Review Article
Latest Advances in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer
Table 2
Comparison of oncologic outcomes among OISR, LISR, and RISR.
| | OISR | LISR | RISR |
| Tumour size (cm) | 3.7 (1.6) | 3.3 (1.7) | 2.8 (1.8) | Lymph node retrieved | 15.9 (9.8) | 14.9 (9.1) | 13.4 (7.7) | Proximal margin (cm) | 15.6 (9.6) | 18.7 (10.9) | 20.7 (8.0) | Distal margin (cm) | 1.7 (0.8) | 1.7 (1.0) | 1.4 (0.9) | Histopathological differentiation (%) | | | | Well | 14.0 | 17.9 | 23.8 | Moderate | 76.6 | 74.7 | 66.7 | Poor | 9.4 | 6.0 | 6.0 | Other type | 0 | 1.4 | 3.5 | Stage (%) | | | | pCR | 0.5 | 2.0 | 6.0 | I | 35.4 | 36.0 | 39.3 | II | 26.4 | 27.6 | 23.8 | III | 34.9 | 30.6 | 23.8 | IV | 2.8 | 3.8 | 7.1 | 3-year LRR (%) | 7.1 | 4.1 | 8.5 | 3-year DFS (%) | 79.3 | 84.5 | 85.8 | 3-year OS (%) | 84.5 | 89.3 | 94.2 | 5-year LRR (%) | 2.0 | 6.6 | 8.7 | 5-year DFS (%) | 71.0 | 76.3 | 80.6 | 5-year OS (%) | 82.0 | 86.7 | 88.5 |
|
|
Values are mean (s.d.). LRR: local recurrence rate; DFS: disease-free survival; OS: overall survival. |