English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Lithotomy (LT) and prone jackknife positions (PJ) are routinely used for abdominoperineal resection (APR). The present study compared the clinical, pathological, and oncological outcomes of PJ-APR vs. LT-APR in low rectal cancer patients in order to confirm which position will provide more benefits to patients undergoing APR.    Methods  This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients with low rectal cancer who underwent curative APR between January 2002 and December 2011. Patients were matched 1:2 (PJ-APR = 74 and LT-APR = 37 patients) based on gender and age. Perioperative data, postoperative outcomes, and survival were compared between the two approaches.    Results  Hospital stay was shorter with PJ-APR compared with LT-APR ( P  < 0.05). Compared with LT-APR, duration of anesthesia (234 ± 50.8 vs. 291 ± 69 min,  P  = 0.022) and surgery (183 ± 44.8 vs. 234 ± 60 min,  P  = 0.016) was shorter with PJ-APR, and estimated blood losses were smaller (549 ± 218 vs. 674 ± 350 mL,  P  < 0.001). Blood transfusions were required in 37.8% of LT-APR patients and in 8.1% of PJ-APR patients ( P  < 0.001). There was no difference in the distribution of N stages ( P  = 0.27). Median follow-up was 47.1 (13.6–129.7) months. Postoperative complications were reported by fewer patients after PJ-APR compared with LT-APR (14.9% vs. 32.4%,  P  = 0.030). There were no significant differences in overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and distant metastasis ( P  > 0.05).    Conclusions  The PJ position provided a better exposure for low rectal cancer and had a lower operative risk and complication rates than LT-APR. However, there was no difference in rectal cancer prognosis between the two approaches. PJ-APR might be a better choice for patients with low rectal cancer.

world journal of surgical oncology

Better operative outcomes achieved with the prone jackknife vs. lithotomy position during abdominoperineal resection in patients with low rectal cancer