We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Randomized clinical trial of conventional versus cylindrical abdominoperineal resection for locally advanced lower rectal cancer.
American Journal of Surgery 2012 September
BACKGROUND: An alternative treatment for low rectal cancer is the cylindrical technique. We aim to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing conventional abdominoperineal resection (APR) versus cylindrical APR.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel controlled trial was conducted between January 2008 and December 2010. Sixty-seven patients with T3-T4 low rectal cancer were identified during the study period (conventional n = 32, cylindrical n = 35).
RESULTS: Patients who received cylindrical APR had less operative time for the perineal portion (P < .001), larger perineal defect (P < .001), less intraoperative blood loss (P = .001), larger total cross-sectional tissue area (P < .001), similar total operative time (P = .096), and more incidence of perineal pain (P < .001). The local recurrence of the cylindrical APR group was improved statistically (P = .048).
CONCLUSIONS: Cylindrical APR in the prone jackknife position has the potential to reduce the risk of local recurrence without increased complications when compared with conventional APR in the lithotomy position for the treatment of low rectal cancer.
METHODS: A prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel controlled trial was conducted between January 2008 and December 2010. Sixty-seven patients with T3-T4 low rectal cancer were identified during the study period (conventional n = 32, cylindrical n = 35).
RESULTS: Patients who received cylindrical APR had less operative time for the perineal portion (P < .001), larger perineal defect (P < .001), less intraoperative blood loss (P = .001), larger total cross-sectional tissue area (P < .001), similar total operative time (P = .096), and more incidence of perineal pain (P < .001). The local recurrence of the cylindrical APR group was improved statistically (P = .048).
CONCLUSIONS: Cylindrical APR in the prone jackknife position has the potential to reduce the risk of local recurrence without increased complications when compared with conventional APR in the lithotomy position for the treatment of low rectal cancer.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app