View clinical trials related to Rectal Cancer.
Filter by:The goal of this clinical trial is to test a telehealth-based personalized physical activity intervention in adult patients diagnosed with Stage I-III rectal cancer. The main question it aims to answer are how to better understand the experiences of rectal cancer survivors who are coping with bowel dysfunction and how physical activity can improve their quality of life. Participants will be asked to: 1. Complete surveys to assess bowel function and quality of life 2. Participate in 12 Telehealth Sessions (one session a week) to discuss and review bowel dysfunction 3. Perform daily physical activity
A retrospective cohort study, conducted nationwide（China） and across multiple centers, aimed to compare the surgical quality and short-term outcomes of R-NOSES （robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery）with R-TSES （robotic transabdominal specimen extraction surgery） for early-stage rectal cancer.
Background: Anastomotic stricture significantly impacts patients' quality of life and long-term prognosis. However, current clinical practice lacks accurate tools for predicting anastomotic stricture. This study aimed to develop a nomogram to predict anastomotic stricture in patients with rectal cancer who have undergone anterior resection. Methods: 1542 eligible patients will be recruited for the study. Least absolute shrinkage selection operator (Lasso) analysis will be used to preliminarily select predictors. A prediction model will be constructed using multivariate logistic regression and presented as a nomogram. The performance of the nomogram will be evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration diagrams, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Internal validation will be conducted by assessing the model's performance on a validation cohort.
Our team has previously published articles providing detailed descriptions of the steps involved in both RS and LS. All surgeries adhered to the total mesorectal excision (TME) principle. In RS, a surgeon employed the Da Vinci Xi surgical system featuring a five-port setup, while five physicians conducted LS with a similarly configured five-port approach. Both the RS and LS doctors are experienced. The surgeries were conducted according to standard procedures, and the RS group utilized totally robotic rectal resection.
Numerous comparison studies on the outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer have been undertaken and reported. But there aren't many studies that compare the safety and effectiveness of the two surgery procedures used to treat people with mid and low rectal cancer who have different body mass indexes (BMIs). This study was done to organize the clinical data we had at our hospital so we could compare the perioperative effectiveness of two minimally invasive approaches for people with different BMIs.
Objective: To investigate gender-based differences in outcomes following robotic surgery for rectal cancer. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 155 patients (82 males, 73 females) who underwent robotic surgery for rectal cancer. Demographic, pre-operative, operative, and post-operative data were collected and analyzed. Pre-operative study: All patients underwent a standardized pre-operative work-up, which included a physical examination, comprehensive colonoscopy with biopsy, rigid rectoscopy, pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, computed tomography (CT) of the thorax and abdomen, and measurement of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. Tumor staging followed the TNM staging criteria (American Joint Committee on Cancer), with the T and N stages determined by the most advanced findings from any imaging modality Data collected: Retrospective evaluation and comparison of demographic characteristics, pre-operative TNM stage, distance from anal verge, tumor size, tumor grade, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and body mass index (BMI) were conducted among both patient groups. Peri-operative and post-operative data, including morbidity and mortality, were assessed, alongside parameters such as distal resection margin (DRM), proximal resection margin (PRM), harvested lymph nodes (HLN), and Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) scores. Diagnosis of anastomotic leakage was confirmed by clinical suspicion (e.g., changes in drainage, fever, abdominal pain) and further validated through contrast enema observed during follow-up computed tomography (CT). Hospital stay and readmission rates were monitored for up to 90 days post-surgery. Post-operative follow-up: Post-operative outcomes encompassed operative duration, estimated blood loss, time to first flatus passage, duration of liquid diet, and length of hospital stay following surgery. Operative duration comprised the time from initial skin incision to closure, including the time needed for robotic surgery docking and undocking. Upon experiencing initial flatulence, patients transitioned to a liquid diet. Hospital stay duration was measured from the time of surgery to discharge. The overall cost of surgery, including surgical procedures, anesthesia, medications, and post-operative care, was considered in the total expenditure analysis.
In rectal cancer surgery, the organ/space surgical site infection (O/S-SSI) has an impact on patient's prognosis. Its influence in the oncologic outcomes remains controversial. The main objective is to assess the possible effect of O/S-SSI on long-term overall survival and cancer recurrence.
Brief Summary Background The preservation of the left colic artery (LCA) during rectal cancer resection remains a topic of controversy, and there is a notable absence of robust evidence regarding the outcomes associated with LCA preservation. And the advantages of robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) surgery in rectal resection remain uncertain. The objective of this study was to assess the influence of LCA preservation surgery and RAL surgery on intraoperative and postoperative complications of rectal cancer resection. Methods Participants who underwent laparoscopic (LSC) or RAL with or without LCA preservation resection for rectal cancer between April 2020 and May 2023 were retrospectively assessed. The patients were categorized into two groups: low ligation (LL) which with preservation of LCA and high ligation (HL) which without preservation of LCA. A one-to-one propensity score-matched analysis was performed to decrease confounding. The primary outcome was operative findings, operative morbidity, and postoperative genitourinary function.
The preservation surgery of the anal sphincter has become a standard procedure for the treatment of rectal cancer and is now possible even when the tumor is close to the anus, thanks to the advancement of surgical techniques. This procedure allows patients to avoid a permanent artificial anus and enables them to evacuate through the anus, maintaining the continuity of the intestine, making it a highly preferred surgical option. Additionally, advancements in tumor treatments have led to improved long-term survival rates. However, this anal sphincter preservation surgery inevitably can cause functional abnormalities in the rectum, and around 90% of patients experience changes in bowel habits after surgery. The characteristic symptoms occurring after rectal cancer surgery, such as diarrhea, urgency of bowel movements, frequent bowel movements, and fecal incontinence, are referred to as Anterior Resection Syndrome (ARS). Particularly, symptoms following low anterior resection surgery for lower rectal cancer are termed Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS). These symptoms are most severe immediately after surgery, persisting up to 1-2 years, with some improvement over time. However, in many patients, LARS can remain a lifelong challenge, significantly impacting their quality of life. Currently, there is no definitive method to treat LARS, and symptom management is achieved through empirical treatment methods or medications. Many patients with LARS experience these symptoms predominantly at night, and it is presumed that their sleep quality is severely compromised, significantly affecting their overall quality of life. However, there is a lack of research on the prevalence of such patients and the appropriate treatments for them.
There is controversy about the maximum number of elements to be included in a surgical site infection (SSI) prevention bundle and the possibility of its implementation at a multi-center level. This study analyzes SSI rates in colorectal surgery after the implementation of two preventive bundles. The investigators hypothesized that the thorough introduction of a well-designed large bundle of best practice preventive measures would result in good adherence and greater reduction of SSI rates after colorectal surgery.