MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer
Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer
Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer
Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer
Journal Article

Comparison of Single-Incision Plus One Additional Port Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection with Conventional Laparoscopy-assisted Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

2014
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Background Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery is the latest innovation in minimally invasive surgery. We performed single-incision plus one additional port laparoscopy-assisted anterior resection (SILS + 1-AR) starting in August 2010. This study aimed at evaluating the feasibility of SILS + 1-AR and comparing it with that of conventional laparoscopy-assisted anterior resection (C-AR). Methods Patients with preoperative clinical stage 0 to stage III rectal cancer were included. Demographic, intraoperative, and pathological examination data, as well as short-term outcome data, of 20 patients who underwent SILS + 1-AR were retrospectively compared with that of 20 patients who underwent C-AR. Invasiveness of the two procedures was also evaluated through a vital signs diary and hematological examination on postoperative days (POD) 1, 3, and 7. Results Operating time, mean estimated blood loss, the number of lymph nodes dissected, the number of lymph node metastases, and the mean distal resection margin length were not significantly different. However, postoperative neutrophil counts in the SILS + 1-AR group were lower than those in the C-AR group ( P  = 0.085). A significant difference in body temperature was observed in the SILS + 1-AR group on POD 1 ( P  = 0.028). No significant differences were observed in perioperative and overall morbidity between the two groups. Conversion to open surgery was required in 2 (10 %) of the 20 patients in the SILS + 1-AR group. The mean postoperative length of stay and recurrence rates were similar in the two groups. Conclusion SILS + 1-AR for rectal cancer is similar to C-AR in safety, feasibility, and provision of oncological radicality.