[Laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. A comparative study].

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is currently accepted and widespread worldwide. However, according tol the surgical experience on this approach, surgical and short-term oncologic results may vary. Studies comparing laparoscopic vs. open surgery in our population are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the superiority of the laparoscopic vs. open technique for colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective and comparative study collected data from patients operated on for colorectal cancer between 1999 and 2011 at the Angeles Lomas Hospital, Mexico.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients were included in this study; 47 were operated through an open approach and 35 laparoscopically. Mean operative time was significantly lower in the open approach group (p= 0.008). There were no significant difference between both techniques for intraoperative bleeding (p= 0.3980), number of lymph nodes (p= 0.27), time to initiate oral feeding (p= 0.31), hospital stay (p= 0.12), and postoperative pain (p= 0.19). Procedure-related complications rate and type were not significantly different in both groups (p= 0.44). Patients operated laparoscopically required significantly less analgesic drugs (p= 0.04) and less need for epidural postoperative analgesia (p= 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approach is as safe as the traditional open approach for colorectal cancer. Early oncological and surgical results confirm its suitability according to this indication.