Sphincter preservation for distal rectal cancer--a goal worth achieving at all costs?

Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/137075
Title:
Sphincter preservation for distal rectal cancer--a goal worth achieving at all costs?
Authors:
Mulsow, Jürgen; Winter, Des C
Affiliation:
Institute for Clinical Outcomes Research and Education, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Citation:
Sphincter preservation for distal rectal cancer--a goal worth achieving at all costs? 2011, 17 (7):855-61 World J. Gastroenterol.
Journal:
World journal of gastroenterology : WJG
Issue Date:
21-Feb-2011
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/137075
DOI:
10.3748/wjg.v17.i7.855
PubMed ID:
21412495
Additional Links:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412495
Abstract:
To assess the merits of currently available treatment options in the management of patients with low rectal cancer, a review of the medical literature pertaining to the operative and non-operative management of low rectal cancer was performed, with particular emphasis on sphincter preservation, oncological outcome, functional outcome, morbidity, quality of life, and patient preference. Low anterior resection (AR) is technically feasible in an increasing proportion of patients with low rectal cancer. The cost of sphincter preservation is the risk of morbidity and poor functional outcome in a significant proportion of patients. Transanal and endoscopic surgery are attractive options in selected patients that can provide satisfactory oncological outcomes while avoiding the morbidity and functional sequelae of open total mesorectal excision. In complete responders to neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, a non-operative approach may prove to be an option. Abdominoperineal excision (APE) imposes a permanent stoma and is associated with significant incidence of perineal morbidity but avoids the risk of poor functional outcome following AR. Quality of life following AR and APE is comparable. Given the choice, most patients will choose AR over APE, however patients following APE positively appraise this option. In striving toward sphincter preservation the challenge is not only to achieve the best possible oncological outcome, but also to ensure that patients with low rectal cancer have realistic and accurate expectations of their treatment choice so that the best possible overall outcome can be obtained by each individual.
Item Type:
Article
Language:
en
MeSH:
Anal Canal; Colorectal Surgery; Humans; Patient Preference; Quality of Life; Rectal Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome
ISSN:
1007-9327

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorMulsow, Jürgenen
dc.contributor.authorWinter, Des Cen
dc.date.accessioned2011-07-27T11:05:41Z-
dc.date.available2011-07-27T11:05:41Z-
dc.date.issued2011-02-21-
dc.identifier.citationSphincter preservation for distal rectal cancer--a goal worth achieving at all costs? 2011, 17 (7):855-61 World J. Gastroenterol.en
dc.identifier.issn1007-9327-
dc.identifier.pmid21412495-
dc.identifier.doi10.3748/wjg.v17.i7.855-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/137075-
dc.description.abstractTo assess the merits of currently available treatment options in the management of patients with low rectal cancer, a review of the medical literature pertaining to the operative and non-operative management of low rectal cancer was performed, with particular emphasis on sphincter preservation, oncological outcome, functional outcome, morbidity, quality of life, and patient preference. Low anterior resection (AR) is technically feasible in an increasing proportion of patients with low rectal cancer. The cost of sphincter preservation is the risk of morbidity and poor functional outcome in a significant proportion of patients. Transanal and endoscopic surgery are attractive options in selected patients that can provide satisfactory oncological outcomes while avoiding the morbidity and functional sequelae of open total mesorectal excision. In complete responders to neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, a non-operative approach may prove to be an option. Abdominoperineal excision (APE) imposes a permanent stoma and is associated with significant incidence of perineal morbidity but avoids the risk of poor functional outcome following AR. Quality of life following AR and APE is comparable. Given the choice, most patients will choose AR over APE, however patients following APE positively appraise this option. In striving toward sphincter preservation the challenge is not only to achieve the best possible oncological outcome, but also to ensure that patients with low rectal cancer have realistic and accurate expectations of their treatment choice so that the best possible overall outcome can be obtained by each individual.-
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21412495en
dc.subject.meshAnal Canal-
dc.subject.meshColorectal Surgery-
dc.subject.meshHumans-
dc.subject.meshPatient Preference-
dc.subject.meshQuality of Life-
dc.subject.meshRectal Neoplasms-
dc.subject.meshTreatment Outcome-
dc.titleSphincter preservation for distal rectal cancer--a goal worth achieving at all costs?en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentInstitute for Clinical Outcomes Research and Education, St. Vincent's University Hospital, Elm Park, Dublin 4, Ireland.en
dc.identifier.journalWorld journal of gastroenterology : WJGen
dc.description.provinceLeinster-

Related articles on PubMed

All Items in Lenus, The Irish Health Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.