log‐rank test. Factors that differed significantly between the two groups were identified by multivariate survival analyses performed with the Cox proportional hazards function. One propensity score matching was performed to eliminate the effects of confounding factors. Results:The study cohort comprised 856 patients, with TNM Stage I disease, 391 (45.7%) with Stage II, and 336 (39.3%) with Stage III, including 442 (51.6%) with LCC and 414 (48.4%) with RCC and 129 (15.1%). Defective mismatch repair (dMMR) was identified in 139 patients (16.2%). Compared with RCC, the proportion of men (274/442 [62.0%] vs. 224/414 [54.1%], χ 2=5.462, P=0.019), body mass index (24.2 [21.9, 26.6] kg/m 2 vs. 23.2 [21.3, 25.5] kg/m 2, U=78,789.0, P<0.001), and well/moderately differentiated cancer (412/442 [93.2%] vs. 344/414 [83.1%], χ 2=22.266, P<0.001) were higher in the LCC than the RCC group. In contrast, the proportion of dMMR (40/442 [9.0%] vs. 99/414 [23.9%], χ 2=34.721, P<0.001) and combined vascular invasion (106/442[24.0%] vs. 125/414[30.2%], χ 2=4.186, P=0.041) were lower in the LCC than RCC group. The median follow‐up time for all patients was 48 (range 33, 59) months. The log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in disease-free survival (DFS) ( P=0.668) or overall survival (OS) ( P=0.828) between patients with LCC versus RCC. Cox proportional hazards model showed that dMMR was significantly associated with a longer DFS (HR=0.419, 95%CI: 0.204?0.862, P=0.018), whereas a higher proportion of T3‐4 (HR=2.178, 95%CI: 1.089?4.359, P=0.028), N+ (HR=2.126, 95%CI: 1.443?3.133, P<0.001), and perineural invasion (HR=1.835, 95%CI: 1.115?3.020, P=0.017) were associated with poor DFS. Tumor location was not associated with DFS or OS (all P>0.05). Subsequent analysis showed that RCC patients with dMMR had longer DFS than did RCC patients with pMMR (HR=0.338, 95%CI: 0.146?0.786, P=0.012). However, the difference in OS between the two groups was not statistically significant (HR=0.340, 95%CI:0.103?1.119, P=0.076). After propensity score matching for independent risk factors for DFS, the log‐rank test revealed no significant differences in DFS ( P=0.343) or OS ( P=0.658) between patients with LCC versus RCC, whereas patient with dMMR had better DFS ( P=0.047) and OS ( P=0.040) than did patients with pMMR. Conclusions:Tumor location is associated with differences in clinicopathological features; however, this has no impact on survival. dMMR status is significantly associated with longer survival: this association may be stronger in RCC patients.

Objective:To explore the impact on safety and prognosis in patients with right-sided colon cancer participating in surgical clinical research.Methods:This retrospective cohort study utilized data from a randomized controlled trial (RELARC study) conducted by the colorectal surgery group at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in which laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) was compared with D2 radical resection for the management of right-sided colon cancer. The eligibility criteria were age 18–75 years, biopsy-proven colon adenocarcinoma, tumor located between the cecum and right 1/3 of the transverse colon, enhanced chest, abdomen, and pelvic CT scans suggesting tumor stage T2–T4N0M0 or TanyN+ M0, and having undergone radical surgical treatment from January 2016 to December 2019. Exclusion factors included multiple primary colorectal cancers, preoperative stage T1N0 or enlarged central lymph nodes, tumor involving surrounding organs requiring their resection, definite distant metastasis or otherwise unable to undergo R0 resection, history of any other malignant tumors within previous 5 years, intestinal obstruction, perforation, or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency surgery, and assessed as unsuitable for laparoscopic surgery. Patients who had participated in the RELARC study were included in the RELARC group, whereas those who met the inclusion criteria but refused to participate in the RELAEC study were included in the control group. The main indicators studied were the patient's baseline data, surgery and perioperative conditions, pathological characteristics, adjuvant treatment, and postoperative follow-up (including average frequency of follow-up within the first 3 years) and survival (including 3-year disease-free survival rate (DFS) and 3-year overall survival rate (OS). Differences in these indicators between the RELARC and control groups were compared.Results:The study cohort comprised 290 patients, 173 in the RELARC group (RELARC-CME group, 82; RELARC-D2 group, 91) and 117 in the control group (CME control group, 72; D2 control group, 45). There was a significantly higher proportion of overweight patients (BMI ≥24 kg/m 2) in the RELARC-CME than in the CME control group (67.1% [55/82] vs. 33.3% [24/72], χ 2=17.469, P<0.001). There were no other statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics (all P>0.05). No significant disparities were found between the CME and D2 groups in terms of operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, combined organ resection, intraoperative blood transfusion, or intraoperative complications (all P>0.05). There was a trend toward Clavien–Dindo grade II or higher postoperative complications in the RELARC-CME group (24.4% [20/82]) than in the CME control group (18.1% [13/72]); however, this difference was not statistically significant (χ 2=0.914, P=0.339). Similarly, the difference in this rate did not differ significantly between the RELARC-D2 group (25.3% [23/91]) and D2 control group (24.4% [11/45], χ 2=0.011, P=0.916). The median duration of postoperative follow-up was significantly shorter in the RELARC groups than in the corresponding control groups. Specifically, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-CME and 7.2 (6.0, 9.0) months in the CME control group ( Z=-10.608, P<0.001). Similarly, the median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (4.5, 4.5) months in the RELARC-D2 group as opposed to 8.3 (6.6, 9.0) months in the D2 control group ( Z=-10.595, P<0.001). The 3-year DFS rate (91.5%) and OS rate (96.3%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-CME group than in the CME control group (84.7% and 90.3%, respectively). The 3-year DFS rate (87.9%) and OS rate (96.7%) tended to be higher in the RELARC-D2 group than in the D2 control group (81.8% and 88.6%, respectively); however, these differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Subgroup analysis according to pathological stage revealed that patients in the RELARC-D2 group with pN0 stage achieved a significantly superior 3-year OS rate than did those in the D2 control group (100% vs. 88.9%, P=0.008). We identified no statistically significant differences in survival rates between the remaining subgroups (all P>0.05). Conclusions:A high-quality surgical clinical trial with close follow-up can achieve perioperative safety and a trend toward improved survival outcomes.

Methods: This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent chest CT and DXA at our hospital between August 2021 and August 2022. Thoracic thoracolumbar segment HU values, lumbar T-scores, and hip T-scores were computed for comparison, and thoracic thoracolumbar segment HU thresholds suggestive of potential bone density abnormalities were established using receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: In total, 470 patients (72.4% women; mean age, 65.5±12.3 years) were included in this study. DXA revealed that of the 470 patients, 90 (19%) had osteoporosis, 180 (38%) had reduced osteopenia, and 200 (43%) had normal bone mineral density (BMD). To differentiate osteoporosis from osteopenia, the HU threshold was established as 105.1 (sensitivity, 54.4%; specificity, 72.2%) for T11 and 85.7 (sensitivity, 69.4%; specificity, 61.1%) for T12. To differentiate between osteopenia and normal BMD, the HU threshold was 146.7 for T11 (sensitivity, 57.5%; specificity, 84.4%) and 135.7 for T12 (sensitivity, 59.5%; specificity, 80%). Conclusions This study supports the significance of HU values from chest CT for BMD assessment. Chest CT provides a new method for clinical opportunistic screening of osteoporosis. When the T11 HU is >146.7 or the T12 HU is >135.7, additional osteoporosis testing is not needed unless a vertebral fracture is detected. If the T11 HU is <105.1 or the T12 HU is <85.7, further DXA testing is strongly advised. In addition, vertebral HU values that fall faster than those of the T11 and L1 vertebrae may explain the high incidence of T12 vertebral fractures.

Objective:To investigate the incidence and influencing factors of anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer.Methods:The retrospective case-control study was conducted. The clinicopathological data of 804 patients with rectal cancer who were admitted to Peking Union Medical College Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences from January 2017 to December 2019 were collected. There were 521 male and 283 female, aged 63(range, 27-94)years. All 804 patients underwent laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer. Observation indicators: (1) surgical situations; (2) incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage; (3) follow-up; (4) influencing factors of postoperative anastomotic leakage; (5) subgroup analysis. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was conducted using the independent sample t test. Measurement data with skewed distribu-tion were represented as M(range), and comparison between groups was conducted using the Mann-Whitney U test. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and comparison between groups was conducted using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Univariate analysis was conducted using the chi-square test or independent sample t test. Factors with P≤0.2 in univariate analysis were included in multivariate Logistic regression analysis. Results:(1) Surgical situations. All 804 patients underwent laparoscopic radical resection of upper and middle rectal cancer successfully, with the operation time and volume of intraoperative blood loss as 135(range, 118-256)minutes and 30(range, 5-350)mL. All 804 patients completed end-to-end colon rectal anastomosis, including 287 patients with reinforced sutures at the anastomotic site, and 517 patients with routine anastomosis. (2) Incidence of postoperative anastomotic leakage. Of the 804 patients, 40 patients had postoperative anastomotic leakage, with the incidence rate as 4.98%(40/804). (3) Follow-up. All 804 patients were followed up for 32(range, 6-49)months. None of patient died during the perioperative period. (4) Influencing factors of postoperative anastomotic leakage. Results of multivariate analysis showed that unreinforced suture at the anastomotic site was an independent risk factor for postoperative anastomotic leakage ( odds ratio=2.78, 95% confidence interval as 1.21-6.37, P<0.05). (5) Subgroup analysis. Of the 804 patients, 202 patients received neoadjuvant therapy and 602 patients did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. Of the 602 patients who did not receive neo-adjuvant therapy, cases with postoperative anastomotic leakage was 6 in the 253 patients with reinforced sutures, versus 21 in the 349 patients with routine sutures, showing a significant difference between them ( χ2=4.56, P<0.05). Conclusion:Unreinforced anastomosis at the anasto-motic site is an independent risk factor for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic anterior rectal resection, especially for rectal cancer patients without neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy.