Home > Journals > Minerva Surgery > Past Issues > Articles online first > Minerva Surgery 2022 Feb 17

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

Publishing options
eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

 

Minerva Surgery 2022 Feb 17

DOI: 10.23736/S2724-5691.22.08803-7

Copyright © 2022 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Functional results after mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: comparative study among surgical approaches

Gianfrancesco INTINI 1 , Simone M. TIERNO 1, Massimo FARINA 1, Marco M. LIRICI 1, Giorgio LUCANDRI 1, Giuseppe MEZZETTI 1, Vito PENDE 1, Graziano PERNAZZA 2, Francesco STIPA 1, Carlo E. VITELLI 1

1 Department of Surgery, General and Oncological Surgery Unit, San Giovanni-Addolorata Hospital, Rome, Italy; 2 Department of Surgery, General and Robotic Surgery Unit, San Giovanni-Addolorata Hospital, Rome, Italy


PDF


BACKGROUND: We analyzed the evolution of genitourinary dysfunctions in patients undergoing surgical treatment for rectal cancer, and compared open surgery, laparoscopy, robotic and TaTME.
METHODS: Functional outcomes were evaluate using standardized questionnaires, compiled at the start of treatment, after the end of Radiotherapy, at 1 and 6 months after surgery.
RESULTS: In 72 patients 37.5% had low, 27.8% middle, and 34.7% high rectal cancers. Open technique was performed in 25% of cases, while 29.2% underwent laparoscopy, 20.8% TaTME and 25% robotic. We noted a deterioration in urogenital function: surgical technique can influence the result both in urinary and male sexual function but not ejaculation. Robotics and laparoscopy bring better outcomes than open surgery and TaTME. Female sexuality worsening seems not influenced by the technique. In general age, stage, complications and anastomotic leakage appear to be predictive factors for functional dysfunctions. As reported in literature rectal cancer treatment leads to urogenital worsening: this seems to be progressive in male sexuality only, while female one and urinary function show a slight improvement in the first months, although a full recovery possibility is discussed. Is also reported how robotic and laparoscopy have a lower functional impact. TaTME has gained consensus thank to the excellent oncological and function outcomes, but in our study leads to worse results.
CONCLUSIONS: Mini-invasive techniques guarantee the same oncological result than more invasive ones, but with better functional outcomes and tolerability; robotic surgery seems to be slight superior than laparoscopy, but with longer operative time.


KEY WORDS: Rectal cancer; Genitourinary dysfunctions; Functional results; Minimally invasive surgery; Oncological surgery

top of page