Long-term outcomes and propensity score matching analysis: rectal cancer resection for patients with elevated preoperative risk.

BACKGROUND: It is still controversial about the treatment strategy for rectal cancer patients with elevated operative risk and elder rectal cancer patients. METHODS: This study presented a retrospective single center experience in rectal cancer proctectomy for high operative risk patients. High operative risk patient was defined as Cr-POSSUM > 5% combined with associated risk factors. 220 in 1477 consecutive patients met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: 132 patients were selected (66:66) after propensity score matching. The total complication rate between conventional open rectal resection (71 %) and laparoscopic surgery (41%) was significantly different (p = 0.0005). There is a significantly positive correlation between open surgery and advanced Dindo Classification (p = 0.02). Cr-POSSUM is positively correlated with Dindo Classification (p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in survival rate among stage I~II, different age groups or different Cr-POSSUM score sub-groups. However, stage III-IV tumor patients in laparoscopic group experienced improved overall survival rate. (p < 0.0001). For patients with preoperative pulmonary or renal disease, patients in laparoscopic group also had better long term prognosis (p = 0.03, p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate the potential advantages of laparoscopic rectal cancer resection for high operative risk patients, especially for the patients with preoperative respiratory or renal disease and stage III cancer.

Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision for Stage II/III Left-Sided Colon Cancers: A Prospective Study and Comparison with D3 Lymph Node Dissection.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the similarities and differences of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) to a colon resection with a D3 lymphadenectomy for the stage II/III left-sided colon carcinoma. METHODS: Patients between July 2011 and August 2014 were randomized into D3 and CME groups. Mesenteric area, log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS), and other operative parameters were collected and assessed. RESULTS: The average specimen sizes were 5730 ± 828 mm(2) in superior rectal artery (SRA)-preserving D3, 8145 ± 1022 mm(2) in SRA-nonpreserving D3, and 8745 ± 1039 mm(2) in the CME group; the differences were significant (P < .0001). The number of lymph nodes collected from CME specimens was larger, but the CME specimens did not contain an elevated value of LODDS or positive nodes or lymph node ratio (LNR). There were also no significant differences between recovery times of bowel function. Although it took more operation time in D3 approach, especially in SRA-preserving D3 operation, the difference was not significant. Concerning the leakage rate (P = .34) and vessel-related complications (P = .64), there were no significant differences either. CONCLUSIONS: Both standard D3 resection and CME could achieve a high quality of mesocolic plane grade for stage II/III colon cancer. The LODDS and LNR were comparable, and those were not relevant to mesenteric size.

Challenge or opportunity: outcomes of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer in patients with high operative risk.

This study investigated the impact of laparoscopic rectal cancer resection for patients with high operative risk, which was defined as American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grades III and IV. This study was conducted at a single center on patients undergoing rectal resection from 2006 to 2010. After screening by ASA grade III or IV, 248 patients who met the inclusion criteria were identified, involving 104 open and 144 laparoscopic rectal resections. The distribution of the Charlson Comorbidity Index was similar between the two groups. Compared with open rectal resection, laparoscopic resection had a significantly lower total complication rate (P<.0001), lower pain rate (P=.0002), and lower blood loss (P<.0001). It is notable that the two groups of patients had no significant difference in cardiac and pulmonary complication rates. Thus, these data showed that the laparoscopic group for rectal cancer could provide short-term outcomes similar to those of their open resection counterparts with high operative risk. The 5-year actuarial survival rates were 0.8361 and 0.8119 in the laparoscopic and open groups for stage I/II (difference not significant), as was the 5-year overall survival rate in stage III/IV (P=.0548). In patients with preoperative cardiovascular or pulmonary disease, the 5-year survival curves were significantly different (P=.0165 and P=.0210), respectively. The cost per patient did not differ between the two procedures. The results of this analysis demonstrate the potential advantages of laparoscopic rectal cancer resection for high-risk patients, although a randomized controlled trial should be conducted to confirm the findings of the present study.

Laparoscopic peritoneal dialysis catheter implantation with an intra-abdominal fixation technique: a report of 53 cases.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, the safety, and outcomes of renal replacement therapy with the laparoscopic technique for peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter implantation with an intra-abdominal fixation. METHODS: Medical records of 53 patients with end-stage renal disease who underwent laparoscopic PD catheter implantation with an intra-abdominal fixation in our department from December 2008 to October 2009 were reviewed retrospectively. Their surgical procedure, operative outcomes, postoperative complications, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: All patients underwent laparoscopic PD catheter implantation with an intra-abdominal fixation successfully. Neither conversion to open surgery nor major intraoperative complications were observed. The median operative time was 24.2±10.5 minutes. The operative cost was 837.3±107.0 US$. Two patients (3.8%) had catheter obstruction peritonitis 12 and 15 months after surgery, respectively, and both of them had the catheter removed. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic PD catheter implantation with an intra-abdominal fixation of the catheter tip is feasible and safe. It had a low incidence of PD catheter migration and other PD-related postoperative complications with the benefit of minimal invasiveness, a shorter operation time, and quicker postoperative recovery.

[Clinical prognostic multivariate analysis of incidental gallbladder cancer: a case controlled retrospective study].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prognostic risk factors in incidental gallbladder cancer (IGBC) and evaluate the effect of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) applied in treating IGBC. METHODS: The retrospective study enrolled 55 patients with incidental gallbladder adenocarcinoma treated between January 2001 and December 2008. The patients were divided into three groups according to different surgical approaches: laparoscope group (n = 23), conversion group (n = 6) and laparotomy group (n = 26). Survival analysis and Cox regression model were applied to comparing the difference of survival rate between three groups and to analyzing the related prognostic risk factors of IGBC. RESULTS: The overall 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were 74.3%, 47.7% and 35.8% respectively. And the median survival time was 36 months. The outcome of survival rate between three groups was not different statistically. Cox regression analysis indicated that pathologic T stage was an independent risk factor influencing IGBC (OR = 2.75, P = 0.00). The prognosis was getting worse according to the rising depth of tumor invasion. However, the other factors, such as surgical approach, tumor incisional implantation, ect.were not related to the prognosis (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The factor of pathologic T stage is related to the prognosis of IGBC for which LC, compared with open cholecystectomy, should not be regarded as a negative factor in treatment.

Direct and indirect costs and long-term survival of laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Few studies evaluate the cost-effectiveness issues of laparoscopic anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. This study evaluates direct and indirect costs of LAR and its long-term survival rate in rectal cancer patients. MATERIAL/METHODS: This prospective nonrandomized controlled trial included 2 endpoints (direct and indirect costs, and disease-free survival). From January 2003 to May 2005, rectal cancer patients admitted to our center were assigned to 2 groups: 87 patients underwent LAR (LAP), while 86 cases received open anterior resection (OPEN). The direct costs were prospectively evaluated. Main indirect cost is productivity loss. The data of direct costs, indirect costs, and the total costs were collected for the minimal cost analysis. RESULTS: Disease-free survival at 65 months in the LAP group and the OPEN group was 78.2% and 74.7%; there was no significant difference between the groups. Median direct costs were not significantly different between the LAP and the OPEN groups. Indirect costs of the LAP group were significantly lower than those of the OPEN group, while total costs were not significantly different. Cost percentage for operations, medications, and hospitalization were 75.90%, 11.28%, and 2.18% in the LAP group; while in the operation group, they were 54.50%, 29.09%, and 3.35%. CONCLUSIONS: Total economic budget for a patient receiving LAR was not significantly increased compared with the conservative method owing to its technical predominance, oncologic safety, as well as frequent bed turnover.

Long-term outcome of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer.

This study aimed to assess the feasibility and long-term outcome of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for middle and lower rectal cancer. Retrospective assessment was performed on 612 patients with middle and low rectal cancer in the surgery department of our hospital. Three-hundred and three patients underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME), and 309 patients underwent open TME (OTME). All the data regarding patient details, operative variables and the short- and long-term outcomes were collected and compared. The sphincter-preserving rates of the two groups were similar. The conversion rate in LTME was 2.31% (seven cases). Fourteen cases (6.67%) of protective diverting stoma were fashioned in the LTME group compared with 57 cases (26.64%) in the OTME group. The postoperative morbidity was the same in these two groups, while the postoperative period until bowel movement and hospital discharge was shorter in the LTME group (P < 0.01). The median follow-up period was 34 (6-81) months for the LTME group and 36 (6-81) months for the OTME group. Local recurrence rates, the five-year disease-free survival rate and the five-year overall survival rate showed no difference between the two groups. Laparoscopic surgery is feasible and safe in patients with middle and lower rectal cancer and can provide favorable short-term and long-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal carcinoma: complications and management in 132 consecutive patients.

AIM: To analyze the clinical manifestations and risk factors of complications in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer patients. METHODS: A series of 132 consecutive patients who received laparoscopic LAR for rectal cancer in our center were included. The etiology, diagnosis, treatment and prevention of rectal cancer were studied among the patients with surgery-related complications using both univariate and multivariate regression analysis. RESULTS: No conversion to open surgery was observed and 5 cases converted to hand-assisted laparoscopic operation. The overall morbidity rate was 20.5%. Complications occurred during the operation in 7 patients (5.3%), within 30 postoperative days in 24 patients (18.2%), and within 3 mo in 2 patients (1.5%). The most significant complications were anastomotic leakage (9.1%) and anastomotic hemorrhage (5.3%). Size and location of tumor, pathological staging and preoperative nutrition were significant factors associated with LAR complications, while gender, age and pathological type showed no relevance. Binary logistics regression showed that the size and location of tumor, and pathological staging were independent factors of laparoscopic LAR. All the complications were treated during their onset of clinical manifestations by interventional or conservative therapy. CONCLUSION: Anastomotic leakage is a major complication in laparoscopic LAR. The complications may be associated with tumor size and site, and pathological stage. Interventional therapies are of value in the management of laparoscopic LAR complications.

[Impact of previous abdominal operations on the outcome of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a non-randomized cohort study].

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the impact of previous abdominal operations on the outcome of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery and to evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic reoperation in treatment for colorectal cancer. METHODS: According to the statistical standards, 653 consecutive patients treated from March 2002 and March 2009 were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into three groups: upper abdominal surgery group (n = 48), middle-lower abdominal surgery group (n = 110) and non-previous abdominal surgery group (n = 495). Demographic, pathoanatomical and surgical data were compared among the three groups. RESULTS: There was no significant differences in demographic, pathoanatomical data and post-operative complications among the three groups. Compared with the other two groups, middle-lower abdominal surgery subgroup had a higher intra-operative conversion rate due to intra-abdominal adhesion (4.2%, 11.8% and 3.8% in upper abdominal surgery group, middle-lower abdominal surgery group and non-previous abdominal surgery group, respectively). And no significant differences was found in operating time [(132 ± 36), (141 ± 42), (132 ± 36) min], intra-operation blood loss [(58 ± 50), (81 ± 99), (57 ± 57) ml], blood transfusion rate (6.3%, 10.9%, 7.9%), low sphincter-preserving surgery rate (47.1%, 44.7%, 55.2%), time of first flatus passage [(2.5 ± 1.4), (2.9 +/- 1.7), (2.5 ± 2.1) d], fasting time [(5 ± 4), (5 ± 4), (4 ± 3) d], hospital stay [(17 ± 9), (15 ± 8), (16 ± 10) d] between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The history of previous abdominal operations should not be regarded as a contraindication for laparoscopic colorectal cancer reoperation. The laparoscopic reoperation for colorectal cancer is safe and feasible.

Intraoperative cholangiography in combination with laparoscopic ultrasonography for the detection of occult choledocholithiasis.

BACKGROUND: There is still a debate about the utility of intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) or laparoscopic ultrasonography (LUS) for detection of occult choledocholithiasis during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of this study was to assess the value of IOC combined with LUS for detection of occult common bile duct (CBD) stones at LC. MATERIAL/METHODS: From Dec 2002 to Aug 2006, 103 patients with moderate risk of CBD stones underwent IOC and LUS simultaneously during LC. The physician teams for the two different procedures were blinded by each other. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio were calculated by several contingency tables that cross-tabulated the results of each technique with those of the gold standard. RESULTS: The success rate of IOC and LUS were 91.3% and 100% respectively and the time required for LUS was significantly shorter (P<0.01). The visualization of intrapancreatic part of CBD by IOC (97.3%) was significantly higher than LUS (73.8%). The sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood rations identifying occult CBD stones were 75.0%, 98.7%, 92.2%, 95.5%, 91.4%, 57.7 and 0.253 by IOC, and 82.1%, 98.7%, 94.2%, 95.8%, 93.7%, 63.2 and 0.181 by IUS respectively. The McNemar test showed no significant difference between two methods. The sensitivity of IOC combined with LUS was 92.9%, which was greater than that of IOC and LUS taken separately. CONCLUSIONS: LUS is usually performed in case where IOC has failed or is contraindicated. The combination of both methods maximizes intraoperative detection of occult CBD stones and should at least be recommended as two complementary methods.

[Safety study of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly (> or = 70 years) and younger(< 70 years) patients, and to evaluate the safety of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly. METHODS: From Aug. 2007 to Dec. 2007, 25 patients with colorectal cancer undergone laparoscopic colorectal surgery were studied prospectively. Ten patients aged 70 years or older(Elder Group), and 15 patients less than 70 years(Younger Group). The parameters of perioperative hemodynamics, blood chemistry, and intraabdominal organs perfusion were recorded periodically during operation and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Elder group had a higher ASA degree(P<0.01). Mean age, height, weight, the classification of the disease, operative time, blood loss and complication were not significantly different between the two groups. The HCO(3) value and PaCO(2) value increased significantly intraoperatively, while the pH value decreased significantly. These parameters returned to basal line at the end of operation, with the decreased electrolytes, especially the kaliopenia and hypocalcemia. The CVP increased significantly at the beginning of operation and after fluid expansion, and decreased postoperatively. Gastric mucosal pH(pHi) decreased when the operation began. The partial pressure of gastric mucosa(PgCO(2)) increased significantly at the end of operation. Other parameters of hemodynamics including HR, CI, and SI were not significantly different during operation. The CVP of elder group was higher than that of younger group at 5 min after the beginning of the operation, while the MAP of elder group was lower than that of younger at 15 min after the end of the operation. Other parameters of hemodynamics including oxygenation, perfusion, and blood chemistry were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: For laparoscopic colorectal surgery, no significant adverse response attributes to elderly patients. The compensation capacity of the elderly is lower. With the reasonable anesthesia administration, the adverse response can be controlled effectively.

Simultaneous laparoscopy-assisted low anterior resection and distal gastrectomy for synchronous carcinoma of rectum and stomach.

Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer or gastric cancer has been advocated for the benefits of a reduced morbidity, a shorter treatment time, and similar outcomes. However, simultaneous laparoscopy-assisted low anterior resection and distal gastrectomy for synchronous carcinoma of rectum and stomach are rarely documented in literature. Endoscopic examination revealed a synchronous carcinoma of rectum and stomach in a 55-year-old male patient with rectal bleeding and epigastric discomfort. He underwent a simultaneous laparoscopy-assisted low anterior resection and distal gastrectomy with regional lymph nodes dissected. The operation time was 270 min and the estimated blood loss was 120 mL. The patient required parenteral analgesia for less than 24 h. Flatus was passed on postoperative day 3, and a solid diet was resumed on postoperative day 7. He was discharged on postoperative day 13. With the advances in laparoscopic technology and experience, simultaneous resection is an attractive alternative to a synchronous gastrointestinal cancer.

[Comparison of inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional surgery for colorectal carcinoma].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the systemic and local inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional surgery for colorectal carcinoma. METHODS: From April 2004 to August 2004, 51 colorectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic (n=25) and conventional open (n=26) colorectal resection were enrolled in the study. The general clinical data,and inflammatory response were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, pre-operative levels of haemoglobin and albumin, Dukes stage and surgical procedure between the two groups (P > 0.05). Laparoscopic surgery had more advantages over conventional open surgery such as incision, operating time, recovery time of bowel function, and hospitalization. On postoperative day (POD) 1, WBC count [(7.30+/- 2.62)x10(9)/L], and the serum levels of IL-10 [(19.46+/- 3.31)pg/ml] and C-reactive protein (CRP) [(2.76+/- 2.17)mg/dl] were significantly lower in laparoscopic group than those in conventional group (P< 0.05), but there were no differences on POD 4 between the two groups (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences in the volume of peritoneal drainage fluid, and levels of IL-10, TNF and CRP in it on POD 1 between the two groups, but the volume of peritoneal drainage fluid decreased significantly from POD 2, and the level of IL-10 in it was significantly lower on POD 4 in laparoscopic group than that in conventional group. CONCLUSIONS: In early stage after operation,intra- peritoneal inflammatory response caused by laparoscopic surgery is similar to that by conventional open surgery, but systemic inflammatory response is slighter than that by conventional open surgery for colorectal carcinoma.

Clinical advantages of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in the elderly.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Elderly patients have a high incidence of colorectal cancer, which may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality due to complex comorbidity and diminished cardiopulmonary reserves. The aims of this study were to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery with those observed in traditional open surgery in patients aged over 70 years. METHODS: Between January 2003 and October 2004, 51 patients aged over 70 years with colorectal cancer, who underwent laparoscopic surgery (LAP group), were evaluated and compared with 102 controls (also over 70 years old) treated by traditional open surgery (OPEN group) in the same period. All patients were evaluated with respect to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, surgery-related complications, and postoperative recovery. RESULTS: No surgery-related death was observed in the LAP group, whereas two deaths occurred in the OPEN group for severe post-operative pulmonary infection and anastomotic leak, respectively. No pneumoperitoneum-related complications were observed in the LAP group; 2 (3.9%) patients required conversion to open surgery, because of the unexpectedly bulky tumor and severe adhesions in the abdominal cavity. With the increase in patients' age, increased ASA classification was observed. No significant differences were observed in gender, Dukes' staging or types of procedures between LAP and OPEN groups. The overall morbidity in the LAP group was significantly less than that of the OPEN group [17.6% (9/51) vs 37.3% (38/102), p=0.013]. Mean blood loss, time to flatus passage, and time to semi-liquid diet in the LAP group were significantly shorter than those of the OPEN group (90.7+/-49.9 vs 150.3+/-108.7 ml, 2.4+/-1.2 vs 3.5+/-2.9 d, 5.0+/-1.8 vs 5.9+/-1.2 d, respectively, p<0.05). No significant differences were observed in terms of mean operation time or hospital stay between LAP and OPEN groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in elderly patients with colon cancer has clinically significant advantages over traditional open surgery, and appears to be the ideal surgical choice for the elderly.

[Experience of laparoscopic salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer].

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility of the laparoscopic salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer. METHODS: Seven cases with recurrent rectal carcinoma treated by laparoscopic salvage surgery from February 2004 to July 2005 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, four were males and 3 females, and the median age was 60 years (range 37-74). Three cases of recurrence were after conventional anterior resection, 2 after laparoscopic-assist anterior resection, 1 after laparoscopic-assist Parks' procedure, and 1 with pars sacral fistula after per-sacral-local resection for three times. Image examination (CT scanning) was taken preoperatively to evaluate the locally recurrence and exclude the distant metastases. The laparoscopic-assist procedure with or without a hand-assist technique was used in this study. RESULTS: Six cases with the recurrent lesion of central type were treated by salvage surgical procedure as follows: 3 laparoscopic-assist anterior resection, 1 laparoscopic-assist abdominoperineal resection, 1 laparoscopic-assist posterior exenteration, and 1 laparoscopic-assist proctocolectomy with a terminal ileum stoma. All of them were R0 resection confirmed by postoperative pathological examination. The other one with the lesion of combination type was treated with the procedure of laparoscopic-assist sigmoid colostomy. A hand-assist technique was used in 2 cases. The mean operation time, bleeding and hospital day was (211 +/- 13) min, (200 +/- 91) ml, and (15 +/- 10) d, respectively. No conversion and complication occurred. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic salvage surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer is safe and feasible when taken by experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeon to the cases with the recurrent lesion of central type.

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma of common bile duct: a case report and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Minimal access techniques have gained wide acceptance in surgical practice, but the role of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is still controversial. Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy has seldom been described. In this report, we assessed the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma of the common bile duct. CASE REPORT: According to imaging findings, a 71-year-old Chinese man was diagnosed with malignancy of the common bile duct, and successfully underwent laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in our center. The operation's safety, postoperative recovery, complications, oncological clearance, and short-term follow-up results of the patient are evaluated. No severe intraoperative or postoperative complications were observed. The operation time was 390 minutes, and the blood loss was about 50 ml; the flatus, time to resume early activity and hospital stay were 3, 4, and 30 days respectively. The patient remained well at a follow-up of 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy can be performed feasibly and safely by surgeons with advanced laparoscopic skills, and could be considered for the treatment of common bile duct tumors.

Laparoscopic versus open right hemicolectomy with curative intent for colon carcinoma.

AIM: Laparoscopic surgery, especially laparoscopic rectal surgery, for colorectal cancer has been developed considerably. However, due to relatively complicated anatomy and high requirements for surgery techniques, laparoscopic right colectomy develops relatively slowly. This study was designed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) with open right hemicolectomy (ORH) in the treatment of colon carcinoma. METHODS: Between September 2000 and February 2003, 30 patients with colon cancer who underwent LRH were compared with 34 controls treated by ORH in the same period. All patients were evaluated with respect to surgery-related complications, postoperative recovery, recurrence and metastasis rate, cost-effectiveness and survival. RESULTS: Among 30 LRH, 2 (6.7%) were converted to open procedure. No significant differences were observed in terms of mean operation time, blood loss, post-operative complications, and hospital cost between LRH and ORH groups. Mean time for bowel movement, hospital stay, and time to resume early activity in the LRH group were significantly shorter than those in the ORH group (2.24+/-0.56 vs 3.25+/-1.29 d, 13.94+/-6.5 vs 18.25+/-5.96 d, 3.94+/-1.64 vs 5.45+/-1.82 d respectively, P<0.05). As to the lymph node yield, the specimen length and total cost for operation and drugs, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Local recurrence rate and metachronous metastasis rate had no marked difference between the two groups. Cumulative survival probability at 40 mo in LRH group (76.50%) was not obviously different compared to the ORH group (74.04%). CONCLUSION: LRH in patients with colon cancer has statistically and clinically significant advantages over ORH. Thus, LRH can be regarded as a safe and effective procedure.