Abstract: Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety between laparoscopic assisted radical resection and laparotomy for colorectal cancer for evaluating the feasibility,safety and oncological clearance of laparoscopic assisted radical resection.Methods: The clinical data(including operation index,postoperative recovery index,radical index and postoperative complication) of 66 patients treated with laparoscopic assisted radical resection and 95 patients treated with laparotomy were compared.Results: The operation time and intraoperative blood loss in laparoscopy and laparotomy group were(185.2±30.12) min &(121.3±20.45) min,and(123.6±57.8) ml &(197.8±87.6) ml,respectively,the differences of which were statistical significance(P<0.01).The postoperative anal exhaust time in laparoscopy and laparotomy group were(2.87±0.25) day and(3.52±0.19) day,the difference of which was statistical significance(P<0.01).The difference of the incidence of postoperative complication between two groups was not statistical significance(P>0.05).The postoperative hospitalization time of laparoscopy(10.70±0.53) days was significantly shorter than that of laparotomy group(13.97±0.28) days(P<0.01).The number of resecting lymph node in laparoscopy group were significantly less than that in laparotomy group(P<0.01).The differences of the positive rate of incisal edge and 3-year survival rate between two groups were not statistical significance(P>0.05).Conclusions: The laparoscopic assisted radical resection for colorectal cancer is minimally invasive,less blood loss,less pain,quick recovery of gastrointestinal function and early out-of-bed,which can decrease the postoperative complications and stay.