Conversion during laparoscopic colorectal resections: a complication or a drawback? A systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcomes

A machine learning model to predict the need for conversion of operative approach in patients undergoing colectomy for neoplasm

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing conversion from laparoscopic to open approaches to colectomy have found an association between conversion and morbidity, mortality, and length of stay, suggesting that certain patients may benefit from an open approach "up-front."

AIM

The objective of this study was to use machine learning algorithms to develop a model enabling the prediction of which patients are likely to require conversion.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used ACS NSQIP data to identify patients undergoing colectomy (2014-2019). We included patients undergoing elective colectomy for colorectal neoplasm via a minimally invasive approach or a converted approach. The outcome of interest was conversion. Variables were included in the model based on their correlation with conversion by logistic regression (p < .05). Two models were used: weighted logistic regression with regularization, and Random Forest classifier. The data was randomly split into training (70%) and test (30%) cohorts, and prediction performance was calculated. 24 327 cases were included (17 028 training, 7299 test). When applied to the test cohort, the models had an accuracy of 0.675 (range 0.65-0.70) in predicting conversion; c-index ranged from 0.62-0.63. This machine learning model achieved a moderate area under the curve and a high negative predictive value, but a low positive predictive value; therefore, this model can predict (with 95% accuracy) whether a colectomy for neoplasm can be successfully completed using a minimally invasive approach.

CONCLUSION

This model can be used to reassure surgeons of the appropriateness of a minimally invasive approach when planning for an elective colectomy.

Open approach for ileocolic resection in Crohn's disease in the era of minimally invasive surgery: indications and perioperative outcomes in a referral center

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is the first-line approach for ileocolic resection in Crohn's disease (CD), and it is safe and feasible, even with severe penetrating CD or redo surgery. While MIS indications are continually broadening, challenging CD cases might still require an open approach. This study aimed to report rate and indications for an upfront open approach in ileocolic resection for CD. Comprehensive perioperative data for all consecutive patients undergoing ileocolic resection for CD between 2014 and 2021 in a high-volume referral center for CD and MIS, were collected retrospectively. Indications for an upfront open approach were reviewed separately by two authors according to the preoperative visit. Among 319 ileocolic resections for CD, 45 (14%) were open and 274 (86%) MIS. Two or more of the below indications were present in 40 patients (89%) in the open group, while only in 6 patients (2%) in the MIS group (p < 0.0001). Indications for upfront open approach were severe penetrating disease (58%), adhesions at previous surgery (47%), history of abdominal sepsis (33%), multifocal and extensive disease (24%), abdominal wall involvement (22%), concomitant open procedures (9%), small bowel dilatation (9%), and anesthesiologic contraindications (4%). MIS was never performed in a patient with abdominal wall involvement, concomitant open procedure, and anesthesiologic contraindication to MIS. This study can help guide patients, physicians, and surgeons. An abdominal wall involvement or the presence of two of the above indications predicts a high surgical complexity and may be considered as a no-go for the MIS approach. These criteria should prompt surgeons to strongly consider an upfront open approach to optimize the perioperative planning and care of these complex patients.

Post-operative outcomes in patients with locally advanced colon cancer: a comparison of operative approach

INTRODUCTION

Surgeons may choose an open approach to locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) because of the elevated conversion rate (minimally invasive to open) in these patients (resulting in part from a judgment of the technical feasibility of a minimally invasive approach). Poorer outcomes have been suggested in those requiring conversion from a minimal access to an open approach; however, the influence of conversion has not been studied in LACC. We sought to compare perioperative outcomes in patients with T4aN2 colon cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS), planned open (PO), and converted (CN) procedures to evaluate the influence of conversion in this subgroup.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the NSQIP database. Patients with T4aN2 colon cancer undergoing elective resection were included; rectal/unknown tumor location, and T4b disease were excluded (to ensure homogeneity in surgical management). Patients were divided into cohorts based on approach: PO, MIS, and CN. Summary statistics were compared between groups. Multivariable analysis was conducted for mortality and morbidity outcomes.

RESULTS

1286 cases were included (313 PO, 842 MIS, 131 CN); 10.2% underwent conversion. Those undergoing MIS had a shorter length of stay than those undergoing PO or CN (p < 0.0001). On univariable analysis, CN resulted in increased rates of any complication (p < 0.0001). CN also had a greater rate of anastomotic leak (p = 0.0046) and death (p = 0.05). On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of any complication included age, ASA class, M stage, and approach; however, CN did not increase the risk of complication compared with MIS, whereas PO nearly doubled the risk of complication (OR = 1.98, p = 0.0083). The only significant predictor of mortality on multivariable analysis was age (HR = 1.09, p = 0.0002)-approach was not associated with mortality.

CONCLUSION

PO confers the greatest risk of suffering any complication. Surgical approach was not associated with death. Results of our study challenge the notion that conversion is associated with the worst perioperative outcomes and an MIS approach should be considered in patients with LACC.

Impact of prior abdominal surgery on short-term outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether laparoscopic surgery after prior abdominal surgery (PAS) is safe and feasible for colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of PAS on short-term outcomes following laparoscopic CRC surgery.

METHODS

We performed retrospective analysis used propensity score-matched analysis to reduce the possibility of selection bias. Participants comprised 1284 consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic CRC surgery between 2010 and 2020. Patients were divided into two groups according to PAS. Patients with PAS were then matched to patients without these conditions. Short-term outcomes were evaluated between groups in the overall cohort and matched cohort, and risk factors for conversion to laparotomy and severe postoperative complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, we enrolled 762 patients (n = 381 in each group). Before matching, significant group-dependent differences were observed in sex, age, primary tumor site, pathological (p) T stage, and type of procedure. No significant difference was found between groups in terms of rate of conversion to laparotomy, estimated blood loss, rate of extended resection, length of postoperative stay, and postoperative complications. After matching, estimated operative time was significantly longer in the PAS group (p = 0.01). Significant differences were found between groups in terms of reason for conversion to laparotomy. Multivariate analyses identified significant risk factors for conversion to laparotomy as pT stage ≥ 3 (odds ratio [OR] 2.36; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-5.26) and body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m² (OR 3.56; 95% CI 1.07-11.7). Multivariate analyses identified rectum in the primary tumor site as the only significant risk factor for severe postoperative complications (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.08-5.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic CRC surgery after PAS showed acceptable short-term outcomes compared to Non-PAS. The laparoscopic approach appears safe and feasible for CRC regardless of whether the patient has a history of PAS.

Converting laparoscopic colectomies to open is associated with similar outcomes as a planned open approach among Crohn's disease patients

PURPOSE

There has been a noted reluctance to offer laparoscopic surgery to Crohn's Disease patients due to the potential risks, and high rate, of converting the procedure to open. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between Crohn's Disease patients undergoing a planned open colectomy, to those undergoing a laparoscopic colectomy that was converted to open.

METHODS

Crohn's Disease patients undergoing an elective colectomy were identified using the ACS-NSQIP database (2012-2019). Patients were stratified based on operative approach: open, laparoscopic, and laparoscopic converted to open. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the impact of conversion to open on overall and serious postoperative morbidity.

RESULTS

Among 8039 elective colectomies, 40.5% were performed open, 46.9% were completed laparoscopically, and 12.6% were converted to open. The conversion rate among all laparoscopic cases was 21.3%. On unadjusted analysis, conversion to open demonstrated similar rates of overall morbidity (P = 0.355) and serious morbidity (P = 0.724) compared to a planned open approach. On multivariable analysis, conversion to open was not associated with increased odds of overall morbidity (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.94-1.30, P = 0.238) or serious morbidity (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.98-1.46, P = 0.074), when compared to an open approach.

CONCLUSION

Among Crohn's Disease patients, cases converted from laparoscopic to open exhibited similar outcomes as a planned open approach. Despite the limitations associated with this retrospective study, our findings suggest that laparoscopic surgery may be safely pursued among Crohn's Disease patients, as the risks of conversion are potentially balanced by the benefits of laparoscopic surgery.

Trends and consequences of surgical conversion in the United States

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to identify national utilization trends of robotic surgery for elective colectomy, conversion rates over time, and the specific impact of conversion on postoperative morbidity. Conversion to open represents a hard endpoint for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and is associated with worse outcomes when compared to MIS or even traditional open procedures.

METHODS

All adult patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robotic elective colectomy from 2013 to 2018 as reported in the American College of Surgeons Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database were included. National trends of both robotic utilization and conversion rates were analyzed, overall and according to underlying disease (benign disease, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), cancer), or the presence of obesity (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m²). Demographic and surgical risk factors for surgical conversion to open were identified through multivariable regression analysis. Further assessed were overall and specific postoperative 30-day complications, which were risk adjusted and compared between converted patients and the remaining cohort.

RESULTS

Of 66,652 included procedures, 5353 (8.0%) were converted to open. Conversion rates were 8.5% for laparoscopic and 4.9% for robotic surgery (p < 0.0001). A decline in conversion rates over the 6-year inclusion period was observed overall and for patients with obesity. This trend paralleled an increased utilization of the robotic platform. Several surrogates for advanced disease stages for cancer, diverticulitis, and IBD and prolonged surgical duration were identified as independent risk factors for unplanned conversion, while robotic approach was an independent protective factor (OR 0.44, p < 0.0001). Patients who had unplanned conversion were more likely to experience postoperative complications (OR 2.36; 95% CI [2.21-2.51]), length of hospital stay ≥ 6 days (OR 2.86; 95% CI [2.67-3.05], and 30-day mortality (OR 2.28; 95% CI [1.72-3.02]).

CONCLUSION

This nationwide study identified a decreasing trend in conversion rates over the 6-year inclusion period, both overall and in patients with obesity, paralleling increased utilization of the robotic platform. Unplanned conversion to open was associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications.

Does conversion during laparoscopic rectal oncological surgery increases postoperative complications and anastomotic leakage rates? A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate, regarding previous published studies, postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing rectal cancer resection performed by totally laparoscopic approach (LAP) compared to those who underwent peroperative conversion (CONV).

METHODS

Studies comparing LAP versus CONV for rectal cancer published until December 2017 were selected and submitted to a systematic review and meta-analysis. Articles were searched in Medline and Cochrane Trials Register Database. Meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager 5.0.

RESULTS

Twelve prospective and retrospective studies with a total of 4503 patients who underwent fully laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer and a total of 612 patients who underwent conversion were included. Meta-analysis did not show any significant difference on overall mortality between both approaches (OR=0.47, 95%CI=0.18-1.22, P=0.12). However, Meta-analysis showed that anastomotic leakage rate, wound abscess rate and postoperative morbidity rate were significantly decreased with totally laparoscopic approach (OR=0.37, 95%CI =0.24-0.58, P<0.0001; OR=0.29, 95%CI=0.19-0.45, P<0.00001; OR=0.56, 95%CI=0.46-0.67, P<0.00001 respectively).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that conversion increases anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity and wound abscess rates without increasing mortality rate for patients who underwent rectal resection for cancer.

Outcomes of Elective and Emergency Conversion in Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: An International Multicenter Propensity Score-matched Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of conversion during minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) on outcome by a propensity-matched comparison with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP).

BACKGROUND

MIDP is associated with faster recovery as compared with ODP. The high conversion rate (15%-25%) in patients with PDAC, however, is worrisome and may negatively influence outcome.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis of a retrospective cohort including distal pancreatectomies for PDAC from 34 centers in 11 countries. Patients requiring conversion were matched, using propensity scores, to ODP procedures (1:2 ratio). Indications for conversion were classified as elective conversions (eg, vascular involvement) or emergency conversions (eg, bleeding).

RESULTS

Among 1212 distal pancreatectomies for PDAC, 345 patients underwent MIDP, with 68 (19.7%) conversions, mostly elective (n = 46, 67.6%). Vascular resection (other than splenic vessels) was required in 19.1% of the converted procedures. After matching (61 MIDP-converted vs 122 ODP), conversion did not affect R-status, recurrence of cancer, nor overall survival. However, emergency conversion was associated with increased overall morbidity (61.9% vs 31.1%, P= 0.007) and a trend to worse oncological outcome compared with ODP. Elective conversion was associated with comparable overall morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Elective conversion in MIDP for PDAC was associated with comparable short-term and oncological outcomes in comparison with ODP. However, emergency conversions were associated with worse both short- and long-term outcomes, and should be prevented by careful patient selection, awareness of surgeons' learning curve, and consideration of early conversion when unexpected intraoperative findings are encountered.

Oncological Outcomes and Quality of Life After Rectal Cancer Surgery

Surgery for rectal cancer has been completely revolutionized thanks to the adoption of new technologies and up-to-date surgical procedures that have been applied to the traditional milestone represented by Total Mesorectal Excision (TME).

The multimodal and multidisciplinary approach, with new technologies increased the patients’ life expectancies; nevertheless, they have placed the surgeon in front of newer issues, represented by both oncological outcomes and the patients’ need of a less destructive surgery and improved quality of life.

In this review we will go through laparoscopic, robotic and transanal TME surgery, to show how the correct choice of the most appropriate technique, together with a deep knowledge of oncological principles and pelvic anatomy, is crucial to pursue an optimal cancer treatment. Novel technologies might also help to decrease the patients’ fear of surgery and address important issues such as cosmesis and improved preservation of postoperative functionality.

Incidence, associated risk factors, and impact of conversion to laparotomy in elective minimally invasive sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease

BACKGROUND

Benefits of minimally invasive surgical approaches to diverticular disease are limited by conversion to open surgery. A comprehensive analysis that includes risk factors for conversion may improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

The US Premier Healthcare Database was used to identify patients undergoing primary elective sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease between 2013 and September 2015. Propensity-score matching was used to compare conversion rates for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted sigmoidectomy. Patient, clinical, hospital, and surgeon characteristics associated with conversion were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression, providing odds ratios for comparative risks. Clinical and economic impacts were assessed comparing surgical outcomes in minimally invasive converted, completed, and open cases.

RESULTS

The study population included 13,240 sigmoidectomy patients (8076 laparoscopic, 1301 robotic-assisted, 3863 open). Analysis of propensity-score-matched patients showed higher conversion rates in laparoscopic (13.6%) versus robotic-assisted (8.3%) surgeries (p < 0.001). Greater risk of conversion was associated with patients who were Black compared with Caucasian, were Medicaid-insured versus Commercially insured, had a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2 versus 0, were obese, had concomitant colon resection, had peritoneal abscess or fistula, or had lysis of adhesions. Significantly lower risk of conversion was associated with robotic-assisted sigmoidectomy (versus laparoscopic, OR 0.58), hand-assisted surgery, higher surgeon volume, and surgeons who were colorectal specialties. Converted cases had longer operating room time, length of stay, and more postoperative complications compared with minimally invasive completed and open cases. Readmission and blood transfusion rates were higher in converted compared with minimally invasive completed cases, and similar to open surgeries. Differences in inflation-adjusted total ($4971), direct ($2760), and overhead ($2212) costs were significantly higher for converted compared with minimally invasive completed cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion from minimally invasive to open sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease results in additional morbidity and healthcare costs. Consideration of modifiable risk factors for conversion may attenuate adverse associated outcomes.

[Conversion of laparoscopic access in colorectal cancer surgery (in Russian only)]

AIM

To analyze the problem of access conversion in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

There were 876 procedures for colorectal cancer T14N01M0 performed at the Rostov Research Institute of Oncology in 2015-2017. Open and laparoscopic surgery was applied in 562 and 309 patients, respectively. Conversion of laparoscopic procedures was required in 35 (10.2%) patients.

RESULTS

Conversions were 2.7 times more frequent in men (p<0.05) (probably due to anatomical features - a narrow pelvis) and predominantly with rectosigmoid (22.2%, 2 patients) and rectal cancer (12%, 22 patients). Conversions in women were as well in right-sided colon cancer (9.7%, 3 cases) and sigmoid cancer (7.4%, 4 patients). Conversions were performed mostly due to locally advanced tumors (37.1%, 13 patients) which are especially baffling in case of narrow pelvis. Visceral obesity (20%, 7 patients) and abdominal adhesions (17.1%, 6 patients) were also important causes of conversions. Conversions did not affect time of surgery (256 min vs. 240 min in laparoscopic and 237 min in open surgery). Intraoperative blood loss (284 ml) was higher than in laparoscopy (240 ml) but did not exceed that in open surgery (291 ml).

CONCLUSION

It is necessary to assess risks and benefits of laparoscopy in patients with high probability of conversion in colorectal cancer surgery.

Novel Approaches to Ileocolic and Perianal Fistulising Crohn's Disease

Crohn's disease (CD) is a well-known idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease characterised by transmural inflammation which can ordinarily affect all the gastrointestinal tract. Its true aetiology is unknown, and a causal therapy is not available to date. The most peculiar aspect of CD lies in its absolute heterogeneity, as we might face various scenarios, locations of the disease, pathologic behaviours, and severity of the disease itself. For these reasons, the cornerstone for the treatment of CD lies in a complex multimodal management, requiring close collaborations among surgeons, gastroenterologists, radiologists, and staff nurses. Advances in surgical and medical therapy are changing the course of the disease. Nowadays, the introduction of both laparoscopy and novel surgical techniques, the improvement of recovery pathways, and the opening of new frontiers are allowing healthcare professionals to deal with complex and recurrent scenarios, trying to spare bowel and anal function, thus ensuring a better quality of life for the patient. Given the heterogeneity and complexity of this disease, it would be impractical to encompass all the aspects of surgical management of CD. This review will address areas that are considered to be hot topics, controversies, challenges, and novelties: thus, we will focus on complex ileocecal disease, surgical strategies, and fistulising perianal conditions.

Effect of cancer characteristics and oncological outcomes associated with laparoscopic colorectal resection converted to open surgery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection is an oncologically safe procedure equivalent to open resection,the effects of conversion of a laparoscopic approach to an open approach remain unclear.This study evaluated the cancer characteristic and oncological outcomes associated with conversion of laparoscopic colorectal resection to open surgery.

METHOD

We conducted searches on PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included the literature published until 2018 that examined the impact of laparoscopic conversion to open colorectal resection. Only randomized control trials and prospective studies were included. Each study was reviewed and the data were extracted. Fixed-effects methods were used to combine data, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate the outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve studies with 5427 patients were included. Of these, 4672 patients underwent complete laparoscopic resection with no conversion (LAP group), whereas 755 underwent conversion to an open resection (CONV group). The meta-analysis showedsignificant differences between the LAP group and converted (CONV) group with respect to neoadjuvant therapy (P = .002), location of the rectal cancer (P = .01), and recurrence (P = .01). However, no difference in local recurrence (P = .17) was noted between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Conversion of laparoscopic to open colorectal cancer resection is influenced by tumor characteristics. Conversion of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is associated with a worse oncological outcome.

Is There a Drawback of Converting a Laparoscopic Colectomy in Colon Cancer?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection is well established in the treatment of colon cancer. However, conversion rates remain high and the impact of conversion is disputed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively identified 1347 patients who underwent surgery for colon cancer between 2004 and 2014 at our tertiary center. Morbidity and oncological outcomes were compared between patients who underwent successfully completed laparoscopic surgery (LS), planned open surgery (OS), and conversion to open surgery (CS). Long-term analysis included patients with stage I-III disease. In addition, we performed propensity score matching to adjust for the heterogeneity and selection bias between the treatment groups.

RESULTS

Of all patients, 505 underwent LS, 789 underwent OS, and 53 underwent CS, which corresponded to a conversion rate of 9.5%. Conversion was associated with male gender, left-sided tumors, and stage III disease. Length of stay, morbidity, and readmission rates were lower for LS patients. Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated worse overall, disease-specific, and disease-free survival in CS than LS, with similar outcomes to OS. However, after propensity score matching, CS was only associated with admission duration and the requirement of blood transfusion, whereas survival outcomes were comparable between all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

CS is associated with adverse short- and long-term outcomes compared to LS. However, when accounting for differences in baseline and pathologic features, CS remained only associated with a longer length of stay and more blood transfusions. Because outcomes were comparable between CS and OS, regardless of stage and other risk factors, our data support a surgeon's attempt to perform LS in patients with colon cancer.

The impact of conversion on the risk of major complication following laparoscopic colonic surgery: an international, multicentre prospective audit

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy has now been implemented as a standard of care for elective colonic resection around the world. During the adoption period, studies showed that conversion may be detrimental to patients, with poorer outcomes than both laparoscopic completed or planned open surgery. The primary aim of this study was to determine whether laparoscopic conversion was associated with a higher major complication rate than planned open surgery in contemporary, international practice.

METHODS

Combined analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology 2017 and 2015 audits. Patients were included if they underwent elective resection of a colonic segment from the caecum to the rectosigmoid junction with primary anastomosis. The primary outcome measure was the 30-day major complication rate, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade III-V.

RESULTS

Of 3980 patients, 64% (2561/3980) underwent laparoscopic surgery and a laparoscopic conversion rate of 14% (359/2561). The major complication rate was highest after open surgery (laparoscopic 7.4%, converted 9.7%, open 11.6%, P < 0.001). After case mix adjustment in a multilevel model, only planned open (and not laparoscopic converted) surgery was associated with increased major complications in comparison to laparoscopic surgery (OR 1.64, 1.27-2.11, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate laparoscopic conversion should not be considered a treatment failure in modern practice. Conversion does not appear to place patients at increased risk of complications vs planned open surgery, supporting broadening of selection criteria for attempted laparoscopy in elective colonic resection.

Sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Sexual and urological problems after surgery for rectal cancer are common, multifactorial, inadequately discussed, and untreated. The urogenital function is dependent on dual autonomic sympathetic and parasympathetic innervation, and four key danger zones exist that are at risk for nerve damage during colorectal surgery: one of these sites is in the abdomen and three are in the pelvis. The aim of this study is to systematically review the epidemiology of sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery, to describe the anatomical basis of autonomic nerve-preserving techniques, and to explore the scientific evidence available to support the laparoscopic or robotic approach over open surgery.

METHODS

According to the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search of studies evaluating sexual function in patients undergoing rectal surgery for cancer was performed in Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials.

RESULTS

An increasing number of studies assessing the incidence and prevalence of sexual dysfunction following multimodality treatment for rectal cancer has been published over the last 30 years. Significant heterogeneity in the prevalence of sexual dysfunction is reported in the literature, with rates between 5 and 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to date in favor of any surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic vs robotic). Standardized diagnostic tools should be routinely used to prospectively assess sexual function in patients undergoing rectal surgery.

Economic Impact of Laparoscopic Conversion to Open in Left Colon Resections

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Studies have shown economic and clinical advantages of laparoscopic left-colon resections. Laparoscopic conversion to open is an important surgical outcome. We estimated conversion incidence, identified risk factors, and measured the clinical and economic impact.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we used the Premier Perspective database to analyze left-sided colectomies from 2009 to 2014. Operating room time (ORT), length of stay (LOS), total hospital cost (2014 U.S. dollars); along with incidence of in-hospital clinical outcomes (anastomotic leak surrogate [Leak], transfusion, and mortality) were evaluated. Multivariable models accounting for hospital clustering were used to identify conversion risk factors and analyze the effect of conversion on economic and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 41,417 patients: 8,468 left hemicolectomy and 32,949 sigmoidectomy were identified. Lap-Conversion incidence was 13.3% (95% CI, 12.9-13.7). Adjusted mean LOS (±SE) days was significantly lower for the Lap-Successful group (4.9 compared with Lap-Conversion 6.8 and Open-Planned 7.0), but Lap-Conversion and Open-Planned had similar LOS. Adjusted mean cost was higher for Lap-Conversion $20,165 compared to Open-Planned $18,797; but this difference was smaller than the cost savings for Lap-Successful $16,206 ± $219. Open-Planned had lower odds of Leak compared to Lap-Conversion. Open-Planned and Lap-Conversion had similar odds of transfusion and mortality. Conversion risk factors included inflammatory bowel disease and left-hemicolectomy. Colorectal specialists were associated with 38% decreased odds of conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful laparoscopic surgery was the most cost effective, with decreased LOS and odds of blood transfusion, leak surrogate, and mortality. Conversion was the most expensive and had increased odds of leak surrogate, but similar LOS compared to Open-Planned. The beneficial effect size of successful laparoscopic surgery was larger than the negative effect of conversion compared to Open-Planned.

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.

Case Selection for Laparoscopic Reversal of Hartmann's Procedure

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic reversal of Hartmann's procedure offers reduced morbidity compared with open surgery while improving reversal rates. However, it is one of the most technically challenging operations in minimally invasive colorectal surgery, with further < 20% of the reversal procedures being attempted laparoscopically. Complications related to late conversion to open surgery may suggest a selective use of the laparoscopic approach for Hartmann's reversal in a subgroup of patients: The aim of this study is to systematically investigate the literature to identify the ideal case for a laparoscopic approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were extracted from a systematic review of the literature of Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials. Subgroup analysis to identify suitable patients for laparoscopic surgery included age at surgery, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, indication for the index Hartmann's procedure (HP), interval time to reversal from the index HP, conversion to open surgery, and temporary ileostomy rate.

RESULTS

A total of 862 patients were included, with 403 cases performed laparoscopically. Conversion to open surgery occurred in 65 patients (mean 16.1%). The indication for the HP showed a trend toward more benign patients included in the laparoscopic group, and the interval time between the index Hartmann's procedure and its reversal was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group with a trend toward a higher rate of temporary ileostomy in patients undergoing an open procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients' selection can explain these differences, with more complex disease operated via an open approach. Nevertheless, future studies are needed to demonstrate an increasing number of reversals attempted laparoscopically in high-volume centers.

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.

Impact of surgeon laparoscopic training and case volume of laparoscopic surgery on conversion during elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery

AIM

The study aimed to determine whether laparoscopic volume and type of training influence conversion during elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHOD

An Institutional Review Board-approved prospective database was reviewed for patients who underwent colorectal resection, performed by six colorectal surgeons, for all diagnoses from 2009 to 2014. Surgeons were designated as laparoscopic- or open-trained based on formal laparoscopic colorectal surgery training, and were classified as low laparoscopic volume (LLV) (i.e. had performed < 100 laparoscopic procedures) or high laparoscopic volume (HLV) (i.e. had performed ≥ 100 laparoscopic procedures). Technique was laparoscopic, open or converted (pre-emptive or reactive). Conversion was compared among three groups: LLV, laparoscopic trained (group A); LLV, open trained (group B); and HLV, open trained (group C).

RESULTS

In total, 159/567 procedures were open and 408 laparoscopic procedures were attempted. Of the 408 laparoscopic procedures, 73 were converted. Among the 567 patients [mean age: 56 ± 17 years (44% male)], the overall conversion rate was 13% (73/567), including 75% pre-emptive and 25% reactive. Conversion rates for groups A, B and C were 17.9%, 42.6% and 14.3%, respectively. Significantly higher conversion was seen in group B compared with group C (P = 0.01), but not between group A and group C (P = 0.85) or between group B and group A (P = 0.11). Converted patients were older (P < 0.001), with lower rates of proctectomy (P = 0.007), higher rates of anastomosis (P < 0.001) and higher body mass index (BMI) (P < 0.001). After adjusting for patient and surgeon factors, training type was not associated with conversion (P = 0.15). Compared with successful laparoscopy, converted patients had a significantly higher incidence of ileus (P < 0.001), length of stay (P = 0.002), time to flatus (OR = 3.21, P < 0.001) and time to solids (P < 0.001). Converted patients experienced increased morbidity.

CONCLUSION

Training is not associated with conversion. Rather, HLV surgeons, regardless of training, convert less frequently than do LLV surgeons.

Conversion of laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer: What is the impact on short-term outcomes and survival?

Laparoscopic resection for colon and rectal cancer is associated with quicker return of bowel function, reduced postoperative morbidity rates and shorter length of hospital stay compared to open surgery, with no differences in long-term survival. Conversion to open surgery is reported in up to 30% of patients enrolled in randomized control trials comparing open and laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer. In this review, reasons for conversion are anatomical-related factors, disease-related-factors and surgeon-related factors. Body mass index, local tumour extension and co-morbidities are independent predictors of conversion. The current evidence has shown that patients with converted resection for colon cancer have similar outcomes compared to patients undergoing a laparoscopic completed or open resection. The few studies that have assessed the outcomes after conversion of laparoscopic rectal resection reported significantly higher rates of complications and longer length of hospital stay in converted patients compared to laparoscopically treated patients. No definitive conclusions can be drawn when converted and open rectal resections are compared. Early and pre-emptive conversion appears to have more favourable outcomes than reactive conversion; however, further large studies are needed to better define the optimal timing of conversion. With regard to long-term oncologic outcome, overall and disease-free survival in the case of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery seems to be worse than those achieved in patients in whom resection was successfully completed by laparoscopy. Although a worse long-term oncologic outcome has been suggested, it remains difficult to draw a proper conclusion due to the heterogeneity of the long-term outcomes as well as the inclusion of both colon and rectal cancer patients in most of the studies. Therefore, we discuss the currently available evidence of the impact of conversion in laparoscopic resection for colon and rectal cancer on both short-term outcomes and long-term survival.