Table 3. Comparison of short-term oncological outcomes between conventional APER and ELAPER.

Oncological outcomes	Conventional (n=78), n [%]	ELAPER (n=42), n [%]	P
CRM involvement	7 [8.9]	3 [7.14]	1
Tumor site perforation			0.529
No	75 [96.16]	39 [92.86]
Yes	3 [3.84]	3 [7.14]
Nodes (median)	11	8	0.481
pT			0.798
No residual tumor	17 [22]	9 [21]
T1	6 [8]	1 [3]
T2	20 [25]	13 [31]
T3	31 [40]	16 [38]
T4	4 [5]	3 [7]

APER, abdominoperineal resection; ELAPER, extralevator APER; CRM, circumferential resection margin; pT, pathological tumor stage.