The studies included in this review do not allow firm conclusions as to the question of whether the quality of life of people after anterior resection is superior to that of people after abdominoperineal excision/Hartmann's operation. The included studies challenges the assumption that anterior resection patients fare better.Larger, better designed and executed prospective studies are needed to answer this question.
Rectal cancer therapy: decision making on basis of quality of life?
As colorectal malignancies are relatively well treatable and show acceptable survival rates, the quality of life indicators are very important in this group of patients.
                372 patients with rectal cancer were included on a voluntary basis in this prospective study. The patient material consisted of two groups, those who underwent sphincter saving operation (64.51 %), and those who underwent Miles operation (35.49 %). The patients answered a colorectal cancer specific questionnaire on quality of life (CRC_QoL) 1 year after surgery. A CRC_QoL was prepared to analyze the correlation between the characteristics of the colorectal cancer and its treatment versus the physical and psychological state, somatic sensations and social connections of the patients. Our QoL questionnaire consists of 62 questions. Internal consistency of each factor was assessed by calculating Cronbach alpha values and was found satisfactory. For the test-retest reliability analysis the questionnaires were re-assessed. Correlation analysis showed that the answers were consistent (p < 0.01 in all cases). Discriminative validity analysis of the factors showed a significant difference in all cases. In self made score system higher numbers mean (9) worse, the smaller mean (0) better quality of life. The scale can also be seen as a percent distribution, where - in turn - the best quality is 100. The CRC_QoL questionnaire, scoring system, and score-to-percent transformation were done in this study. The results were evaluated by question and by patient group too.
                Our indicator did not show poor QoL for ostomates. Physical function was quite good in both groups: non-ostomates 87.69 +/- 20.85, ostomates: 96.46 +/- 8.25, p = 0.05 respectively. The cumulated converted percentile value for general state was significantly better (p = 0.03) for the ostomates (86.18 +/- 13.43) compared to non-ostomates (69.80 +/- 31.37). The cumulative gastrointestinal problem score did not reveal any significant difference (non-ostomates: 90.19 +/- 12.50, ostomates: 95.62 +/- 9.04, p = 0.11). Non-ostomates and ostomates did not differ regarding the cumulative score of stool-related questions: 83.75 +/- 20.53 versus 89.85 +/- 10.01 respectively, p = 0.14. The score for the peristomal problems was as high as 90.00 +/- 16.12. There was no difference in the cumulative gender specific indicators for both sexes, which showed the value 72.50 +/- 44.35 at non-ostomates and 63.64 +/- 50.45 at ostomates (p = 0.31). None of the patients regarded the chemotherapy problem as a factor diminishing the quality of their life. After calculating the total of all above mentioned functional parameters the score for non-ostomates results 82.50 +/- 19.83, and that of ostomates results 88.60 +/- 8.48, what is about the same, p = 0.12. The cumulative score of the two groups concerning emotional indicators did not really differ (non ostomates 78.69 +/- 24.19, ostomates 84.95 +/- 12.08, p = 0.11). The total cumulative scores among the groups did not show significant difference (non-ostomates 81.67 +/- 31.48, ostomates 87.12 +/- 16.40, p = 0.27). The global QoL was high in both groups with no significant difference among non-ostomates and ostomates (82.00 +/- 24.86 versus 88.60 +/- 8.48, respectively, p = 0.12).
                The quality of life of all patients was poorer than it was prior to the onset of the disease, but most of them could return to their prior way of living with not too many compromises. This process can be well monitored with our score system.