| Objective:To contrast the therapeutic efficacy of the laparoscopy-assisted and open surgery for rectal cancer.Method:We collected70patients who had laparoscopy-assisted resection for rectal cancer(LCR) in XiangYa hospital and82patients as control group who had open resection(OR) during the same period.The clinical date between the two groups were analyzed retrospectively.The patients were followed up by letter,call and outpatient visit.Results:Difference was not significant in general date(ageã€gender〠preoperative hemoglobinã€preoperative albuminã€tumor differentiation degreeã€pTNM stageã€tumor location)between the two groups.The mean operative time of LCR group was longer than that of OR group.(157.3±40.5min vs129.8±32.5min,P<0.05).The intraoperative blood loss of LCR group was significantly less than that of OR group (99.5±80.1ml vs128.5±67.2ml, P<0.05).The number of harvested lymph nodes was no significant difference between the two groups(10.0±4.0vs9.0±4.8P>0.05).The rate of sphincter preservation of LCR group was significantly highter than that of OR group.(85.7%vs70.7%, P<0.05). LCR group was faster than OR group in intestinal function recovery (2.9±0.7vs3.4±0.5, P<0.05). No significant differences were found between the two groups in indwelling urinary catheter time, incidence of postoperation complication, hospitalization(P>0.05). No significant differences were found between the two group in incidence of urination dysfunction(6.3%vs6.9%, P>0.05),local recurrence rate(7.9%vs8.2%, P>0.05), distant metastasis rate(1.6%vs8.2%,p>0.05). Both the two group patients were followed up for mean25.0months. No significant differences were found between the two groups inaccumula-tive survival rate and mean survival time(p>0.05).Conclution:Larparoscopy-assisted resection for rectal cancer is safe and feasible.It’s short-term effect is comparable to open surgery.The laparoscopy-assisted surgery have advantages of higher sphincter preservation rate,less blood loss, minimal trauma and rapid recovery. |