Survival and outcomes after laparoscopic versus open curative resection for colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have shown that open and laparoscopicsurgery for resection of colonic cancers produce similar short- and long-term results, but no data have been reported from Saudi Arabia. OBJECTIVE: Compare 3-year disease-free and overall survival after laparoscopic versus open curative resection for potentially curable colon cancer. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary academic hospital. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed data of patients who underwent curative resection for potentially curable colon cancer using the laparoscopic or open approach at three tertiary care centers during the period 2000-2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall and disease-free 3-year survival were the primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints included conversion rate, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, rate of wound infection, resumption of bowel function, number of lymph nodes retrieved, adequacy of resection and rate of recurrence. Risk factors for recurrence, including complete mesocolic excision, were assessed. SAMPLE SIZE: 721. RESULTS: Patient and tumor characteristics were similar in the two groups except for ASA class ( P<.01), weight ( P<.05) and tumor stage ( P<.05). Over a median follow-up of 46 months, the 3-year overall survival was 76.7% for open resection and 90.3% for laparoscopic colon resection ( P<.05). The 3-year disease-free survival was 55.3% for open colon resection and 64.9% for laparoscopic colon resection ( P=.0714). CONCLUSION: Overall and disease-free survival after the laparoscopic approach for curative resection of colon cancer is comparable to the open approach. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design and the possibility of selection bias. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None.

Outcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis compared to mucosal ulcerative colitis in a Middle Eastern population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the complications and outcome after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for mucosal ulcerative colitis (MUC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). DESIGN AND SETTINGS: This is a retrospective study. The study was conducted at a single tertiary referral center. METHODS: All patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA at a tertiary center in Saudi Arabia from 2001 till 2009 were retrieved. Data was obtained regarding preoperative status, postoperative complications, and functional outcome. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients underwent IPAA, of which 21 cases were of FAP and 19 cases of MUC. Median age at operation for FAP and MUC was 31 (range: 16-45) and 43 (range: 15-65) years, respectively (P < .05). Median length of stay was 10 days (range: 6-42) for FAP and 12 days (range: 9-27) for MUC (P=.1). Postoperative morbidity was noted in 4 cases of FAP and 6 cases of MUC (P=.36). Specifically, wound infection was noted in 2 cases of FAP compared to 3 cases of MUC (P=.55); 1 MUC case had an anastomotic leak (P=.29). One mortality was recorded among the FAP cases (P=.35). The time between the creation of IPAA and the closure of ileostomy was 4.5 and 5 months for FAP and MUC, respectively (P=.87). Median follow-up was 36 months. Median bowel frequency per 24 hours was 6 (range: 3-24) for FAP and 7 (range 3-17) for MUC (P=.54). Intestinal obstruction was reported in 3 cases of FAP and 5 cases of MUC (P=.38). One pouch was excised in a FAP patient. One case of MUC developed pouchitis. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome after IPAA was inferior for MUC compared to FAP, but it was not statistically significant due to the small sample size. The morbid status of the MUC cases and their older age contributed to the minor differences.