published_or_final_version / abstract / toc / Surgery / Master / Master of Surgery

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer was first reported in 1991. However, early experiences with laparoscopic colectomy were unfavorable, with higher than expected rates of port-site recurrence and concerns about compromised long-term oncologic outcomes. These concerns have been resolved by the results of several large-scale European and American multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported no difference in oncologic clearance and survival between laparoscopic and open colectomy for colon cancer. / The role of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer, on the other hand, still remains controversial. Because laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is technically more difficult and has a higher morbidity rate than laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer, most of the published large-scale multicenter RCTs comparing laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer did not include patients with rectal cancer. To date, good-quality data comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal cancer are still scarce in the literature. The main objective of this thesis is to provide additional evidence to justify the role of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. / To be justified, laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer should have equal or better clinical outcomes than open surgery and improve quality of life. Furthermore, oncologic clearance as well as long-term survival should not be adversely affected by the laparoscopic approach. / In this thesis, a series of RCTs and comparative studies with long-term follow-up were conducted to address the above issues. Our results demonstrate that laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is associated with earlier postoperative recovery, better preservation of urosexual function and quality of life, and less late morbidity when compared with open surgery. Oncologic clearance in terms of resection margins and number of lymph nodes harvested are comparable between the laparoscopic and open groups. Most importantly, laparoscopic surgery does not adversely affect disease control or jeopardize long-term survival of rectal cancer patients. The benefits of the laparoscopic over the open approach remain the same regardless of the types of rectal cancer surgery (laparoscopic-assisted anterior resection, total mesorectal excision, or abdominoperineal resection) or the location of the tumor. It is therefore concluded that laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is safe and justified. Based on our results, we believe that laparoscopic surgery can be regarded as an acceptable alternative to open surgery for treating curable rectal cancer. / Ng, Siu Man Simon. / Thesis (M.D.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2013. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 323-366). / Dedication --- p.1 / Declaration of Originality --- p.2 / Abstract --- p.3 / Table of Contents --- p.5 / List of Tables --- p.8 / List of Figures --- p.10 / List of Abbreviations --- p.13 / PRÉCIS TO THE THESIS --- p.15 / Chapter PART I --- BACKGROUND --- p.37 / Chapter Chapter 1 --- Management of Colorectal Cancer: From Open to Laparoscopic Surgery --- p.38 / Chapter 1.1 --- Introduction to Colorectal Cancer --- p.39 / Chapter 1.2 --- A Brief History of Laparoscopic Surgery --- p.51 / Chapter 1.3 --- Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: The Beginning --- p.58 / Chapter 1.4 --- Evidence for the Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Surgery for Colon Cancer --- p.62 / Chapter Chapter 2 --- Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Critical Appraisal of Published Literature --- p.71 / Chapter 2.1 --- Introduction --- p.72 / Chapter 2.2 --- Evidence from Single-Center Trials --- p.76 / Chapter 2.3 --- Evidence from Multicenter Trials --- p.82 / Chapter 2.4 --- Ongoing Trials --- p.89 / Chapter 2.5 --- Discussion --- p.92 / Chapter Chapter 3 --- Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectosigmoid and Rectal Cancer: Experience at The Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong --- p.97 / Chapter 3.1 --- The Beginning of Laparoscopic Era in Hong Kong --- p.98 / Chapter 3.2 --- Early Experience of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery --- p.102 / Chapter 3.3 --- Nonrandomized Comparative Studies --- p.105 / Chapter 3.4 --- The Hong Kong Trial --- p.110 / Chapter PART II --- HYPOTHESES AND CLINICAL STUDIES --- p.116 / Chapter Chapter 4 --- Research Hypotheses and Objectives --- p.117 / Chapter 4.1 --- Research Hypotheses --- p.118 / Chapter 4.2 --- Research Plan and Objectives --- p.120 / Chapter Chapter 5 --- Laparoscopic-Assisted Versus Open Anterior Resection for Upper Rectal Cancer: Short-Term Outcomes --- p.122 / Chapter 5.1 --- Abstract --- p.123 / Chapter 5.2 --- Introduction --- p.125 / Chapter 5.3 --- Patients and Methods --- p.128 / Chapter 5.4 --- Results --- p.133 / Chapter 5.5 --- Discussion --- p.144 / Chapter 5.6 --- Conclusions --- p.148 / Chapter Chapter 6 --- Laparoscopic-Assisted Versus Open Anterior Resection for Upper Rectal Cancer: Long-Term Morbidity and Oncologic Outcomes --- p.149 / Chapter 6.1 --- Abstract --- p.150 / Chapter 6.2 --- Introduction --- p.152 / Chapter 6.3 --- Patients and Methods --- p.154 / Chapter 6.4 --- Results --- p.158 / Chapter 6.5 --- Discussion --- p.173 / Chapter 6.6 --- Conclusions --- p.179 / Chapter Chapter 7 --- Laparoscopic-Assisted Versus Open Abdominoperineal Resection for Low Rectal Cancer --- p.180 / Chapter 7.1 --- Abstract --- p.181 / Chapter 7.2 --- Introduction --- p.183 / Chapter 7.3 --- Patients and Methods --- p.185 / Chapter 7.4 --- Results --- p.190 / Chapter 7.5 --- Discussion --- p.201 / Chapter 7.6 --- Conclusions --- p.207 / Chapter Chapter 8 --- Laparoscopic-Assisted Versus Open Total Mesorectal Excision with Anal Sphincter Preservation for Mid and Low Rectal Cancer --- p.208 / Chapter 8.1 --- Abstract --- p.209 / Chapter 8.2 --- Introduction --- p.211 / Chapter 8.3 --- Patients and Methods --- p.214 / Chapter 8.4 --- Results --- p.221 / Chapter 8.5 --- Discussion --- p.238 / Chapter 8.6 --- Conclusions --- p.246 / Chapter Chapter 9 --- Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Three Randomized Controlled Trials --- p.247 / Chapter 9.1 --- Abstract --- p.248 / Chapter 9.2 --- Introduction --- p.250 / Chapter 9.3 --- Patients and Methods --- p.254 / Chapter 9.4 --- Results --- p.258 / Chapter 9.5 --- Discussion --- p.272 / Chapter 9.6 --- Conclusions --- p.280 / Chapter Chapter 10 --- Prospective Comparison of Quality of Life Outcomes After Curative Laparoscopic Versus Open Sphincter-Preserving Resection for Rectal Cancer --- p.281 / Chapter 10.1 --- Abstract --- p.282 / Chapter 10.2 --- Introduction --- p.284 / Chapter 10.3 --- Patients and Methods --- p.287 / Chapter 10.4 --- Results --- p.292 / Chapter 10.5 --- Discussion --- p.308 / Chapter Chapter 11 --- Conclusions --- p.314 / Chapter 11.1 --- Conclusions --- p.315 / REFERENCES --- p.322 / LIST OF PUBLICATIONS RELATED TO THE THESIS --- p.367 / ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS --- p.373

In the past, patients with peritoneal surface malignancy were considered incurable and were only offered palliative treatments. However, in a substantial number of patients, disease progression that is isolated to peritoneum may occur. It has been realised that elimination of peritoneal surface tumours may have an impact on the survival of these cancer patients, in whom a prominent cause of death is peritoneal carcinomatosis. The focus of this PhD. thesis is on the combined treatment of cytoreductive surgery and perioperative intrapersonal chemotherapy for diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma, pseudomyxoma peritonei, colorectal peritoneal carcinomatosis and resectable gastric cancer. Section one describes the major principles of management for peritoneal surface malignancy, covering the historical perspectives, the treatment rationales and the learning curve associated with the combined procedure. Section two is devoted to peritoneal mesothelioma, in trying to examine this disease from its clinical, radiologic and histopathologic aspects. A radiologic classification and a histopathologic staging system for this disease are proposed. In section three, the results of the combined treatment for pseudomyxoma peritonei are presented, including a systematic review of the literature, a case series of 50 patients from our Australian centre and a treatment failure analysis of 402 patients from the Washington Cancer Institute. These studies suggest that a disease-free state is important for long-term survival for patients with pseudomyxoma peritonei. In section four, the current evidence on the combined treatment for colorectaI peritoneal carcinomatosis is demonstrated by conducting a systematic review of the literature and survival and perioperative outcome analyses of two separate patient cohorts. These results suggest that the combined treatment is associated with an improved survival, as compared with historical controls. In the last section, a metaanalysis of the randomised controlled trials on adjuvant intraperitoneal chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer shows that a significant improvement in survival is associated with hyperthermic intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy alone or in combination with early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy.