Laparoscopic versus open resection in locally advanced rectal cancers: a propensity matched analysis of oncological and short-term outcomes.

AIM: The aim was to compare oncological and short-term outcomes between open and laparoscopic surgery in locally advanced rectal cancers. METHODS: It is a retrospective analysis conducted in a high volume tertiary centre. Matching was carried out for nine variables, including preoperative factors, neoadjuvant treatment and sphincter preservation. RESULTS: Both the open and laparoscopic surgery arms had 239 patients each. The distributions of pretreatment MRI T3, T4, circumferential resection margin (CRM) positive tumours, neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiation and sphincter preservation were 80.3%, 13.6%, 50%, 89% and 56.4% respectively. The mean number of nodes harvested (12.9 vs. 12.7, P = 0.716), pathological CRM positivity (6.3% in open vs. 5.4% in laparoscopic, P = 0.697) and distal resection margins were similar. The mean blood loss was higher in open surgeries (910 ml vs. 349 ml, P < 0.001). Anastomotic leaks and Clavien-Dindo Grade 3-4 complications were higher in the open arm than in the laparoscopy arm (5.9% vs. 1.7%, P = 0.024, and 12.5% vs. 6.7%, P = 0.015 respectively). The median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy arm (7 vs. 6, P = 0.015). In CRM positive and threatened cases, the measured outcomes were similar between the two groups except for blood loss which was significantly higher in the open surgery (872 vs. 379, P = 0.000). CONCLUSIONS: In high volume centres, in the hands of experienced colorectal surgeons, laparoscopic rectal surgery is oncologically safe in locally advanced rectal cancers and has lesser morbidity and shorter hospital stay than open surgery. In CRM positive and threatened cases the laparoscopic surgery showed less blood loss compared to open surgery, while other outcome measures were similar to open surgery.