Laparoscopic vs open surgery for colorectal cancer patients with high American Society of Anesthesiologists classes

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic surgery has become popular for colorectal cancer treatment in recent years. However, its success rate even among high-risk patients remains debatable. The present study aims to compare the short- and long-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open surgeries in the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classes 3 and 4 patients with colorectal cancer. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, cohort study performed at a university hospital, with 78 patients suffering from colorectal cancer who underwent surgery in ASA classes 3 and 4 as respondents. Patient and tumor characteristics, operative outcomes, and prognoses were factors compared between the open and laparoscopic groups. RESULTS: Compared with the open group, laparoscopic group had longer operation time (median 287.5 vs 204.5 minutes, P = .001), less operative blood loss (median 40 vs 240 mL, P = .020), and fewer postoperative complications (24% vs 55%, P = .011). In addition, operative approach (open vs laparoscopic) served as an independent factor for the occurrence of postoperative complications [HR = 3.963 (1.344-12.269), P = .013]. In terms of overall survival and recurrence-free survival (P = .171 and .087, respectively), no significant difference was found between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery is thus associated with more favorable short-time outcomes and could be adopted as treatment even for colorectal cancer ASA class 3 and 4 patients.