Short-term efficacy of laparoscopic and open Dixon surgery for rectal cancer

AIM: To compare the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic and open Dixon surgery for rectal cancer. METHODS: The clinical data for 109 patients who received Dixon surgery for rectal cancer at our hospital between June 2011 and June 2013 were reviewed retrospectively and perioperative results were compared. The patients were divided into two groups, a laparoscopy group (n = 48) and an open surgery group (n = 61). RESULTS: The operation was successfully performed on all patients. The mean operation time for the laparoscopy group was significantly longer than that for the open surgery group (231.0 min �� 60.3 min vs 201.7 min �� 46.9 min, P < 0.05). The length of operative incision (5.9 cm �� 0.7cm vs 15.1 cm �� 2.6 cm), blood loss (96.2 mL �� 20.0 mL vs 181.2 mL �� 117.7 mL), postoperative administration of anodyne (0.5 �� 0.6 vs 0.9 �� 0.8), time to anal exhaust (2.1 d �� 0.8 d vs 3.0 d �� 0.7 d), time of liquid food intake (3.3 d �� 0.5 d vs 4.3 d �� 0.4 d), urinary catheterization time (4.5 d �� 0.5 d vs 6.2 d �� 0.4 d), pelvic cavity drainage tube placement time (7.5 d �� 0.6 d vs 8.2 d �� 0.4 d), and postoperative hospitalization time (11.7 d �� 2.1 d vs 13.8 d �� 2.8 d) were significantly less in the laparoscopy group than in the open surgery group (all P < 0.05). The postoperative complication, mass maximal diameter, the distance between the distal and proximal margin and the mass in rectum specimens, resected lymph node number and positive lymph node number were not significantly different between the two groups (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic Dixon surgery for rectal cancer is safe and feasible in terms of favorable short-term outcomes and minimal invasiveness. ? 2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.