Comparison of long-term oncologic outcomes of XXXX following laparoscopic versus @entity1538 .

@entity1 @entity1538 @entity5 @entity14 @entity1104 @entity694
PURPOSE: The oncologic outcomes after performing @entity1104 ( @entity1104 ) compared to @entity1538 ( @entity1538 ) are still under debate and a concern when treating @entity1 with @entity694 . The aim of this study was to compare the long-term oncologic outcomes of @entity1104 and @entity1538 as treatment for @entity14 @entity1 . METHODS: From January 2001 to December 2007, 230 @entity1 with @entity14 who had undergone @entity1104 or @entity1538 in this single center were assessed. Data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat. The primary endpoints were disease-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 230 @entity1 were entered into the study (114 @entity1 had @entity694 -33 underwent @entity1104 and 81 underwent @entity1538 ; 116 @entity1 had @entity5 -44 underwent @entity1104 and 72 underwent @entity1538 ). The median follow-up periods for the @entity694 groups were 54 and 53 months, respectively. The overall conversion rate was 12.1% (n = 4) for @entity694 , and 4.5% (n = 2) for @entity5 . Disease-free 5-year survival of @entity694 was 84.3% and 90% in @entity1104 group (LG) and @entity1538 group (OG), respectively, and that of @entity5 was 83% and 74.6%, respectively (P > 0.05). Overall 5-year survival for @entity694 was 72.2% and 71.3% for LG and OG, respectively, and that for @entity5 was 67.6% and 59.2%, respectively (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The long-term analyses for oncologic aspects of our study may confirm the safety of @entity1104 compared to @entity1538 in @entity14 @entity1 .
