Abstract: Objective:To observe the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic assisted sphincter-preserving surgery and conventional open surgery in low rectal cancer. Method:90 patients with low rectal cancer were selected and divided into research group and control group according to different operative plans. The research group adopted the laparoscopic assisted sphincter-preserving surgery and control group adopted the conventional open surgery. The general operation conditions like surgical procedures, intraoperative blood loss, operation time, preserving rate of sphincter, intraoperative/postoperative transfusion rate were observed. The postoperative recovery time of intestinal function, hospitalization time as well as postoperative complications of two groups was compared. Result:The intraoperative blood loss, operation time and intraoperative/postoperative transfusion rate of research group was (297.3±185.3)ml, (221.3±51.3)min and 2.22% while the intraoperative blood loss, operation time and intraoperative/postoperative transfusion rate of control group was (370.1±198.3)ml, (245.3±55.0)min and 13.33% (P＜0.05); the postoperative recovery time of intestinal function of research group and control group was (2.3±1.6)d and (3.8±1.7)d (P＜0.05); the incidence rate of postoperative complications of research group (15.56%) was significantly lower than that of control group (35.56%) (P＜0.05).Conclusion: For low rectal cancer, the laparoscopic assisted sphincter-preserving surgery have a better clinical efficacy than the conventional open surgery, which it can reduce the patient’s injury, promote the recovery of intestinal function and have fewer complications. It is worthy of promotion.

Key words: Laparoscopic Assisted Sphincter-Preserving Surgery, Open Surgery, Low Rectal Cancer