Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT05685680
NCT05685680RecruitingNot Applicable

Outcome of Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision Versus Open Technique in Management of Rectal Carcinoma

Sohag University1 site in 1 country50 target enrollmentStarted: December 20, 2022Last updated:
Conditions
Interventions

Trial Snapshot

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Recruiting
Enrollment
50
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Comparison betewen laparoscopic and open teqnique in resection of rectal carcinoma and the involvement of the resection margin (R1), which is CRM involvement or DRM involvement.after resection.

Study Overview

Brief Summary

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of death in the West, and rectal cancer accounts for about 25% of colon cancers

Low anterior resection has been the mainstay of rectal cancer surgery in low rectal cancer since the 1970s. Although the best efforts of experienced surgeons, The local recurrence rate is 3 to 33% in conventional surgery, while total mesorectal excision (TME) results indicate a recurrence rate of less than 10%

The evolution of the concept of TME which was first revealed by Heald.in 1982 made a major shift in the treatment strategies (Rodriguez-Luna et al,2015). The concept of TME was the most important event in surgery for rectal cancer in the last two decades, because even without a curative approach, the local recurrence decreased to 6 to 12%, and 5-year survival improved by 53-87% TME described clear definitions of distal resection margin (DRM), circumferential resection margin (CRM), and least number of harvested lymph nodes, so oncological outcomes improved, locoregional recurrence and survival rates also influenced .

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) may be associated with less blood loss, earlier recovery, and lower morbidity. Identification of the small nerves and vessels became easiear because of laparoscopic magnified view of pelvis and thus prevents these injuries (Sajid et al, 2019). Also, minimal surgical trauma will reduce the immunologic response and preserves postoperative immunologic defenses. This may lead to low rate of infections as well as low local recurrences and distant metastases in addition to, tissue handling with less manipulation, 'may reduces the spread of cancer cells

TME in obese males with low and anterior rectal tumors is technically challenging especially post neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy due to distortion of the anatomical planes (Ng et al, 2014). In these patients, it is difficult to obtain a proper view of the dissection plane, in open technique which threatens the integrity of TME and carries the risk of positive margins, which is related to higher rates of local recurrence

LTME is a widely used approach for rectal cancers; although conversion rate varies from 1.2 to 17%, and it is higher if BMI is equal to or more than 30

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Masking
None

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
20 Years to 70 Years (Adult, Older Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Inclusion Criteria

  • •All patients with pathologically confirmed rectal carcinoma involving middle or lower third rectum and operable by MRI and CT scan criteria.
  • •Both sexes will be included.
  • •Age: ranging from 20 to 70 years.

Exclusion Criteria

  • •Patients with stage IV.
  • •Recurrent rectal cancers.
  • •Combined malignancy.
  • •Patients admitted due to emergency situations (acute large bowel obstruction, abdominal abscess, or rectal perforation and hemorrhage).
  • •Patients with contraindication for laparoscopic surgery.
  • •Unfit patients (ASA score > II).

Arms & Interventions

Group A laparoscopic group

Active Comparator

group A laparoscopic surgery

Intervention: total mesorectal excision in rectal carcinoma (Procedure)

Group B

Active Comparator

Group B open surgery

Intervention: total mesorectal excision in rectal carcinoma (Procedure)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Comparison betewen laparoscopic and open teqnique in resection of rectal carcinoma and the involvement of the resection margin (R1), which is CRM involvement or DRM involvement.after resection.

Time Frame: 1year

R(resection margin of cancer of rectum) CRM circumferencial margin Or. DRM distal resection margin of cancer

Secondary Outcomes

No secondary outcomes reported

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Osama Saleh Ahmed

Assistant lecture ofgeneral surgery

Sohag University

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials