{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Redo laparoscopic colorectal resection: a retrospective analysis with propensity score matching.
{Author}: Sakai J;Watanabe J;Ohya H;Takei S;Toritani K;Suwa Y;Iguchi K;Atsumi Y;Numata M;Sato T;Takeda K;Kunisaki C;
{Journal}: Int J Colorectal Dis
{Volume}: 38
{Issue}: 1
{Year}: 2023 May 27
{Factor}: 2.796
{DOI}: 10.1007/s00384-023-04439-0
{Abstract}: <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>Reports of redo laparoscopic colorectal resection (Re-LCRR) are scarce. In order to evaluate the safety and short-term outcomes of Re-LCRR, we performed a matched case-control analysis of patients who underwent this procedure for colorectal cancer.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>This was a retrospective, monocentric study that included patients who underwent Re-LCRR for colorectal cancer between January 2011 and December 2019 at our institution. The patients were compared to a 2:1 matched sample. Matching was conducted based on age, sex, BMI, surgical procedure, and clinical stage.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Twenty-nine patients underwent Re-LCRR (RCRR group) and were compared to 58 patients selected by matching who underwent LCRR as primary resection (PCRR group). The median of age of the 29 patients of RCRR group was 75 (IQR 56-81) years and the RCRR group included 14 males. The median operative time of the RCRR group was 167 (IQR 126-232) minutes, and the median intraoperative blood loss was 5 (IQR 2-35) ml. In the RCRR group, there were no cases that required conversion to laparotomy. The short-term outcomes of the two groups did not differ to a statistical extent with respect to operative time (p = 0.415), intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.971), rate of conversion to laparotomy (p = 0.477), comorbidity (p = 0.215), and postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.809). No patients in either group experienced postoperative anastomotic leakage or required re-operation due to postoperative complications, and there was no procedure-related death. However, in terms of oncological factors, although there was no difference in the number of cases with a positive radical margin between the two groups (p = 1.000), the number of harvested lymph nodes in the RCRR group was significantly lower than that in the PCRR group (p = 0.015) and the RCRR group included 10 cases with less than 12 harvested lymph nodes.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Re-LCRR is associated with good short-term results and can be safely performed; however, the number of harvested lymph nodes is significantly reduced in comparison to primary resection cases, and further studies are needed to evaluate its long-term prognosis.