IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcom/v14y2023i1d10.1038_s41467-023-42367-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preservation versus resection of Denonvilliers’ fascia in total mesorectal excision for male rectal cancer: follow-up analysis of the randomized PUF-01 trial

Author

Listed:
  • Jiafeng Fang

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Bo Wei

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Zongheng Zheng

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Jian’an Xiao

    (Henan University of Science and Technology)

  • Fanghai Han

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Meijin Huang

    (The Sixth Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Qingwen Xu

    (Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University)

  • Xiaozhong Wang

    (Shantou Central Hospital)

  • Chuyuan Hong

    (Guangzhou Medical University)

  • Gongping Wang

    (Henan University of Science and Technology)

  • Yongle Ju

    (Shunde Hospital of Southern Medical University)

  • Guoqiang Su

    (Xiamen University)

  • Haijun Deng

    (Nanfang Hospital of Southern Medical University)

  • Jinxin Zhang

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Jun Li

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Xiaofeng Yang

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Tufeng Chen

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Yong Huang

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Jianglong Huang

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Jianpei Liu

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

  • Hongbo Wei

    (Sun Yat-sen University)

Abstract

Traditional total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer requires partial resection of Denonvilliers’ fascia (DVF), which leads to injury of pelvic autonomic nerve and postoperative urogenital dysfunction. It is still unclear whether entire preservation of DVF has better urogenital function and comparable oncological outcomes. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to investigate the superiority of DVF preservation over resection (NCT02435758). A total of 262 eligible male patients were randomized to Laparoscopic TME with DVF preservation (L-DVF-P group) or resection procedures (L-DVF-R group), 242 of which completed the study, including 122 cases of L-DVF-P and 120 cases of L-DVF-R. The initial analysis of the primary outcomes of urogenital function has previously been reported. Here, the updated analysis and secondary outcomes including 3-year survival (OS), 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rate between the two groups are reported for the modified intention-to-treat analysis, revealing no significant difference. In conclusion, L-DVF-P reveals better postoperative urogenital function and comparable oncological outcomes for male rectal cancer patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiafeng Fang & Bo Wei & Zongheng Zheng & Jian’an Xiao & Fanghai Han & Meijin Huang & Qingwen Xu & Xiaozhong Wang & Chuyuan Hong & Gongping Wang & Yongle Ju & Guoqiang Su & Haijun Deng & Jinxin Zhang &, 2023. "Preservation versus resection of Denonvilliers’ fascia in total mesorectal excision for male rectal cancer: follow-up analysis of the randomized PUF-01 trial," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:14:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-023-42367-3
    DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-42367-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-42367-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41467-023-42367-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcom:v:14:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-023-42367-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.