A meta-analysis of quality of life for abdominoperineal excision of rectum versus anterior resection for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Avoiding a permanent stoma following rectal cancer excision is believed to improve quality of life (QoL), but evidence from comparative studies is contradictory. The aim of this study was to compare QoL following abdominoperineal excision of rectum (APER) with that after anterior resection (AR) in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: A literature search was performed to identify studies published between 1966 and 2006 comparing values of QoL following APER and AR. Random-effect meta-analysis was used to combine the data. Sensitivity analyses were performed for larger studies, those of higher quality and those using self-administered QoL questionnaires. RESULTS: The outcomes for 1,443 patients from 11 studies, of whom 486 (33%) underwent APER, were included. QoL assessments were made at periods of up to 2 years following surgery. There was no significant difference in global health scores between APER and AR. Vitality (WMD -9.82; 95% CI -27.01, -2.04, P = 0.01) and sexual function (WMD -2.73; 95% CI -4.93, -0.64, P = 0.01) were improved in the AR patients. Patients with low AR had improved physical function scores in comparison with APER patients (WMD -4.67; 95% CI -9.10, -0.23; P = 0.004). Cognitive (WMD 3.57; 95% CI 1.41, 5.73; P < 0.001) and emotional function scores (WMD 3.51; 95% CI 1.40, 5.62; P < 0.001) were higher for APER patients. CONCLUSION: Overall, when comparing APER with AR, we identified no differences in general QoL following the procedures. Individualisation of care for rectal cancer patients is essential, but a policy of avoidance of APER cannot currently be justified on the grounds of QoL alone.