Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Surg Proced. Mar 28, 2015; 5(1): 1-13
Published online Mar 28, 2015. doi: 10.5412/wjsp.v5.i1.1
Published online Mar 28, 2015. doi: 10.5412/wjsp.v5.i1.1
Table 4 Single center comparison of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and standard resection for T1 rectal cancer
| Ref. | Year | Follow-up (yr) | n | 5 yr local recurrence | 5 yr overall survival | |||
| TEMS | SR | TEMS (%) | SR (%) | TEMS (%) | SR (%) | |||
| Winde et al[81] | 1996 | 3.8[TEMS]/3.4[SR] | 24 | 26 | 4.2 | 0 | 96 | 96 |
| Heintz et al[78] | 1998 | 4.3 | 46 | 34 | 4.3 | 2.9 | 79 | 81 |
| Lee et al[79] | 2003 | 2.6[TEMS]/2.9[SR] | 52 | 22 | 4.1 | 0 | 100 | 92.9 |
| Palma et al[80] | 2009 | 7.2[TEMS]/7.8[SR] | 34 | 17 | 5.9 | 0 | 88.23 | 82.35 |
| De Graaf et al[77] | 2009 | 3.5[TEMS]/7[SR] | 80 | 75 | 241 | 01 | 75 | 77 |
- Citation: Devaraj B, Kaiser AM. Impact of technology on indications and limitations for transanal surgical removal of rectal neoplasms. World J Surg Proced 2015; 5(1): 1-13
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2219-2832/full/v5/i1/1.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5412/wjsp.v5.i1.1