Laparoscopic versus conventional open resection of rectal carcinoma: A clinical comparative study

Table 1 Characteristics of patients in two groups

	LAP resection group (n = 18)	Open resection group (n = 18)	Difference (P value)
Age (Years)	52.4 ± 7.9	54.1 ± 6.8	NS
Male/Female	9:09	10:08	NS
ASAP score	2.4 ± 0.2	2.5 ± 0.3	NS
Operations
LAR	11	12	NS
APR	7	6	NS
Duke’s stage
A	3	3	NS
B	9	7	NS
C	6	8	NS

NS: no statistical significance.

Table 2 Operative details for two groups

	LAP resection group (n = 18)	Open resection group (n = 18)	Difference (P value)
Operative time (min)	189 ± 18	146 ± 22	< 0.05
Estimated blood loss (mL)	136 ± 21	357 ± 34	< 0.01
Passing flatus (h)	43 ± 5	78 ± 12	< 0.05
Oral intake (h)	58 ± 9	89 ± 13	< 0.05
Hospital stay (d)	7.8 ± 1.5	9.1 ± 3.3	NS

Table 3 Complications of surgery for rectal carcinoma

Complication	Number of patients		P value
	LAP (n = 18)	Open (n = 18)
Intraoperative
Bleeding	0	2	NS
Rectum injury	2	1	NS
Increased PaCO2	1	0	NS
Postoperative
Wound infection	0	1	NS
Urinary retention	1	2	NS
Prolonged ileum ( > 4 d)	0	2	NS
Morbidity (%)	5.6	27.8	< 0.05

Table 4 Pathology data in laparoscopic and open resection groups

	LAP resection group (n = 18)	Open resection group (n = 18)	Difference (P value)
Lymph nodes harvest	7.8 ± 1.7	8.2 ± 2.3	NS
Specimen length (cm)
LAR	19.4 ± 3.2	21.2 ± 2.9	NS
APR	27.3 ± 4.1	25.8 ± 3.0	NS
Distal resection margin (cm)
LAR	4.3 ± 1.1	4.6 ± 1.6	NS
Surgical margins	clear	clear