DSpace@İnönü

Extralevator abdominoperineal excision versus conventional surgery for low rectal cancer a single surgeon experience

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.author Neşşar, Gürel
dc.contributor.author Demirbağ, Ali Eba
dc.contributor.author Celep, Bahadır
dc.contributor.author Elbir, Orhan Hayri
dc.contributor.author Kayaalp, Cüneyt
dc.date.accessioned 2017-09-12T06:49:08Z
dc.date.available 2017-09-12T06:49:08Z
dc.date.issued 2016
dc.identifier.citation Neşşar, G. Demirbağ, A. E. Celep, B. Elbir, O. H. Kayaalp, C. (2016). Extralevator abdominoperineal excision versus conventional surgery for low rectal cancer a single surgeon experience. Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi. 32: 244-247. tr_TR
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/11616/7746
dc.description.abstract Objective: Extralevator abdominoperineal excision (ELAPE) reduces the risk of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and of intraoperative perforation (IOP), both of which are associated with high local recurrence rates and poor survival outcomes for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the results of ELAPE with conventional abdominoperineal excision (APE) for low rectal cancer. Material and Methods: A total of 25 consecutive patients underwent ELAPE for low rectal cancer between November 2008 and September 2011. Fifty-six patients treated by conventional APE prior to 2008 were selected from our rectal cancer database for comparison as a historical cohort. Results: The mean follow-up was 44.7 months in the ELAPE group, and 70.6 months in the APE group. Patients undergoing ELAPE had a lower CRM positivity and IOP rate than APE (12% vs. 20%, p=0,531; 4% vs. 8,9%, p=0,826; respectively). The ELAPE group was associated with higher perineal wound complications than the APE group (16.0% vs. 1.8%, p=0.030). Local recurrence rates for patients in both groups did not differ significantly (4.0% vs. 3.6%, p=1.0). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that ELAPE technique was associated with less CRM involvement and reduced rates of IOP but markedly higher rates of postoperative perineal complications occurred as compared to conventional surgery. ELAPE must be reserved for advanced low rectal cancers. tr_TR
dc.language.iso eng tr_TR
dc.publisher Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi tr_TR
dc.relation.isversionof 10.5152/UCD.2016.3251 tr_TR
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess tr_TR
dc.subject Extralevator abdominoperineal excision tr_TR
dc.subject Margin involvement tr_TR
dc.subject Perforation tr_TR
dc.subject Rectal cancer tr_TR
dc.title Extralevator abdominoperineal excision versus conventional surgery for low rectal cancer a single surgeon experience tr_TR
dc.type article tr_TR
dc.relation.journal Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi tr_TR
dc.contributor.department İnönü Üniversitesi tr_TR
dc.contributor.authorID 109262 tr_TR
dc.identifier.volume 32 tr_TR
dc.identifier.startpage 244 tr_TR
dc.identifier.endpage 247 tr_TR


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster