الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 120 |  |  |
| | | from | 120 | | |
Abstract
In 1993, laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer was first reported. Since then, laparoscopy has been widely applied for colorectal cancer surgery. Many studies have demonstrated that laparoscopy is safe and feasible for colon cancer, but it is still controversial for rectal cancer. Recently, some literatures have reported that laparoscopic is not inferior to open surgery in long time outcomes for TME. But they did not present the data of APR independently (Zhang et al., 2018).Several studies have compared laparoscopic APR and open APR for rectal cancer, but the results may differ from each other (Wong et al., 2006). This study was conducted to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic APR compared with the conventional open procedure.This combined prospective and retrospective comparative study was conducted in Gastro-Intestinal Surgical Center, Mansoura University in the period between January 2017 and March 2019. Additionally, the study was approved by the local ethical committee.A total of 40 patients diagnosed with low rectal or anal cancers were included in this study. These patients were divided into two groups; group A that included 20 cases and underwent the open procedure, and group B that included the other 20 cases who underwent the laparoscopic technique.All patients underwent complete history taking, through clinical examination, required investigations, and full anesthetic consultation before surgery. Moreover, the details and complication of every approach was explained in detail for every patient. The results of this study revealed the following when comparing the laparoscopic approach to the open one in performing APR procedure:Laparoscopic APR is associated with early return to bowel function expressed as early nasogastric tube removal, early oral intake, early flatus passage, and less experience of post-operative ileus.Laparoscopic surgery is associated with less post-operative pain and shorter hospital stay and thus, less analgesic needs are detected and less health costs are expended.Laparoscopic APR is associated with fewer post-operative complications especially abdominal wound infections and paralytic ileus.Although laparoscopic surgery is associated with a greater number of harvested lymph nodes in the surgical specimen, it was not superior to the open approach when it comes to the number of infiltrated lymph nodes.