A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Comparison of robotic assisted and laparoscopic radical resection for rectal cancer with or without left colic artery preservation. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

The preservation of the left colic artery (LCA) during rectal cancer resection remains a topic of controversy, and there is a notable absence of robust evidence regarding the outcomes associated with LCA preservation. And the advantages of robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) surgery in rectal resection remain uncertain. The objective of this study was to assess the influence of LCA preservation surgery and RAL surgery on intraoperative and postoperative complications of rectal cancer resection. Patients who underwent laparoscopic (LSC) or RAL with or without LCA preservation resection for rectal cancer between April 2020 and May 2023 were retrospectively assessed. The patients were categorized into two groups: low ligation (LL) which with preservation of LCA and high ligation (HL) which without preservation of LCA. A one-to-one propensity score-matched analysis was performed to decrease confounding. The primary outcome was operative findings, operative morbidity, and postoperative genitourinary function. A total of 612 patients were eligible for this study, and propensity score matching yielded 139 patients in each group. The blood loss of the LL group was significantly less than that of the HL group (54.42 ± 12.99 mL vs. 65.71 ± 7.37 mL, p<0.001). The urinary catheter withdrawal time in the LL group was significantly shorter than that in the HL group (4.87 ± 2.04 d vs. 6.06 ± 2.43d, p<0.001). Anastomotic leakage in the LL group was significantly lower than that in HL group (1.44% vs. 7.91%, p = 0.011). The rate of urinary dysfunction and sexual dysfunction in LL group is both significantly lower than HL group. Blood loss and number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs) of both RAL subgroups in LL and HL groups were significantly more than that in LSC subgroups. The anastomotic leakage in the RAL subgroup of HL group was significantly lower than that in LSC subgroup (0% vs. 14.89%, p = 0.018). LCA preservation surgery for rectal cancer may help reduce the blood loss, urinary catheter withdrawal time, the rate of anastomotic leakage and ileus, and postoperative genitourinary function outcomes. RAL can reduce the probability of blood loss and improve harvest LNs in patients with rectal cancer.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568222PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-79713-4DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

rectal cancer
16
lca preservation
12
resection rectal
8
left colic
8
colic artery
8
cancer resection
8
ral surgery
8
ligation preservation
8
preservation lca
8
preservation
7

Similar Publications