Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis of 163 Patients in a Single Institution

Abstract EN

Background.

The present study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancers.

Materials and Methods.

The medical records from a total of 163 patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancers were retrospectively analyzed.

Patient’s demographic data, operative details and postoperative early outcomes, outpatient follow-up, pathologic results, and stages of the cancer were reviewed from the database.

Results.

The patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery showed significant advantages due to the minimally invasive nature of the surgery compared with those who underwent open surgery, namely, less blood loss, faster postoperative recovery, and shorter postoperative hospital stay ( P < 0.05 ).

However, laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer resulted in a longer operative time compared with open surgery ( P < 0.05 ).

There were no statistically significant differences between groups for medical complications ( P > 0.05 ).

Open surgery resulted in more incisional infections and postoperative ileus compared with laparoscopic surgery ( P < 0.05 ).

There were no differences in the pathologic parameters between two groups ( P < 0.05 ).

Conclusions.

These findings indicated that laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer had the clear advantages of a minimally invasive surgery and relative disadvantage with longer surgery time and exhibited similar pathologic parameters compared with open surgery.