Till sidans topp

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion
Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11 15:12

Tipsa en vän
Utskriftsversion

Extralevator abdominoperi… - Göteborgs universitet Till startsida
Webbkarta
Till innehåll Läs mer om hur kakor används på gu.se

Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) for rectal cancer-short-term results from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. Selective use of ELAPE warranted

Artikel i vetenskaplig tidskrift
Författare Mattias Prytz
Eva Angenete
Jan Ekelund
Eva Haglind
Publicerad i International Journal of Colorectal Disease
Volym 29
Nummer/häfte 8
Sidor 981-987
ISSN 0179-1958
Publiceringsår 2014
Publicerad vid Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper, Avdelningen för kirurgi
Sidor 981-987
Språk en
Länkar dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-014-1932-...
Ämnesord APE, ELAPE, Colorectal cancer, TOTAL MESORECTAL EXCISION, SURGICAL COMPLICATIONS, RANDOMIZED-TRIAL, RESECTION, CLASSIFICATION
Ämneskategorier Klinisk medicin

Sammanfattning

Local recurrences are more common after abdominoperineal excision (APE) than after anterior resection of rectal cancer. Extralevator APE was introduced to address this problem. This prospective registry-based population study aims to investigate the efficacy of extralevator APE (ELAPE) in improving short-term oncological outcome. All Swedish patients operated with any kind of abdominoperineal excision and registered in the Swedish Rectal Cancer Registry 2007-2009 were included (n = 1,397) and analyzed with emphasis on the perineal part of the operation. Short-term perioperative and oncological results were collected from the registry. Extralevator APE did not result in fewer intraoperative perforations or involved circumferential resection margins as compared to standard APE for the entire group. Intraoperative perforations were significantly fewer for patients with low tumours (a parts per thousand currency sign4 cm) (ELAPE: n = 28/386 versus APE: n = 9/58) (p = 0.043) and for early (T0-T2) T-stages (ELAPE: n = 3/172 versus APE: n = 6/75) (p = 0.025). There were significantly more post-operative wound infections for ELAPE than for APE (n = 106 (20.4 %) versus n = 25 (12.0 %), p = 0.011). The short-term results indicate that selective use of extralevator APE can be warranted, for example, for subgroups with low tumours. In conclusion, selective use of the extralevator APE is advocated as not all patients seem to benefit from the technique, and there are significantly more short-term complications after extralevator APE.

Sidansvarig: Webbredaktion|Sidan uppdaterades: 2012-09-11
Dela:

På Göteborgs universitet använder vi kakor (cookies) för att webbplatsen ska fungera på ett bra sätt för dig. Genom att surfa vidare godkänner du att vi använder kakor.  Vad är kakor?