Recurrence and survival after mesorectal excision for rectal cancer

105Citations
Citations of this article
41Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Mesorectal excision for rectal cancer has resulted in local recurrence rates of 3-11 per cent compared with up to 38 per cent after conventional methods. The results of a prospective Danish study with a historical control group are presented. Methods: Three hundred and eleven patients with a mobile rectal cancer had mesorectal excision with curative intent performed by certified surgeons and were followed for 3 years. Demographic, perioperative and follow-up data were recorded prospectively. A series of patients who had conventional operations for rectal cancer served as a control group. Results: The cumulative 3-year local recurrence rate was 11 per cent after mesorectal excision compared with 30 per cent after conventional surgery (hazard ratio (HR) 0.33 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.21 to 0.52); P < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that only advanced age (HR 0.97 (95 per cent c.i. 0.94 to 1.00); P = 0.048) and tumour in the lower third of the rectum (HR 0.21 (95 per cent c.i. 0.04 to 1.97); P = 0.075) were marginal independent predictors of local recurrence after mesorectal excision. The cumulative crude 3-year survival rate was 77 per cent after mesorectal excision and 62 per cent after conventional surgery (HR 0.58 (95 per cent c.i. 0.43 to 0.77); P < 0.001). Age was the only independent predictor of death after mesorectal excision (HR 1.04 (95 per cent c.i. 1.02 to 1.07); P = 0.001). Conclusion: Mesorectal excision is associated with a considerably lower risk of local recurrence and a better survival rate than conventional surgery, and is the optimum method for rectal cancer resection.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bülow, S., Christensen, I. J., Harling, H., Kronborg, O., & Fenger, C. (2003). Recurrence and survival after mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. British Journal of Surgery, 90(8), 974–980. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4137

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free