Short-term outcomes from a prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer

Long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Though our previous study has demonstrated that the single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1) is safe and feasible for sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer and has better short-term outcomes compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), the long-term outcomes of SILS + 1 remains uncertain and are needed to evaluated by an RCT.

METHODS

Patients with clinical stage T1-4aN0-2M0 rectosigmoid cancer were enrolled. The participants were randomly assigned to either SILS + 1 (n = 99) or CLS (n = 99). The 3-year DFS, 5-year OS, and recurrence patterns were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between April 2014 and July 2016, 198 patients were randomly assigned to either the SILS + 1 group (n = 99) or CLS group (n = 99). The median follow-up in the SILS + 1 group was 64.0 months and in CLS group was 65.0 months. The 3-year DFS was 87.8% (95% CI, 81.6-94.8%) in SILS + 1 group and 86.9% (95% CI, 81.3-94.5%) in CLS group (hazard ratio: 1.09 (95% CI, 0.48-2.47; P = 0.84)). The 5-year OS was 86.7% (95% CI,79.6-93.8%) in the SILS + 1 group and 80.5% (95% CI,72.5-88.5%) in the CLS group (hazard ratio: 1.53 (95% CI, 0.74-3.18; P = 0.25)). There were no significant differences in the recurrence patterns between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant difference in 3-year DFS and 5-year OS of patients with sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer treated with SILS + 1 vs. CLS. SILS + 1 is noninferior to CLS when performed by expert surgeons.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02117557 (registered on 21/04/2014).

Short-term and long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a propensity-matched cohort study with conventional laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1) has been demonstrated to be minimally invasive while possessing better cosmesis and less pain compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). However, SILS + 1 as an alternative to CLS for colorectal cancer is still controversial.

METHODS

A total of 1071 patients who underwent curative laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer between 2015 and 2018 were included. Of these patients, 258 SILS + 1 cases and 516 CLS cases were analyzed using propensity score matching. The baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, pathologic findings and recovery course, morbidity and mortality within postoperative 30 days and 3-year disease-free and overall survival were compared.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were balanced between the groups. The mean operating time was significantly shorter in SILS + 1 group, with less estimated blood loss. Tumor size, tumor differentiation, number of harvested lymph nodes, resection margin and pathologic T, N, TNM stage was similar between the groups. There was no significant difference in overall perioperative complications. Uni- and multivariate analyses revealed that SILS + 1 was not a risk factor for complications. Postoperatively, SILS + 1 group showed faster recovery than CLS group in terms of ambulation, bowel function, oral intake and discharge. The 3-year disease-free survival rates of SILS + 1 and CLS groups were 90.1% and 87.3%(p = 0.59), respectively and the 3-year overall survival rates were 93.3% vs. 89.8%(p = 0.172).

DISCUSSION

Our study revealed that SILS + 1 is safe, feasible, oncologically efficient, and may be considered as a surgical option for selected patients with colorectal cancer.

Overall survival comparing laparoscopic to open surgery for right-sided colon cancer: propensity score inverse probability weighting population study

BACKGROUND

This retrospective cohort study reports on overall survival and short-term complications, comparing laparoscopic to open resection for right-sided colon cancers. It is one of the largest studies in the field with generalizable population-level results.

METHOD

This study on right sided colon cancers used prospectively collected administrative data linked to a death registry over 5 years from 2014 to 2018. Exclusion criteria were private patients, patients aged less than 10 years, synchronous and metachronous cancers. Propensity score weighting was used to balance cohorts and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the hazard of death. In addition, logistic regression analysis was used to assess secondary outcomes. For completeness, unweighted data was similarly analysed.

RESULTS

There were 3603 patients identified for the analysis: 1729 open patients and 1874 laparoscopic patients. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis of the weighted data showed no evidence of a statistically significant effect of laparoscopic surgery compared to open surgery on overall survival for right-sided colon cancers (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.04, P = 0.112). The weighted data showed lower odds of prolonged length of stay, return to theatre and discharge destination other than home in the laparoscopic cohort compared to the open cohort. There was no difference in inpatient mortality. Unweighted results were similar.

CONCLUSION

This study validates the use of laparoscopic surgery for right-sided colon cancer, showing similar long-term overall survival and inpatient mortality compared to open surgery. It is superior to open surgery for the short-term outcomes of LOS, return to theatre and discharge destination other than home.

Oncological outcomes following minimally invasive surgery for pathological N2M0 colorectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is safe and effective for patients with N2M0 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. This study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes between MIS and open surgery (Open) groups for patients with pathological (p)N2M0 CRC, and evaluate the oncological outcomes of MIS for pN2M0 CRC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 125 consecutive patients with pN2M0 CRC who underwent curative surgery between 2010 and 2017, using propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 59.4 months. After PSM, we enrolled 68 patients (n = 34 in each group). The conversion rate was 9.6% for the entire patient cohort and 5.9% for the matched cohort. In colon cancer (CC), short-term outcomes were similar between groups. On the other hand, in rectal cancer (RC), estimated blood loss, rate of anastomosis leakage, and length of postsurgical stay were lower in the MIS group than the Open group. R0 resection was achieved in all patients with MIS. No surgical mortality was encountered in any group. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of 3-year local recurrence rate, overall survival, cancer-specific survival, or recurrence-free survival among the entire patient cohort or the matched cohort, regardless of the primary tumor site (CC or RC). Surgical approach (MIS vs Open) had no significant influence on survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS is a safe and effective option for patients with pN2M0 CRC, with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes comparable to the open approach. MIS can be considered for patients with pN2M0 CRC.

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in an elderly population with high comorbidity: a single centre experience

PURPOSE

The use of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients with high comorbidity is a controversial subject. This retrospective analysis aims to compare two different age groups with respect to short and long term clinical and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

All laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer performed between February 2011 and October 2017 with curative or palliative intention were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 128 completed resections, the rate of major complications, length of hospital stays, 30-day mortality, 2-year recurrence rate, and the survival after palliative surgery were comparable between group A (< 75 years; n = 76) and B (≥ 75 years; n = 52). Patients in group B showed an extraordinarily high proportion of ASA III stage (73.1% vs. A: 35.5%; p < 0.01) and, in this context, an increased rate of minor postoperative complications (17.3% vs. A: 6.6%; p < 0.05) and lower overall 2 and 5-year survival rates. Within the first 2 years, they died sooner in the event of recurrence (57.1% vs. A: 18.2%; p < 0.05), and their survival after rectal resection, especially for low rectal carcinoma, was significantly reduced (58.8% vs. A: 96.7%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer can be strongly advocated for elderly patients even in the face of high comorbidity. Whether very old patients with low rectal carcinoma also benefit from minimally invasive surgery or should undergo alternative therapies would need to be clarified primarily by examining the quality of life.

Use of gentamicin-collagen sponge (Collatamp® G) in minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery: A propensity score-matched study

Background

Minimally invasive surgery is commonly used to treat patients with colorectal cancer, although it can cause surgical site infections (SSIs) that can affect the oncologic outcome. Use of a gentamicin-collagen sponge may help reduce the occurrence of SSIs. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of a gentamicin-collagen sponge in reducing SSIs in minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the records of 310 patients who were diagnosed with colorectal cancer at our hospital and underwent minimally invasive surgery between December 1, 2018, and February 28, 2021. Propensity score matching was conducted with a 1:1 ratio using logistic regression. The primary outcome was the incidence of SSIs in the mini-laparotomy wound. The secondary endpoints were factors affecting the incidence of SSIs.

Results

After propensity score matching, 130 patients were assigned to each group. There were no differences in clinical characteristics between the two groups. SSIs occurred in 2 (1.5%) and 3 (2.3%) patients in the gentamicin-collagen sponge and control groups, respectively (p<0.999). The following factors showed a statistically significant association with SSIs: body mass index >25 kg/m² (odds ratio, 39.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.90–802.21; p = 0.018), liver disease (odds ratio, 254.8; 95% confidence interval, 10.43–6222.61; p = 0.001), and right hemicolectomy (odds ratio, 36.22; 95% confidence interval, 2.37–554.63; p = 0.010).

Conclusion

Applying a gentamicin-collagen sponge to the mini-laparotomy wound did not reduce the frequency of SSIs. Further studies should be conducted on whether the selective use of gentamicin-collagen sponges may help reduce SSIs in high-risk patients.

Laparoscopic surgery using 8 K ultra-high-definition technology: Outcomes of a phase II study

INTRODUCTION

Currently, laparoscopic surgery generally relies on 2 K high-definition image quality. The National Cancer Center Hospital, Olympus Corporation, and NHK Engineering System Inc. recently developed a new laparoscopic system with an 8 K ultra-high-definition (UHD) camera that provides images with a high-resolution, wide color range, high frame rate, and high dynamic range. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of a new laparoscopic system which uses an 8 K UHD camera system (8K UHD system).

METHODS

This phase II study enrolled 23 patients with colon or rectosigmoid cancer who were indicated for radical resection with laparoscopic colectomy using the 8 K UHD system. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with ≥30 mL of intraoperative blood loss.

RESULTS

Of the 23 patients, 22 completed laparoscopic surgery with the 8 K UHD system. One patient was converted to the 2 K high-definition laparoscopic system due to technical difficulties with the 8 K UHD system during surgery. The median amount of intraoperative blood loss was 14 mL (range, 2-71 mL), and number of patients with intraoperative blood loss ≥30 mL was four (17.4%). None of the patients had >100 mL of intraoperative blood loss. No intraoperative complications were noted, and four (17.4%) patients developed postoperative complications. Pathological complete resection was achieved in all patients, and no conversion to open surgery was required.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery using the 8 K UHD system appears to be both safe and effective. However, further refinements may be necessary to improve usability.

Impact of laparoscopy on oncological outcomes after colectomy for stage III colon cancer: A post-hoc multivariate analysis from PETACC8 European randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

In colon cancer (CC), surgery remains the mainstay of treatment with curative intent. Despite several clinical trials comparing open and laparoscopic approaches, data on long-term outcomes for stage III CC are lacking.

METHODS

This post-hoc analysis of the European PETACC8 randomized phase 3 trial included patients from 340 sites between December 2005 and November 2009, with long follow-up (median 7.56 years). Patients were randomly assigned to FOLFOX or FOLFOX+cetuximab after colonic resection. The surgical approach was left to the referring surgeon's discretion.

RESULTS

Among 2555 patients included, 1796 (70.29%) were operated on by open surgery and 759 (29.71%) by laparoscopy. The 5-year OS rate was better after laparoscopic resection (85.4%, 95%CI 82.5-87.7) than after open surgery (80.2%, 95%CI 78.2-82.0; p = 0.002). The 5-year DFS rate was also better after laparoscopy (p = 0.016). However, in multivariate analysis using a propensity matching, the surgical approach was not found to be an independent prognostic factor for OS or DFS. OS (p = 0.0243) and DFS (p = 0.035) were increased after laparoscopic surgery in KRAS/BRAF WT sub-group CONCLUSION: We showed that laparoscopic resection has comparable long-term outcomes to open surgery in patients with stage III CC. For those with RAS and BRAF WT CC, laparoscopic colectomy may favorably impact survival.

Persistent Descending Mesocolon as a Risk Factor of Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Single Institution Experience

The objectives of this study are to clarify the significance of persistent descending mesocolon (PDM), a kind of intestinal malrotation, in laparoscopic colorectal surgery and present potentially useful preoperative diagnostic methods for PDM. Although several risk factors for laparoscopic colorectal surgery have been convincingly reported, the impact of PDM on laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer remains less studied. This was an observational study with a retrospective analysis. A consecutive 110 patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal cancer were included. To identify risk factors for operative time of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer, we examined age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists Performance Status score, tumor location, depth of tumor invasion, lymph node metastasis, and PDM as potential risk factors. For identification of appropriate preoperative diagnostic imaging, we reviewed three-dimensional vessel images reconstructed from computed tomographic slice data of all patients. During the study period, no effective pre- or intraoperative diagnoses of PDM were achieved. A total of 4 patients were diagnosed with PDM. Sex (P = 0.0032); tumor location (P = 0.0044); lymph node metastasis (P = 0.022); and PDM (P = 0.0007) were identified as risk factors based on multivariate analysis. A ventrally branched left colic artery visualized by three-dimensional imaging appeared to be a highly specific feature of PDM. Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer with PDM was difficult without the recognition of PDM. PDM was well-defined preoperatively using three-dimensional vessels images reconstructed from computed tomographic slice data.

Challenges to quality assurance of surgical interventions in clinical oncology trials: A systematic review

Where surgery forms the primary curative modality in surgical oncology trials the quality of this intervention has the potential to directly influence outcomes. Many trials however lack a robust framework to ensure surgical quality. We aim to report existing published challenges to quality assurance of surgical interventions within oncological trials. A systematic on-line literature search of Embase and Medline identified 34 relevant studies, including 19 RCTs, 11 further analyses of the primary RCTs, and 4 trial protocols. Inclusion criteria: oncological RCTs with a surgical intervention and/or associated publications relevant to the research question; 'Challenges to quality assurance of surgery in clinical oncology trials'. Selected articles were assessed by two reviewers to identify reported challenges to quality assurance of surgical intervention within these trials. Reported challenges to surgical quality could be classified as those affecting credentialing, standardisation and monitoring of surgical interventions. Constraints of using case volume for credentialing surgeons; inter-centre variation in the definition and execution of interventions; insufficient training, and monitoring of surgical quality, were the most commonly encountered challenges within each of these three domains. Findings confirmed an inadequacy in the implementation and reporting of effective surgical quality assurance measures. The surgical community should enable implementation of agreed upon mitigating strategies to overcome challenges to surgical quality in oncology trials.

Subtotal colectomy, extended right hemicolectomy, left hemicolectomy, or splenic flexure colectomy for splenic flexure tumors: a network meta-analysis

AIM

To perform a network meta-analysis of the current literature to evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes of four operations for splenic flexure tumors.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of PubMed, Baidu Scholar, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed up to August 2020. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was utilized to compare the outcomes involved in subtotal colectomy (STC), extended right hemicolectomy (ERHC), standard left hemicolectomy (LHC), and splenic flexure colectomy (SFC) by using R software.

RESULTS

A total of 10 non-randomized studies were included in this meta-analysis. There was no statistically significant difference among these 4 surgical techniques in terms of the utilization rate of minimally invasive surgery, reoperative surgery, anastomotic dehiscence, mortality, the proportion of patients with the number of lymph nodes harvested ≥ 12, local recurrence, distant recurrence and overall survival. Although ERHC was associated with a higher risk of postoperative ileus (ERHC vs SFC, OR = 6.4, 95% CI 1.4-45.0, P = 0.019), it has an advantage of a higher rate of primary anastomosis (ERHC vs LHC, OR = 4.2, 95% CI 1.3-18.0, P = 0.019) and a non-significant trend for lower anastomotic dehiscence when compared with more restrict resections.

CONCLUSION

SFC, LHC, ERHC and STC for the curative resection of splenic flexure tumors provide similar survival. An individualized surgical plan considering both long-term and short-term outcomes is necessary to select the appropriate operations.

Robotic Complete Mesocolic Excision with Central Vascular Ligation for Right Colon Cancer: Surgical Technique and Short-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive colorectal surgery has demonstrated to have the same oncological results as open surgery, with better clinical outcomes. Robotic assistance is an evolution of minimally invasive technique.

PURPOSE

The study aims to present technical details and short-term oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL) for right colon cancer.

METHODOLOGY

Fifty-two consecutive patients affected by right colon cancer were operated between May 2016 and February 2020 with da Vinci Xi platform. Data regarding surgical and short-term oncological outcomes were systematically collected in a colorectal specific database for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven (71.15%) and 15 (28.85%) patients underwent right and extended right hemicoletomy with an extracorporeal anastomosis. Median age was 55 years. Mean operative time was 182 ± 36 min. Mean blood loss was 110 ± 90 ml. Conversion rate was 3.84% (two cases). 78.84% (41 cases) were pT3 and mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 28 ± 4. 1/52 (1.92%) had a documented anastomotic leak requiring exploratory laparotomy and diversion proximal ileostomy. Surgery-related grade IIIa-IIIb Calvien Dindo morbidity were noted in 9.61% and 1.92%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Robotic assistance allows performance of oncological adequate dissection of the right colon with radical lymphadenectomy as in open surgery, confirming the safety and oncological adequacy of this technique, with acceptable results and short-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer in Super-Elderly Patients: A Single-Center Analysis

BACKGROUND

Super-elderly patients with colorectal cancer are being encountered with increasing frequency in Japan. Laparoscopic surgery is considered a less invasive surgery in these patients; however, it is difficult to conduct controlled clinical trials in this super-elderly population. This study assessed the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients over 85 years old.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Open and laparoscopic surgeries for colorectal cancer in super-elderly patients (aged 85 y and older) were performed under general anesthesia in a single medical center. Records were retrospectively reviewed, and the clinicopathologic features of each patient and the surgical time and outcomes were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Records of colorectal surgery were reviewed for 108 super-elderly patients. Twenty-six open surgeries and 82 laparoscopic surgeries were performed. The mean operation times were 215 and 228 minutes in open and laparoscopic surgeries, respectively. Intraoperative bleeding in laparoscopic surgery was lesser than that in open surgery. There were 2 cases with major postoperative complications in open surgery, and mortality occurred in one case within 1 month after surgery. No major complications were observed in laparoscopic surgery. In survival analysis, disease-free survival did not differ between the 2 groups. The oldest patient was a man aged 102 years and 6 months who underwent laparoscopic anterior resection with lymph node dissection.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery in super-elderly patients with colon cancer is feasible and safe. The authors report the success of laparoscopic colectomy for rectosigmoid colon cancer in the oldest known patient and the positive outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy in super-elderly patients.

Laparoscopic versus robotic right colectomy with extra-corporeal or intra-corporeal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) versus robotic right colectomy (RRC) using homogeneous subgroup analyses for extra-corporeal anastomosis (EA) and intra-corporeal anastomosis (IA).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched up to April 2020 for prospective or retrospective studies comparing LRC versus RRC on at least one short- or long-term outcome. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay (LOS). The secondary outcomes included operative and pathological results, survival, and total costs. LRC and RRC were compared using three homogeneous subgroups: without distinction by the type of anastomosis, EA only, and IA only. Pooled data analyses were performed using mean difference (MD) and random effects model.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven of 448 studies were selected. The included patients were 21,397 for the LRC group and 2796 for the RRC group. Regardless for the type of anastomosis, RRC showed shorter LOS, lower blood loss, lower conversion rate, shorter time to flatus, and lower overall complication rate compared with LRC, but longer operative time and higher total costs. In the EA subgroup, RRC showed similar LOS, longer operative time, and higher costs compared with LRC, the other outcomes being similar. In the IA subgroup, RRC showed shorter LOS and longer operative time compared with LRC, with no difference for the remaining outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Most included articles are retrospective, providing low-quality evidence and limiting conclusions. The more frequent use of the IA seems to explain the advantages of RRC over LRC.

Oncological outcomes following laparoscopic surgery for pathological T4 colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSES

Whether laparoscopic colectomy (LC) is safe and effective for patients with locally advanced T4 colon cancer remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the oncological outcomes of LC and open colectomy (OC) for patients with pathological (p) T4 colon cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 151 consecutive patients with pT4M0 colon cancer who underwent curative surgery between 2010 and 2017 using a propensity score-matched analysis.

RESULTS

After propensity score-matching, we enrolled 100 patients (n = 50 in each group). Median follow-up was 43.5 months. The conversion rate to laparotomy in this study was 5.5% for the entire patient cohort and 6.0% for the matched cohort. Compared to the OC group, the LC group showed reductions in estimated blood loss and length of postsurgical stay. Clavien-Dindo classification grade ≥ II and all-grade complication rates were significantly lower in the LC group than in the OC group. R0 resection was achieved in all patients with LC. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of overall, cancer-specific, recurrence-free survival, or incidence of local recurrence among the entire patient cohort and matched cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The oncological outcomes were similar between the LC and OC groups. LC offers a safe, feasible option for patients with pT4 colon cancer.

The Impact of Comorbid Diabetes on Short-Term Postoperative Outcomes in Stage I/II Colon Cancer Patients Undergoing Open Colectomy

Purpose

This study aimed at evaluating the impact of comorbid diabetes on short-term postoperative outcomes in patients with stage I/II colon cancer after open colectomy.

Methods

The data were extracted from the National Inpatient Sample database (2005-2010). Short-term surgical outcomes included in-hospital mortality, postoperative complications, and hospital length of stay.

Results

A total of 49,064 stage I/II colon cancer patients undergoing open surgery were included, with a mean age of 70.35 years. Of them, 21.94% had comorbid diabetes. Multivariable analyses revealed that comorbid diabetes was significantly associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications. Compared to patients without diabetes, patients with uncomplicated diabetes had lower percentages of in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications, but patients with complicated diabetes had a higher percentage of postoperative complications. In addition, patients with diabetes only, but not patients with diabetes and hypertension only, had a lower percentage of in-hospital mortality than patients without any comorbidity.

Conclusion

The present results suggested the protective effects of uncomplicated diabetes on short-term surgical outcomes in stage I/II colon cancer patients after open colectomy. Further studies are warranted to confirm these unexpected findings and investigate the possible underlying mechanisms.

Laparoscopic surgery reduces the incidence of surgical site infections compared to the open approach for colorectal procedures: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) are the commonest healthcare associated infections. They severely compromise patient safety, are a significant burden on healthcare resources and have an adverse impact on patient quality of life. The incidence of SSIs can be as high as 10% after colorectal procedures. The laparoscopic approach is being increasingly used to undertake colorectal procedures. It provides advantages over the traditional open approach with smaller incisions, shorter hospital stay and equal oncological outcomes. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether the laparoscopic approach for colorectal procedures reduces the incidence of SSI compared to the open approach.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the two approaches published since 2000 were included in the review. Revman 5.3 software was used to carry out the review. Data were pooled and the results were shown as risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals using the fixed effects model.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCT's were included in the analysis comprising 5797 patients. These covered a range of colorectal pathologies including colon cancer, rectal cancer, inflammatory bowel disease and familial adenomatous polyposis syndrome. Analysis showed significantly lower wound infection rates (RR: 0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.88, p = 0.001) and lower abdominal abscess rates (RR: 0.88, 95% CI 0.62-1.27, p = 0.51). The combined SSI rate was significantly lower in laparoscopic compared to open surgery (RR: 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.90, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery significantly lowers the incidence of SSI compared to open surgery.

Rivaroxaban for extended antithrombotic prophylaxis after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Design of the PRO-LAPS II STUDY

BACKGROUND

The clinical benefit of extending prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) beyond hospital discharge after laparoscopic surgery for cancer is undefined. Extended prophylaxis with rivaroxaban is effective in reducing post-operative VTE after major orthopedic surgery without safety concern.

METHODS

PROLAPS II is an investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind study aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of extended antithrombotic prophylaxis with rivaroxaban compared with placebo after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in patients who had received antithrombotic prophylaxis with low molecular-weight heparin for 7 ± 2 days (NCT03055026). Patients are randomized to receive rivaroxaban (10 mg once daily) or placebo for 3 weeks (up to day 28 ± 2 from surgery). The primary study outcome is a composite of symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE, asymptomatic ultrasonography-detected DVT or VTE-related death at 28 ± 2 days from laparoscopic surgery. The primary safety outcome is major bleeding defined according to the International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Symptomatic objectively confirmed VTE, asymptomatic ultrasonography-detected DVT, major bleeding or death by day 28 ± 2 and by day 90 from surgery are secondary outcomes. Assuming an 8% event rate with placebo and 60% reduction in the primary study outcome with rivaroxaban, 323 patients per group are necessary to show a statistically significant difference between the study groups.

DISCUSSION

The PROLAPS II is the first study with an oral anti-Xa agent in cancer surgery. The study has the potential to improve clinical practice by answering the question on the clinical benefit of extending prophylaxis after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

Prospective multicenter study of reduced port surgery combined with transvaginal specimen extraction for colorectal cancer resection

PURPOSE

The relevance of transvaginal specimen extraction (TVSE) combined with reduced port surgery (RPS) remains unknown. This study investigated the feasibility of TVSE with RPS according to short-term outcomes and cosmesis.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter study enrolled ten patients at three institutions. For the semi-quantification of each parameter, we administered questionnaires to assess pain (visual analogue scale), subjective/objective wound healing esthetics [photo series questionnaires (PSQ)], and quality of life (QOL).

RESULTS

No operative complications occurred, except one case of urinary tract infection, which was promptly cured with antibiotics. On day 0, pain was rated at 2.3 ± 0.67 at rest and 4.9 ± 0.82 during sneezing; these ratings gradually declined over time. The PSQ showed that the patient ratings of wound esthetics after TVSE were not inferior to ratings from patients after conventional laparoscopy or single incision laparoscopic surgery, and they were significantly higher than the patient ratings of wounds after laparotomy (P < 0.05). The QOL scores showed that, in comparison to before surgery, after surgery, patients reported significant deterioration of their physical function (96.67 ± 1.49 vs. 87.33 ± 2.71), emotional function (93.33 ± 2.72 vs. 86.67 ± 2.22), fatigue (7.78 ± 3.72 vs. 26.67 ± 8.31), and pain (6.67 ± 3.69 vs. 18.33 ± 4.61).

CONCLUSION

TVSE with RPS for colorectal cancer was feasible and was associated with a low degree of postoperative pain.

Essential advances in surgical and adjuvant therapies for colorectal cancer 2018-2019

Surgical resection and adjuvant chemotherapy are the only treatment modalities for localized colorectal cancer that can obtain a "cure." The goal in surgically treating primary colorectal cancer is complete tumor removal along with dissection of systematic D3 lymph nodes. Adjuvant treatment controls recurrence and improves the prognosis of patients after they undergo R0 resection. Various clinical studies have promoted the gradual spread and clinical use of new surgical approaches such as laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery, and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME). Additionally, the significance of adjuvant chemotherapy has been established and it is now recommended in the JSCCR (the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum) guideline as a standard treatment. Herein, we review and summarize current surgical treatment and adjuvant chemotherapy for localized colorectal cancer and discuss recent advances in personalized medicine related to adjuvant chemotherapy.

Multicenter phase III randomized trial comparing laparoscopy and laparotomy for colon cancer surgery in patients older than 75 years: the CELL study, a Fédération de Recherche en Chirurgie (FRENCH) trial

Background

Several multicenter randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopy and conventional open surgery for colon cancer have demonstrated that laparoscopic approach achieved the same oncological results while improving significantly early postoperative outcomes. These trials included few elderly patients, with a median age not exceeding 71 years. However, colon cancer is a disease of the elderly. More than 65% of patients operated on for colon cancer belong to this age group, and this proportion may become more pronounced in the coming years. In current practice, laparoscopy is underused in this population.

Methods

The CELL (Colectomy for cancer in the Elderly by Laparoscopy or Laparotomy) trial is a multicenter, open-label randomized, 2-arm phase III superiority trial. Patients aged 75 years or older with uncomplicated colonic adenocarcinoma or endoscopically unresectable colonic polyp will be randomized to either colectomy by laparoscopy or laparotomy. The primary endpoint of the study is overall postoperative morbidity, defined as any complication classification occurring up to 30 days after surgery. The secondary endpoints are: 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality, 30-day readmission rate, quality of surgical resection, health-related quality of life and evolution of geriatric assessment. A 35 to 20% overall postoperative morbidity rate reduction is expected for patients operated on by laparoscopy compared with those who underwent surgery by laparotomy. With a two-sided α risk of 5% and a power of 80% (β = 0.20), 276 patients will be required in total.

Discussion

To date, no dedicated randomized controlled trial has been conducted to evaluate morbidity after colon cancer surgery by laparoscopy or laparotomy in the elderly and the benefits of laparoscopy is still debated in this context. Thus, a prospective multicenter randomized trial evaluating postoperative outcomes specifically in elderly patients operated on for colon cancer by laparoscopy or laparotomy with curative intent is warranted. If significant, such a study might change the current surgical practices and allow a significant improvement in the surgical management of this population, which will be the vast majority of patients treated for colon cancer in the coming years.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03033719 (January 27, 2017).

Preoperative rehabilitation for patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

We investigated the impact of preoperative short-term rehabilitation on activities of daily living among patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilized a hospital-based database containing Diagnosis Procedure Combination survey data from over 100 participating acute-care hospitals. We extracted data on consecutive inpatients hospitalized with stage 1 and 2 colorectal cancer. We compared characteristics and outcomes between patients who underwent short-term rehabilitation before surgery and those who did not. Primary outcomes measured were Barthel Index decline and number of complications during hospitalization.

RESULTS

Among of included inpatients (male, 57%; older individuals aged over 65 years, 79%; mean Barthel Index, 93.4), the number of patients who underwent preoperative rehabilitation was 760 (39.3%). Patients in the preoperative rehabilitation group were less likely to have a decline in the Barthel Index compared with the control group (5.9% vs 10.1%, P < 0.001) and after propensity score adjustment using inverse probability weighting (6.3% vs 9.8%, P = 0.024). The preoperative rehabilitation group had fewer complications during hospitalization compared with the control group (P < 0.001) and after inverse probability weighting (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that preoperative short-term rehabilitation was associated with maintenance and improvement of activities of daily living and fewer complications among patients with stage 1 and 2 colorectal cancer.

Comparison of Oncologic Outcomes in Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Non-Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Personal Experience in a Single Institution

The oncologic merits of the laparoscopic technique for colorectal cancer surgery remain debatable. Eligible patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer who were scheduled for an elective resection by one surgeon in a medical institution were randomized to either laparoscopic or open surgery. During this period, a total of 188 patients received laparoscopic surgery and the other 163 patients received the open approach. The primary endpoint was cancer-free five-year survival after operative treatment, and the secondary endpoint was the tumor recurrence incidence. Besides, surgical complications were also compared. There was no statistically significant difference between open and laparoscopic groups regarding the average number of lymph nodes dissected, ileus, anastomosis leakage, overall mortality rate, cancer recurrence rate, or cancer-free five-year survival. Even though performing a laparoscopic approach used a significantly longer operation time, this technique was more effective for colorectal cancer treatment in terms of shorter hospital stay and less blood loss. Meanwhile, fewer patients receiving the laparoscopic approach developed postoperative urinary tract infection, wound infection, or pneumonia, which reached statistical significance. For non-metastatic colorectal cancer patients, laparoscopic surgery resulted in better short-term outcomes, whether in several surgical complications and intra-operative blood loss. Though there was no significant statistical difference in terms of cancer-free five-year survival and tumor recurrence, it is strongly recommended that patients undergo laparoscopic surgery if not contraindicated.

Risk factors for early postoperative complications after D3 dissection for stage II or III colon cancer: Supplementary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial in Japan (JCOG0404)

OBJECTIVE

To determine risk factors for early postoperative complications after D3 dissection for stage II/III colon cancer.

BACKGROUND

Identification of risk factors for postoperative complications is essential in patients surgically treated for colon cancer. The Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) conducted a randomized controlled trial, JCOG0404, to confirm the non-inferiority of laparoscopic surgery (LAP) to open surgery (OP) with D3 dissection for stage II/III colon cancer. This supplementary analysis was made to assess risk factors for surgery requiring D3 dissection using data from JCOG0404.

METHODS

Proportion of postoperative complications of any grade (CTCAE ver. 3.0) until first discharge and risk factors for the most frequent complications were analyzed by univariable and multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

Among 1057 randomized patients treated between October 2004 and March 2009, 520 patients with OP and 525 patients with LAP were analyzed. Overall postoperative complications of all grades occurred in 190 patients (18.2%). Multivariable analysis showed that the risk factors for overall early postoperative complications were OP itself (odds ratio [OR] 2.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38-2.91, P = 0.0003) and operation time of >240 minutes (OR 1.94, 95% CI: 1.24-3.02, P = 0.0036). The most frequent adverse event was wound complication (50/1045, 4.8%). In the univariable analysis, reconstruction, greater blood loss, OP, and higher body mass index were significantly associated with wound complication.

CONCLUSION

Open surgery and longer operation time of >240 minutes were significant risk factors for postoperative complications. LAP surgery and shorter operation time could contribute to fewer postoperative complications in patients undergoing colectomy with D3 dissection. (Japan Clinical Oncology Group study JCOG 0404: NCT00147134/UMIN-CTR: C000000105.).

A meta-analysis of laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery in the treatment of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to explore the overall effect and safety of anterior laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery for patients with colorectal cancer based on eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs), especially the difference in the postoperative incidence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT).

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase were searched based on keywords to identify eligible studies before February 2018. Only RCTs were eligible. We analyzed the main outcomes using the relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) along with 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, we analyzed a total of 24 studies with 4592 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group and 3865 patients in the open surgery group. The results indicated that compared with the open surgery, laparoscopic surgery significantly decreased estimated blood loss (SMD: -1.14, 95%CI: -1.70 to -0.57), hospital stay (SMD: -1.12, 95%CI: -1.76 to -0.47), postoperative mortality (RR: 0.60, 95%CI: 0.41-0.86) and postoperative complication (RR: 0.83, 95%CI: 0.72-0.95). However, the operative time (WMD: 40.46, 95%CI: 35.94-44.9) was statistically higher in the laparoscopic surgery group than the open surgery group, and there was no significant difference in the incidence of DVT between the 2 groups (RR: 0.96, 95%CI: 0.46-2.02).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery is superior to open surgery for patients with colorectal cancer. But the 2 surgeries showed no significant difference in the incidence of DVT.

Clinical Outcomes of Reduced-Port Laparoscopic Surgery for Patients With Sigmoid Colon Cancer: Surgery With 1 Surgeon and 1 Camera Operator

Purpose

This study compared the perioperative clinical outcomes of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) with those of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for patients with sigmoid colon cancer and investigated the safety and feasibility of RPLS performed by 1 surgeon and 1 camera operator.

Methods

From the beginning of 2010 until the end of 2014, 605 patients underwent a colectomy for sigmoid colon cancer. We compared the characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and pathologic results for the patients who underwent RPLS and for the patients who underwent MPLS. We also compared the clinical outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and 3-port laparoscopic surgery.

Results

Of the 115 patients in the RPLS group, 59 underwent SILS and 56 underwent 3-port laparoscopic surgery. The MPLS group included 490 patients. The RPLS group had shorter operating time (137.4 ± 43.2 minutes vs. 155.5 ± 47.9 minutes, P < 0.001) and shorter incision length (5.3 ± 2.2 cm vs. 7.8 ± 1.2 cm, P < 0.001) than the MPLS group. In analyses of SILS and 3-port laparoscopic surgery, the SILS group showed younger age, longer operating time, and shorter incision length than the 3-port surgery group and exhibited a more advanced T stage, more lymphatic invasion, and larger tumor size.

Conclusion

RPLS performed by 1 surgeon and 1 camera operator appears to be a feasible and safe surgical option for the treatment of patients with sigmoid colon cancer, showing comparable clinical outcomes with shorter operation time and shorter incision length than MPLS. SILS can be applied to patients with favorable tumor characteristics.

Three-Port Laparoscopic Right Colectomy Versus Conventional Five-Port Laparoscopy for Right-Sided Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of three-port laparoscopic right colectomy (3-LRC) for right-sided colon cancer compared with conventional five-port laparoscopic right colectomy (5-LRC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred sixty-three patients diagnosed with right-sided colon adenocarcinoma underwent laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) between April 2011 and December 2017. Seventy-four of these patients underwent 3-LRC procedure and 89 patients underwent 5-LRC. Clinical characteristics, perioperative short-term outcomes, and pathologic data were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no differences in TNM stage, tumor location, estimated blood loss, complications, and open conversion rates. The operation time was shorter in the 3-LRC group than in 5-LRC group (140.9 ± 27.5 minutes versus 178.2 ± 38.2 minutes; P = .001). The number of harvested lymph nodes (28.5 ± 13.9 versus 22.6 ± 11.7; P = .004) was also higher in the 3-LRC group. The first passage of flatus and first oral diet were significantly faster in the 3-LRC group than in the 5-LRC group (2.8 ± 1.0 days versus 4.0 ± 1.2 days; P = .001, 3.6 ± 2.9 days versus 5.0 ± 1.5 days; P = .001). The number of patients who required analgesics is less in the 3-LRC group (32.4% versus 43.8%; P = .583).

CONCLUSION

3-LRC for right-sided colon cancer is technically feasible and is associated with a short operation time. We believe that 3-LRC effectively reduces the costs associated with equipment and manpower and represents a standard procedure.

Lymph node metastases in splenic flexure colon cancer: Is subtotal colectomy warranted?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Tumors of the splenic flexure (TSF) can be associated with metastatic lymph nodes (LN) along the left colic pedicle, but also along the superior mesenteric vessels. We aimed to detail the anatomical distribution of metastatic LNs in patients undergoing elective subtotal colectomy for TSF.

METHOD

Between 2000 and 2016, 65 patients were included. At pathological analysis, LNs were classified into two groups: locoregional LN (along the left colic artery) and distant LN (along the middle colic, right colic, and ileocolic arteries).

RESULTS

The median number of LNs examined was 20. Eighteen patients (27%) were pN+. Among them, six (33% of pN+ patients and 9% of the series) had at least one positive distant LN. All these patients had a positive distant LN along the right colic artery. These patients had a significantly advanced stage and more positive LNs than the others (stage III-IV: 100% vs 22%, P = 0.0009 and 6 [3-15] vs 0 [0-15], P < 0.0001, respectively). The presence of synchronous metastases was predictor of metastatic distant LNs (P = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

Elective subtotal colectomy for TSF allows to discover distant positive LNs in nearly 10% of patients. For those having TSF and synchronous metastatic disease enable to resection, subtotal colectomy should be recommended.

Comparison of robot-assisted surgery, laparoscopic-assisted surgery, and open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to find the better treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) by comparing robot-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS), laparoscopic-assisted colorectal surgery (LACS), and open surgery using network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search updated to August 15, 2017 was performed. All the included literatures were evaluated according to the quality evaluation criteria of bias risk recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. All data were comprehensively analyzed by ADDIS. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to show the effect index of all data. The degree of convergence of the model was evaluated by the Brooks-Gelman-Rubin method with the potential scale reduction factor (PSRF) as the evaluation indicator.

RESULTS

The PSRF values of operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication, mortality, and anastomotic leakage ranged from 1.00 to 1.01, and those of wound infection, bleeding, and ileus ranged from 1.00 to 1.02. Open surgery had the shortest operation time compared with LACS and RACS. Furthermore, compared with LACS, the amount of blood loss, complication, mortality, bleeding rate, and ileus rate for RACS were the least, and the length of hospital stay for RACS was the shortest. The anastomotic leakage rate for LACS was the least, but there was no significant difference compared with those of RACS and open surgery. The wound infection rate for LACS was the least, but there was no significant difference compared with that of RACS.

CONCLUSION

RACS might be a better treatment for patients with CRC.

The Feasibility and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Extended Total Mesorectal Excision for Locally Advanced Lower Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

Extended total mesorectal excision (ETME) is defined as en bloc resection of the adjacent organs outside the mesorectal fascia, that is indicated in cases with locally advanced lower rectal cancer (T4 tumor). The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic ETME (L-ETME) for locally advanced lower rectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The present study analyzed clinical outcomes and oncological outcomes of 11 consecutive patients who underwent L-ETME for cT4 lower rectal cancer in Nagasaki Medical Center between 2012 and 2015.

RESULTS

Of the 11 patients, 7 underwent neoadjuvant therapy, and 7 underwent pelvic node dissection. One case (7.1%) underwent resection of anterior organs (prostate), 6 cases (54.5%) had resection of the lateral organs (neurovascular bundle, hypogastric nerve, pelvic plexus, ovary, and internal iliac blood vessels) and 4 cases (36.4%) had resection of both anterior and lateral organs. In all cases enrolled in this study, R0 resection was achieved. The median operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 416 min and 350 ml, respectively. The postoperative complication rate was 18.2% (2/11). The 3-year overall survival rate was 79.5%, and the 3-year local recurrence-free survival rate was 87.5%. There was no mortality and no re-operation in this series.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study suggest that L-ETME is feasible and has efficacy for locally advanced lower rectal cancer.

Induced Bias Due to Crossover Within Randomized Controlled Trials in Surgical Oncology: A Meta-regression Analysis of Minimally Invasive versus Open Surgery for the Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) inform clinical practice and have provided the evidence base for introducing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in surgical oncology. Crossover (unplanned intraoperative conversion of MIS to open surgery) may affect clinical outcomes and the effect size generated from RCTs with homogenization of randomized groups.

OBJECTIVES

Our aims were to identify modifiable factors associated with crossover and assess the impact of crossover on clinical endpoints.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify all RCTs comparing MIS with open surgery for gastrointestinal cancer (1990-2017). Meta-regression analysis was performed to analyze factors associated with crossover and the influence of crossover on endpoints, including 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak rate, and early complications.

RESULTS

Forty RCTs were included, reporting on 11,625 patients from 320 centers. Crossover was shown to affect one in eight patients (mean 12.6%, range 0-45%) and increased with American Society of Anesthesiologists score (β = + 0.895; p = 0.050). Pretrial surgeon volume (β = - 2.344; p = 0.037), composite RCT quality score (β = - 7.594; p = 0.014), and site of tumor (β = - 12.031; p = 0.021, favoring lower over upper gastrointestinal tumors) showed an inverse relationship with crossover. Importantly, multivariate weighted linear regression revealed a statistically significant positive correlation between crossover and 30-day mortality (β = + 0.125; p = 0.033), anastomotic leak rate (β = + 0.550; p = 0.004), and early complications (β = + 1.255; p = 0.001), based on intention-to-treat analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Crossover in trials was associated with an increase in 30-day mortality, anastomotic leak rate, and early complications within the MIS group based on intention-to-treat analysis, although our analysis did not assess causation. Credentialing surgeons by procedural volume and excluding high comorbidity patients from initial trials are important in minimizing crossover and optimizing RCT validity.

Case-matched study of short-term effects of 3D vs 2D laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer

Background

The purpose of this study is to compare and evaluate the security and efficacy of 3D vs 2D laparoscopy in rectal cancer treatment.

Methods

Forty-six patients who suffered from rectal cancer and went on laparoscopic radical resection of rectal carcinoma in Peking University Shougang Hospital from Feb. 2015 to Mar. 2016 were included in the study. They were randomly divided into two groups. The 23 patients operated with the 3D system were compared with 23 patients operated with the 2D system by perioperative data.

Results

There were no significant differences in age, sex, pathological type, tumor differentiation, TNM staging, and surgical procedures (P > 0.05). The average operating time of 3D laparoscopic surgery group (172.2 ± 27.5 min) was shorter than that of 2D group (192.6 ± 22.3) (P < 0.05); the rate of transfer to laparotomy is lower in 2D group (72.7%) than in 3D group (86.4%), but they have no significant difference; and the intraoperative blood loss (247.0 ± 173.6 ml vs 282.6 ± 195.6 ml), postoperative passage of flatus (2.8 ± 0.8 days vs 3.1 ± 1.0 days), and indwelling catheter time (5.6 ± 1.9 days vs 6.3 ± 2.0 days) in 3D group and 2D group (P > 0.05) were not significantly different. There were no differences in other complications between the two groups. No significantly different recrudescence and death rates were found between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

The 3D laparoscopy shortens the operation time of rectum cancer. 3D laparoscopic surgery is more efficient in treatment of rectal cancer than 2D laparoscopy and is worth of being generalized.

Effectiveness and safety of metallic stent for ileocecal obstructive colon cancer: a report of 4 cases

Background and study aims  Self-expandable metallic stents (SEMS) have been widely used for left-sided colorectal obstruction. Few studies on SEMS placement for right-sided colonic obstructions have been reported because stenting in the right colon is technically difficult, particularly in the ileocecal region. We present 4 cases of successful bridge-to-surgery stenting for ileocecal cancer. Using an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography catheter with a movable tip and a decompression tube was effective for stenting. No adverse events occurred during or after SEMS placement in any of these cases. Short-term stenting for ileocecal cancer seems to be effective and safe.

Colorectal cancer surgery in the very elderly patient: a systematic review of laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of death from neoplastic disease in men and third in women of all ages. Globally, life expectancy is increasing, and consequently, an increasing number of operations are being performed on more elderly patients with the trend set to continue. Elderly patients are more likely to have cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities that are associated with increased peri-operative risk. They further tend to present with more locally advanced disease, more likely to obstruct or have disseminated disease. The aim of this review was to investigate the feasibility of laparoscopic colorectal resection in very elderly patients, and whether there are benefits over open surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on Medline, Pubmed, Embase and Google Scholar. All comparative studies evaluating patients undergoing laparoscopic versus open surgery for colorectal cancer in the patients population over 85 were included. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day overall morbidity. Secondary outcomes were operating time, time to oral diet, number of retrieved lymph nodes, blood loss and 5-year survival.

RESULTS

The search provided 1507 citations. Sixty-nine articles were retrieved for full text analysis, and only six retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall mortality for elective laparoscopic resection was 2.92% and morbidity 23%. No single study showed a significant difference between laparoscopic and open surgery for morbidity or mortality, but pooled data analysis demonstrated reduced morbidity in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.032). Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery are more likely to have a shorter hospital stay and a shorter time to oral diet.

CONCLUSION

Elective laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer in the over 85 age group is feasible and safe and offers similar advantages over open surgery to those demonstrated in patients of younger ages.

Influence of previous abdominal surgery on surgical outcomes between laparoscopic and open surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer: subanalysis of a large multicenter study in Japan

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to examine the technical and oncological feasibility of laparoscopic surgery (LAP) in elderly patients with a history of abdominal surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a propensity score-matched case-control study of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients aged ≥80 years that were treated at 41 hospitals between 2003 and 2007. We included 601 patients who had a history of abdominal surgery and underwent curative and elective surgery for stage 0 to III CRC. After the matching procedure, 153 patients were included in each cohort. The surgical outcomes of LAP and open surgery (OS) were compared. P-values of <0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

LAP resulted in a significantly longer surgical time (220 vs. 170 min, p < 0.001), but significantly less intraoperative blood loss (39 vs. 100 ml, p < 0.001). A number of postoperative recovery-related parameters, including the length of the hospitalization period (12 vs. 14 days, p = 0.002), and the days to the resumption of fluid (2 vs. 3 days, p < 0.001) and solid food intake (4 vs. 5 days, p < 0.001), were significantly better in the LAP group. Moreover, the overall morbidity rate (43 vs. 66 %, p = 0.009) and the frequency of postoperative ileus (7 vs. 19 %, p = 0.023) were significantly lower in the LAP group, while the frequencies of other morbidities did not differ significantly between the groups. In the survival analyses, overall survival and disease-free survival did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, LAP can be performed safely in elderly CRC patients with a history of abdominal surgery, and LAP resulted in a lower postoperative morbidity rate than OS.

Survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open D3 dissection for stage II or III colon cancer (JCOG0404): a phase 3, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although benefits of laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery have been suggested, the long-term survival of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer requiring Japanese D3 dissection remains unclear. We did a randomised controlled trial to establish non-inferiority of laparoscopic surgery to open surgery.

METHODS

We did an open-label, multi-institutional, randomised, two-arm phase 3 trial in 30 hospitals in Japan. Patients aged 20-75 years who had histologically proven colon cancer; tumours located in the caecum or ascending, sigmoid, or rectosigmoid colon; T3 or deeper lesions without involvement of other organs, node stages N0-2, and metastasis stage M0; and tumour size of 8 cm or smaller were included. Only accredited surgeons did surgery as an operator or instructor. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) preoperatively to undergo D3 resection either by an open route or a laparoscopic route, via phone call or fax to the Japan Clinical Oncology Group (JCOG) Data Center. Randomisation used a minimisation method with a biased-coin assignment according to tumour location (caecum, ascending vs sigmoid, rectosigmoid) and institution. The primary endpoint was overall survival and was analysed by intention to treat. The non-inferiority margin for the hazard ratio (HR) was set at 1·366. This study is registered with UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, number C000000105, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00147134.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 1, 2004, and March 27, 2009, 1057 patients were randomly assigned to either open surgery (n=528) or laparoscopic surgery (n=529). 5-year overall survival was 90·4% (95% CI 87·5-92·6) for open surgery and 91·8% (89·1-93·8) for laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic D3 surgery was not non-inferior to open surgery for overall survival (HR 1·06, 90% CI 0·79-1·41; p_{non-inferiority}=0·073). 65 (13%) patients in the open surgery group and 53 (10%) patients in the laparoscopic surgery group had grade 2-4 adverse events. Grade 2-4 adverse events included diarrhoea (15 [3%] in the open surgery group vs 14 [3%] in the laparoscopic surgery group), paralytic ileus (six [1%] vs nine [2%]), and small intestine bowel obstruction (16 [3%] vs 11 [2%]). Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the open surgery group: one patient died 7 days after surgery (probably due to myocardial infarction), and one patient died from febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, diarrhoea, and gastrointestinal haemorrhage during postoperative chemotherapy.

INTERPRETATION

Laparoscopic D3 surgery was not non-inferior to open D3 surgery in terms of overall survival for patients with stage II or III colon cancer. However, because overall survival in both groups was similar and better than expected, laparoscopic D3 surgery could be an acceptable treatment option for patients with stage II or III colon cancer.

FUNDING

National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund, Grant-in-Aid for Cancer Research, and Health and Labour Sciences Research Grant for Clinical Cancer Research from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan.

Cancer recurrence following conversion during laparoscopic colorectal resections: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Evidence regarding long-term oncological outcomes following conversion to open surgery (COS) during laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCR) is controversial. The aim of this study is to assess the impact on cancer recurrence of a failed laparoscopic attempt.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus and ISI Web of Knowledge databases were searched for articles reporting data on cancer recurrence in patients undergoing completed LCR and COS. Data were pooled by fixed or random effect modeling, according to the presence of heterogeneity. Primary outcomes were local recurrence (LR) and distance recurrence (DR).

RESULTS

Seven studies involving 2493 patients (completed LCR, n 2201 and COS, n 292) were included. The pooled analysis showed that COS resections have an higher risk of LR (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.14-3.42, p = 0.1); no difference was found in DR (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.67-1.77, p = 0.71). However, an higher rate of T4 tumor was present in the converted group (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.71-4, p = 0.0). Subgroup analysis including studies with T stage matched populations showed no significant statistical difference in LR rate; however, a trend toward higher recurrence was still clear.

CONCLUSION

There is no consistent evidence that a failed laparoscopic attempt does not result in a poorer oncological outcome; therefore, a careful selection of patients for LCR for cancer is required.

[Laparoscopic colectomy versus colectomy performed via laparotomy in the treatment of non-metastatic colic adenocarcinomas]

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic colectomy is considered with increasing frequency the gold standard treatment for colorectal cancer. Our study aims to show that short-term results and the oncological safety of laparoscopy are at least equivalent to those of laparotomy in the treatment of non-metastatic colic adenocarcinomas. We also highlight the impact of the learning curve on outcomes after laparoscopy in patients with these cancers.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of all patients undergoing surgery for resectable colic adenocarcinomas over a period of 6 years. The study population was divided into 2 groups based on the surgical procedure used initially. The group "OC" included 35 patients who underwent midline laparotomy and the group "LAC" included 30 patients who underwent laparoscopy. All data were analyzed using SPSS software version 19.0.

RESULTS

Our study showed that there was no significant difference in short-term outcomes between the 2 groups, namely intraoperative morbidity, hospital stay, intensive care unit stay as well as postoperative morbidity and mortality. Regarding the long-term outcomes, there was also no significant difference in the incidence of late complications, type of recurrence, overall survival and disease-free survival. Oncological safety based on the limits of resection and the number of lymph nodes removed was not significantly different between the two groups. Operative time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (p <0.001). Convertion rate was 33%. It went from 67% in the first 2 years of the study to 13% in the last 2 years. The conversion from laparoscopy to laparotomy had no significant impact neither on early postoperative outcomes nor on overall survival and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is a surgical procedure resulting in at least equivalent short and long term outcomes as laparotomy. The learning curve representing a "prerequisite" has no negative impact on the outcomes of laparoscopic treatment of non-metastatic colic cancers.

Short-Term Efficacy of Laparoscopic Treatment for Colorectal Cancer in Patients with Schistosomiasis Japonica

Introduction. Schistosomiasis is associated with numerous complications such as thrombocytopenia, liver cirrhosis, portal hypertension, and colitis. To the best of our knowledge, the feasibility and outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients with schistosomiasis have not yet been studied. Methods. In this study, the data of 280 patients with colorectal carcinoma along with schistosomiasis japonica infection who underwent laparoscopic or open colorectal surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Preoperative data, operative data, pathological outcomes, postoperative complications, and recovery were compared between patients in the laparoscopic (LAC) and open (OC) groups. Results. There were no significant differences in the preoperative data between the groups. However, fewer postoperative complications, especially severe hypoproteinemia, early postoperative feeding, and shorter postoperative hospital stay, were observed in patients in the LAC group (P < 0.001). The mean operative time was higher in the LAC group (180 min versus 158 min; P < 0.001), while the mean blood loss was similar (95 mL versus 108 mL; P = 0.196) between groups. The mean number of lymph nodes harvested was also similar in both groups (15 versus 16; P = 0.133). Conclusion. Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is safe in patients with schistosomiasis japonica and has better short-term outcomes than open surgery.

Differences in surgical site infection between laparoscopic colon and rectal surgeries: sub-analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial (Japan-Multinational Trial Organization PREV 07-01)

BACKGROUND

The incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) is reportedly lower in laparoscopic colorectal surgery than in open surgery, but data on the difference in SSI incidence between colon and rectal laparoscopic surgeries are limited.

METHODS

The incidence and risk factors for SSI, and the effect of oral antibiotics in colon and rectal laparoscopic surgeries, were investigated as a sub-analysis of the JMTO-PREV-07-01 (a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of oral/parenteral vs. parenteral antibiotic prophylaxis in elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery).

RESULTS

A total of 582 elective laparoscopic colorectal resections, comprising 376 colon surgeries and 206 rectal surgeries, were registered. The incidence of SSI in rectal surgery was significantly higher than in colon surgery (14 vs. 8.2 %, P = 0.041). Although the incidence of incisional SSI was almost identical (7 %) between the surgeries, the incidence of organ/space SSI in rectal surgery was significantly higher than in colon surgery (6.3 vs. 1.1 %, P = 0.0006). The lack of oral antibiotics was significantly associated with the development of SSI in colon surgery. Male sex, stage IV cancer, and abdominoperineal resection were significantly associated with SSI in rectal surgery. The combination of oral and parenteral antibiotics significantly reduced the overall incidence of SSI in colon surgery (relative risk 0.41, 95 % confidence interval 0.19-0.86).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of SSI in laparoscopic rectal surgery was higher than in colon surgery because of the higher incidence of organ/space SSI in rectal surgery. The risk factors for SSIs and the effect of oral antibiotics differed between these two procedures.

Network meta-analysis of protocol-driven care and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic approaches and standardized recovery protocols have reduced morbidity following colorectal cancer surgery. As the optimal regimen remains inconclusive, a network meta-analysis was undertaken of treatments for the development of postoperative complications and mortality.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, trial registries and related reviews were searched for randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and open surgery within protocol-driven or conventional perioperative care for colorectal cancer resection, with complications as a defined endpoint. Relative odds ratios (ORs) for postoperative complications and mortality were estimated for aggregated data.

RESULTS

Forty trials reporting on 11 516 randomized patients were included with the network. Open surgery within conventional perioperative care was the index for comparison. The OR relating to complications was 0·77 (95 per cent c.i. 0·65 to 0·91) for laparoscopic surgery within conventional care, 0·69 (0·48 to 0·99) for open surgery within protocol-driven care, and 0·43 (0·28 to 0·67) for laparoscopic surgery within protocol-driven care. Sensitivity analyses excluding trials of low rectal cancer and those with a high risk of bias did not affect the treatment estimates. Meta-analyses demonstrated that mortality risk was unaffected by perioperative strategy.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery combined with protocol-driven care reduces colorectal cancer surgery complications, but not mortality. The reduction in complications with protocol-driven care is greater for open surgery than for laparoscopic approaches. Registration number: CRD42015017850 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).

Race/ethnicity and socio-economic differences in colorectal cancer surgery outcomes: analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample

Background

The purpose of this study was to examine racial and socio-economic differences in the receipt of laparoscopic or open surgery among patients with colorectal cancer, and to determine if racial and socio-economic differences exist in post-surgical complications, in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay among patients who received surgery.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of hospitalized patients with a primary diagnosis of colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2011 using data from Nationwide Inpatient Sample. ICD-9 codes were used to capture primary diagnosis, surgical procedures, and health outcomes during hospitalization. We used logistic regression analysis to determine racial and socio-economic predictors of surgery type, post-surgical complications and mortality, and linear regression analysis to assess hospital length of stay.

Results

A total of 122,631 patients were admitted with a primary diagnosis of malignant colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2011. Of these, 17,327 (14.13 %) had laparoscopic surgery, 70,328 (57.35 %) received open surgery, while 34976 (28.52 %) did not receive any surgery. Black (36 %) and Hispanic (34 %) patients were more likely to receive no surgery compared with Whites (27 %) patients. However, among patients that received any surgery, there were no racial differences in which surgery was received (laparoscopic versus open, p = 0.2122), although socio-economic differences remained, with patients from lower residential income areas significantly less likely to receive laparoscopic surgery compared with patients from higher residential income areas (OR: 0.74, 95 % CI: 0.70-0.78). Among patients who received any surgery, Black patients (OR = 1.07, 95 % CI: 1.01-1.13), and patients with Medicare (OR = 1.16, 95 % CI: 1.11-1.22) and Medicaid (OR = 1.15, 95 % CI: 1.07-1.25) insurance experienced significantly higher post-surgical complications, in-hospital mortality (Black OR = 1.18, 95 % CI: 1.00-1.39), and longer hospital stay (Black β = 1.33, 95 % CI: 1.16-1.50) compared with White patients or patients with private insurance.

Conclusion

Racial and socio-economic differences were observed in the receipt of surgery and surgical outcomes among hospitalized patients with malignant colorectal cancer in the US.

Case-matched Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: Initial Institutional Experience

Robotic colorectal surgery is an emerging technique. In this study, we aimed to compare outcomes of robotic colorectal operations to laparoscopy. Patients undergoing robotic colorectal surgery between November 2010 and July 2013 were case matched to laparoscopic counterparts based on diagnosis and operation type. Perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared. There were 57 patients who underwent robotic colorectal surgery. American Society of Anaesthesiologists score was higher in patients who underwent robotic surgery (2 vs. 3, P=0.01). Blood loss (200 vs. 300 mL, P=0.27) and conversion rate to open surgery (6 vs. 5, P=0.75) were similar between the groups. Operating time was longer in robotic surgery (172 vs. 267 min, P<0.0001). Time to first bowel movement (3 vs. 3 d, P=0.38), hospital stay (5 vs. 6 d, P=0.22), and postoperative complications were comparable between the groups. In the early learning curve period, robotic colorectal surgery shows similar short-term outcomes with longer operating time compared with conventional laparoscopy.

Evolution of Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: The Impact of the Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Group Trial

The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Group (COST) Trial established laparoscopic procedures offer short-term benefits while preserving the same oncologic outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients compared with open procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the trend of laparoscopic resection for CRC before and after the publication of the COST Trial. Retrospective study of surgically treated CRC patients was conducted from January 2000 to December 2009. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program and Medicare. Between 2000 and 2009, 147,388 patients underwent resection for CRC, 9,901 resections were performed laparoscopically. In 2000, 1.0 per cent of colorectal resections were performed laparoscopically. There was a dramatic increase in laparoscopic resections in 2009 to 30.4 per cent. During this time period, rates of laparoscopic resections increased for all tumor stages. Right colectomies and early stage tumors had the most significant rise from 3.1 per cent (2004) to 38.7 per cent (2009) and 4.41 per cent (2004) to 39.17 per cent (2009), respectively; whereas, rectal and later stage tumors resection rates were more modest from 2.1 per cent (2004) to 13.2 per cent (2009) and 1.41 per cent (2004) to 17.10 per cent (2009), respectively. This study demonstrates the COST Trial had a significant impact on utilization of laparoscopic colorectal resection for CRC. Although laparoscopic colorectal resections have been accepted for all types of CRCs, more difficult procedures are being adopted at slower rates.

Meta-analysis of the laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery within fast track surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic methods and fast-track surgery (FTS) can enhance recovery and reduce postoperative hospital stay. However, whether laparoscopic surgery can provide short-term benefits within FTS is controversial. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis of published studies to evaluate the effect of laparoscopic colorectal surgery within FTS.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases for eligible studies. Endpoints were duration of postoperative hospital stay, time to first bowel movement, total postoperative complication rate, readmission rate, mortality within 30 days after surgery, and conversation rate of laparoscopic surgery.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and six clinical controlled trials (1510 patients) were eligible for analyses. Duration of postoperative hospital stay (weighted mean difference, -1.65 days; p < 0.001), time to first bowel movement (-1.13 days; p < 0.001), total postoperative complication rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.65; p < 0.001), readmission rate (0.46; p < 0.001), and mortality (0.45; p < 0.001) were significantly reduced in the laparoscopic surgery group. Overall conversion rate of laparoscopic surgery was 11.1%. Subgroup analyses based on each FT element demonstrated that studies without the element "prevention of hypothermia," "no bowel preparation," or "no routine use of drains" did not show significant differences between two groups with regard to duration of postoperative hospital stay or total prevalence of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Within FTS, laparoscopic methods can significantly shorten postoperative hospital stay, accelerate postoperative recovery, and enhance safety in colorectal surgery. The FT elements "prevention of hypothermia," "no bowel preparation," and "no routine use of drains" may play important parts in the combined effect of these two methods.

Meta-analysis of the risk of small bowel obstruction following open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Background

One of the potential advantages of laparoscopic compared with open colorectal surgery is a reduction in postoperative bowel obstruction events. Early reports support this proposal, but accumulated evidence is lacking.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomized clinical trials and observational studies by searching the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases from 1990 to August 2015. The primary outcomes were early and late postoperative bowel obstruction following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery. Both ileus and bowel obstruction were defined as a postoperative bowel obstruction. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed, and a random-effects model was used to account for the heterogeneity among the studies.

Results

Twenty-four randomized clinical trials and 88 observational studies were included in the meta-analysis; 106 studies reported early outcome and 12 late outcome. Collectively, these studies reported on the outcomes of 148 392 patients, of whom 58 133 had laparoscopic surgery and 90 259 open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery was associated with reduced rates of early (odds ratio 0·62, 95 per cent c.i. 0·54 to 0·72; P &lt; 0·001) and late (odds ratio 0·61, 0·41 to 0·92; P = 0·019) postoperative bowel obstruction. Weighted mean values for early postoperative bowel obstruction were 8 (95 per cent c.i. 6 to 10) and 5 (3 to 7) per cent for open and laparoscopic surgery respectively, and for late bowel obstruction were 4 (2 to 6) and 3 (1 to 5) per cent respectively.

Conclusion

The reduction in postoperative bowel obstruction demonstrates an advantage of laparoscopic surgery in patients with colorectal disease.