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
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Rectal cancer surgery presents a technical challenge due to the intricate anatomy of the pelvis, contributing to an increased risk of postoperative complications.
Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the prognostic value of clinical and anatomical factors in predicting anastomotic complications after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.
Design: Retrospective analysis.
Settings: Taipei Medical University Hospital.
Patients: A total of 527 patients with rectal cancer.
Interventions: Robotic or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision between 2012 and 2023.
Main Outcome Measures: Preoperative clinical parameters and magnetic resonance imaging-derived anatomical measurements were subjected to multivariate analysis to develop a predictive model for postoperative anastomotic complications.
Results: Over a mean period of 66.2 (6-149) months, the incidence of anastomotic complications following sphincter-preserving surgery was 15.8%. Multivariate logistic regression identified six predictors of anastomotic complications: tumor-to-anal verge distance (p = 0.003), interspinous diameter (p = 0.030), clinical N stage (p = 0.047), angle α (p = 0.015), carcinoembryonic antigen level (p = 0.046), and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (p = 0.015). These variables were incorporated into the final model, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.70 (95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.78). The top three predictors of anastomotic complications were tumor-to-anal verge distance, interspinous diameter, and clinical N stage.
Limitations: All data were obtained from a single institution, the study was retrospective, all pelvimetric measurements were obtained manually (introducing the possibility of interobserver variability and measurement error), and the parameters analyzed were limited to two-dimensional measurements.
Conclusions: These findings highlight the role of clinical variables and pelvimetry in predicting anastomotic complications after minimally invasive rectal surgery. The developed regression model is a practical tool for refining preoperative planning and informed decision-making. See Video Abstract.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000003938 | DOI Listing |