Propensity score analysis of postoperative and oncological outcomes after surgical treatment for splenic flexure colon cancer

Extended procedure has no oncological benefits over segmental resection in the treatment of non-metastatic splenic flexure colon cancer, a population-based cohort study and a single center's decade-long experience

To compare the oncological survival outcome between extended resections (ER) and segmental resection (SR) for non-metastatic splenic flexure tumors. A total of 10,063 splenic flexure colon cancers patients who underwent ER (n = 5546) or SR (n = 4517) from 2010 to 2018 were included from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-registered database. Additionally, we included 135 patients from our center who underwent ER (n = 54) or SR (n = 81) between 2011 and 2021. Survival rates were compared between groups. To reduce the inherent bias of retrospective studies, propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed. In the SEER database, patients in the ER group exhibited higher pT stage, pN stage, larger tumor size, and elevated rates of CEA level, perineural invasion, and tumor deposits compared to those in the SR group (each P < 0.05). The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) rate was slightly lower in the ER group than in the SR group (79.2% vs. 81.6%, P = 0.002), while the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were comparable between the two groups (66.2% vs. 66.9%, P = 0.513). After performing PSM, both the 5-year CSS and 5-year OS rates were comparable between the ER and SR groups (5-year CSS: 84.9% vs. 83.0%, P = 0.577; 5-year OS: 70.6% vs. 66.0%, P = 0.415). These findings were consistent in the subgroup analysis that included only patients with stage III disease or tumor size ≥ 7 cm. Furthermore, although the number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the ER group compared to the SR group (14.4 vs. 12.7, P < 0.001), the number of invaded lymph nodes remained similar between the two groups (0.5 vs. 0.5, P = 0.90). Similarly, our center's data revealed comparable 3-year OS and 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates between the two groups. ER have no significant oncological benefits over SR in the treatment of non-metastatic splenic flexure colon cancer, even for locally advanced cases.

Short- and long-term outcomes after surgical treatment of 5918 patients with splenic flexure colon cancer by extended right colectomy, segmental colectomy and left colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is among the most common cancers in the world, and splenic flexure colon cancer accounts for about 2-5% of them. There is still no consensus on the surgical treatment of splenic flexure colon cancer (SFCC), and the extent of surgical resection and lymph node dissection for SFCC is still controversial.

AIM

To compare the postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of extended right colectomy (ERC), segmental colectomy (SC) and left colectomy (LC) for SFCC.

METHOD

Up to March 2024, retrospective and prospective studies of ERC, SC, and LC for SFCC were searched through databases. Pooled weighted/standardized mean difference (WMD/SMD), odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed effects model or random effects model, and meta-analysis was performed using Stata.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis includes 5,918 patients from 13 studies with more lymph node harvest (OR:6.29; 95%Cl: 3.66-8.91; Z=4.69, P=0), more operation time (WMD: 22.53; 95%Cl: 18.75-26.31; Z=11.68, P=0), more blood loss (WMD:58.44; 95%Cl: 20.20-96.68; Z=2.99, P=0.003), longer hospital stay (WMD:1.74; 95%Cl: 0.20-3.29; Z=2.21, P=0.03), longer time to return to regular diet (WMD:3.17; 95%Cl: 2.05-4.30; Z=5.53, P=0), longer first flatus time (WMD:1.66; 95%Cl: 0.96-2.37; Z=4.61, P=0) in ERC versus SC. More lymph node harvest (WMD: 3.52; 95% Cl: 1.59-5.44; Z=3.58, P=0) in ERC versus LC and LC versus SC (WMD: 1.97; 95% CI: 0.53-3.41; Z=2.68, P=0.007), respectively. There is no significant difference between anastomotic leakage, postoperative ileus, total postoperative complication, severe postoperative complication, wound infection, reoperations, R0 resection, postoperative mortality, 5-year overall survival (OS), 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) in three group of patients. In LC versus SC and ERC versus LC, there is no difference between operation time, blood loss, hospital stay, return to regular diet, and first flatus.

CONCLUSION

In the included studies, SC and LC may be more advantageous, with fewer postoperative complications and faster recovery. ERC harvests more lymph nodes, but there is no significant difference in long-term OS and DFS between the three surgical approaches. Given that the included studies were retrospective, more randomized controlled trials are needed to validate this conclusion.

SF-CORNER (splenic flexure colorectal cancer): an international survey of operative approaches and outcomes for cancers of the splenic flexure

AIM

The optimum surgical approach to splenic flexure cancers (SFCs) remains uncertain. The aim of this survey was to explore the opinions of an international surgical community on the management and outcomes of SFC.

METHOD

A questionnaire was constructed comprising five sections (information about respondents; definition and prognosis of SFC; operative approach; approach in specific scenarios; outcomes) and circulated through an international dissemination committee and social media.

RESULTS

The survey received 576 responses over 4 weeks across 50 countries. There was no consensus regarding the definition of the splenic flexure, whilst the proportion of respondents who did and did not think that patients with SFC had a worse outcome was equal. The overall preferred operative approach was left hemicolectomy [203 (35.2%)], followed by segmental resection [167 (29%)], extended right hemicolectomy [126 (21.9%)] and subtotal colectomy [7 (12%)]. The stated pedicles for ligation varied between resection types and also within the same resection. One hundred and sixty-six (28.8%) respondents thought a segmental resection was associated with the worst survival and 190 (33%) thought it was associated with the best quality of life.

CONCLUSION

This survey confirms a lack of consensus across all aspects SFC treatment. The differing approaches described are likely to represent different beliefs around the variable anatomy of this region and the associated lymphatic drainage. Future studies are required to address such inconsistencies and identify the optimum surgical strategy, whilst also incorporating quality-of-life metrics and patient-reported outcomes. A one-size-fits-all approach is probably not appropriate with SFC, and a more bespoke approach is required.

Tata Memorial Centre Evidence Based Management of Colorectal cancer

This review article examines the evidence-based management of colorectal cancers, focusing on topics characterized by ongoing debates and evolving evidence. To contribute to the scientific discourse, we intentionally exclude subjects with established guidelines, concentrating instead on areas where the current understanding is dynamic. Our analysis encompasses a thorough exploration of critical themes, including the evidence surrounding complete mesocolic excision and D3 lymphadenectomy in colon cancers. Additionally, we delve into the evolving landscape of perioperative chemotherapy in both colon and rectal cancers, considering its nuanced role in the context of contemporary treatment strategies. Advancements in surgical techniques are a pivotal aspect of our discussion, with an emphasis on the utilization of minimally invasive approaches such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery in both colon and rectal cancers, including advanced rectal cases. Moving beyond conventional radical procedures, we scrutinize the feasibility and implications of endoscopic resections for small tumors, explore the paradigm of organ preservation in locally advanced rectal cancers, and assess the utility of total neoadjuvant therapy in the current treatment landscape. Our final segment reviews pivotal trials that have significantly influenced the management of colorectal liver and peritoneal metastasis.

Surgical management strategies for colorectal malignancies of the splenic flexure - A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extended right hemicolectomy (ERHC) or left hemicolectomy (LHC) are accepted as the standard-of-care for colonic tumours of the splenic flexure. Lymphatic drainage at this site is poorly defined and subject to significant heterogeneity. Nevertheless, emerging evidence demonstrates the potential oncological safety of segmental splenic flexure colectomy (SFC).

AIM

To perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare outcomes following ERHC, LHC and SFC for splenic flexure tumours (SFTs).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed as per PRISMA guidelines. NMA was performed using R Shiny and Netmeta packages.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies, involving 6176 patients (ERHC n = 785; LHC n = 1527; SFC n = 3864) were included in the NMA. There was no difference in overall survival (OS) (SFC vs LHC Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.0, 95% Credible Interval [CrI] 0.76,1.34; SFC vs ERHC HR 1.18, 95% CrI 0.85,1.58) between the groups. SFC had a shorter operation time (Mean 176.37 min; Mean Difference [MD] SFC vs LHC 20.34 min 95% CrI 10.9, 29.97; SFC vs ERHC MD 22.19 95% CrI 11.09, 33.29) but also had a lower average lymph node yield (LNY) compared with ERHC (MD 7.15, 95% CrI 5.71, 8.60). ERHC had a significantly higher incidence of post-operative ileus (Odds Ratio [OR] 3.47, 95% CrI 1.11, 10.84). There was also no difference observed for minimally invasive approaches, anastomotic leak rate, perioperative mortality, reoperation rates or length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

While SFC may allow for reduced operative duration and improved bowel function postoperatively. SFC, LHC, ERHC are all acceptable approaches for curative resection of cancers of the splenic flexure, with no difference in OS observed. Thus, surgeon preference and candidate-specific factors will likely determine the management of SFTs.

Segmental and extended resections provide comparable survival for clinically node-negative splenic flexure cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis of the National Cancer Database

PURPOSE

There is an ongoing debate regarding the extent of resection for splenic flexure tumors (SFT). The purpose of this study was to compare segmental and extended resections in terms of overall survival (OS) and pathologic outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all patients surgically treated for SFT in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) for the period 2010-2019. Outcomes of segmental and extended resections were compared and a 1:1 propensity score matching was used to match for confounders. Primary outcome was OS.

RESULTS

In total 3498/668,852 (0.5%) patients with clinical stage I-III splenic flexure adenocarcinoma in the NCDB were included. Of these, 1533 (43.8%) underwent segmental resection while 1965 (56.1%) underwent extended resection. After matching, mean OS was similar between the groups (92 vs 91 months; p = 0.94). When survival was stratified by clinical N stage, an 8-month survival benefit was shown in the extended resection group for clinical N-positive status (86 vs 78); however, this difference did not achieve statistical significance (p = 0.078). Median number of harvested lymph nodes was significantly lower in the segmental resection group (16 vs 17; p < 0.001) and the percentage of patients with  fewer than 12 harvested nodes was significantly higher (18.4% vs 11.6%; p < 0.001). Length of stay was significantly shorter in the segmental resection group (5 vs 6 days; p = 0.027). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of 30-day readmission or 30- or 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

While segmental and extended resections were associated with similar OS for clinically node-negative SFT, there might be a survival benefit for extended resection in patients with clinical evidence of lymph node involvement.

Splenic flexure cancer: is right extended hemicolectomy better than left hemicolectomy?

INTRODUCTION

There is no consensus on the optimal surgery for splenic flexure cancers.

METHODS

Review of a prospectively maintained database of patients with splenic flexure cancer undergoing either a right extended hemicolectomy or left hemicolectomy at a tertiary care cancer hospital from 14.5.2010 to 16.9.2021. The primary outcome measures were postoperative morbidity and hospital stay with secondary outcomes being overall survival, disease-free survival, and long-term patient reported functional and quality of life outcomes.

RESULTS

The demographic variables were evenly distributed between groups, and median follow-up was 44 months. The groups were comparable in terms of postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo complication ≥ 3a 10.6% vs 10%, p = 0.322) and hospital stay (8 days vs 7 days, p = 0.316). Oncological outcomes were similar in both groups (3-year disease-free survival 71.8% vs 67.8%, p = 0.877, and 3-year overall survival 83.9% vs 75.8%, p = 0.787), and long-term patient-reported functional outcomes were excellent in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Oncological outcomes, post operative morbidity, and long-term patient reported functional outcomes are comparable in patients undergoing either a right extended or left hemicolectomy for splenic flexure cancer.

Splenic flexure cancer survival: a 25-year experience and implications for complete mesocolic excision (CME) and central vascular ligation (CVL)

BACKGROUND

The management of splenic flexure cancers (SFCs) in the era of complete mesocolic excision (CME) and central vascular ligation (CVL) is challenging because of its variable lymphatic drainage. This study aimed to compare survival outcomes for SFCs and non-SFCs, and better understand the clinicopathological characteristics which may define a distinct SFC phenotype.

METHODS

An observational cohort study at Concord Hospital, Sydney was conducted with patients who underwent resection for colon adenocarcinoma (1995-2019). Clinicopathological data were extracted from a prospective database. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) estimates and their associations to clinicopathological variables were investigated with Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Of 2149 patients with colon cancer, 129 (6%) had an SFC. The overall 5-year OS and DFS rates were 63.6% (95% CI 62.5-64.7) and 59.4% (95% CI 58.3-60.5), respectively. SFCs were not associated with OS (P = 0.6) or DFS (P = 0.5). SFCs were more likely to present urgently (P < 0.001) with obstruction (P < 0.001) or perforation (P = 0.03), and more likely to require an open operation (P < 0.001). These characteristics were associated with poorer survival outcomes. No differences were noted between SFCs and non-SFCs with respect to tumour stage (P = 0.3).

CONCLUSION

SFCs have a distinct phenotype, the individual characteristics of which are associated with poorer survival. However, the survivals of SFCs and non-SFCs are similar, possibly because the most important determinant of outcome, tumour stage, is no different between the groups. This may have implications for the surgical approach to SFCs with respect to standardization of CME and CVL surgery for these cancers.

Surgical management of splenic flexure cancer: is there an optimal technique? A bi-national registry analysis

BACKGROUND

Splenic flexure tumours (SFC) are uncommon and present at more advanced disease stages. The optimal surgical technique for SFC remains controversial. We sought to compare the short-term outcomes of a left hemicolectomy (LHC) versus an extended resection (subtotal colectomy, STC) for SFCs.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis using the Binational Colorectal Cancer Audit (BCCA) registry was performed. All patients with SFC who underwent elective or emergency surgery for a SFC between 2010 and 2021 were included. Primary outcomes included short-term inpatient complications. Secondary outcomes included survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Six hundred and ninety-nine patients underwent resections for SFCs. A LHC was more common, performed in 64.1%. Patients having a LHC were significantly older, with proportionally more LHCs done laparoscopically. Overall grade III/IV complications were similar between both operations. Prolonged ileus and return to theatre were significantly higher in patients undergoing a STC. On multivariate analysis, anastomotic leak and overall grade III/IV complications were not independently associated with the type of operation. There was no difference in medial survival based on type of operation. Higher tumour stage (Stage III/IV) were independently associated with worse survival.

CONCLUSION

Segmental and extended resections are both oncologically sound procedures for SFCs. Segmental resections are associated with lower rates of prolonged ileus.

Standardization of the Definition and Surgical Management of Splenic Flexure Carcinoma by an International Expert Consensus Using the Delphi Technique: Room for Improvement?

BACKGROUND

Surgical management of splenic flexure carcinoma remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to establish an expert international consensus on splenic flexure carcinoma management.

DESIGN

A 3-round online-based Delphi study was conducted between September 2020 and April 2021.

SETTING

The first round included 18 experts from 12 different countries. For the second and third rounds, each expert in the first round was asked to invite 2 more colorectal surgeons (n = 47). Out of 47 invited experts, 89% (n = 42) participated in the second and third rounds of the consensus.

INTERVENTIONS

A total of 35 questions were created and sent via the online questionnaire tool.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Levels of recommendation based on voting concordance were graded as follows: more than 75% agreement was defined as strong, between 50% and 75% as moderate, and below 50% as weak.

RESULTS

There was moderate consensus on the definition of splenic flexure (55%) as 10 cm from either side where the distal transverse colon turns into the proximal descending colon. Also, experts recommended an abdominopelvic CT scan plus intraoperative exploration (moderate consensus, 72%) for tumor localization and cancer registry. Segmental colectomy was the preferred technique for the management of splenic flexure carcinoma in the elective setting (72%). Moderate consensus was achieved on the technique of complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation principles for splenic flexure carcinoma (74%). Only strong consensus was achieved on the surgical approach for minimally invasive surgery (88%).

LIMITATIONS

Subjective decisions are based on individual expert clinical experience and not evidence based.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first internationally conducted Delphi consensus study regarding splenic flexure carcinoma. The definition of splenic flexure remains ambiguous. To more effectively compare oncologic outcomes among different cancer registries, guidelines need to be developed to standardize each domain and avoid arbitrary definitions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C143 .

ESTANDARIZACIN DE LA DEFINICIN Y MANEJO QUIRRGICO DEL CARCINOMA DE NGULO ESPLNICO ESTABLECIDO POR UN CONSENSO INTERNACIONAL DE EXPERTOS UTILIZANDO LA TCNICA DELPHI ESPACIO PARA MEJORAR

ANTECEDENTES:El tratamiento quirúrgico del cáncer de ángulo esplénico sigue siendo controvertido.OBJETIVO:Establecer un consenso internacional de expertos sobre el manejo del cáncer del ángulo esplénico.DISEÑO:Se condujo un estudio Delphi en línea de 3 rondas entre septiembre de 2020 y febrero de 2021.ESCENARIO:La primera ronda incluyó a 18 expertos de 12 países distintos. Para la segunda y tercera rondas, a cada experto de la primera ronda se le pidió que invitara a 2 cirujanos colorrectales más de su región (n = 47). De los 47 expertos invitados, el 89% (n = 42) participó en la segunda y tercera ronda del consenso.INTERVENCIONES:Se crearon y enviaron un total de 35 preguntas a través de la herramienta de cuestionario en línea.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los niveles de recomendación basados en la concordancia de votos fueron jerarquizados de la siguiente manera: más del 75% de acuerdo se definió como fuerte, entre 50 y 75% como moderado y por debajo del 50% como débil.RESULTADOS:Hubo un consenso moderado sobre la definición de ángulo esplénico (55%) como 10 cm desde cualquier lado donde el colon transverso distal se convierte en el colon descendente proximal. Así también, los expertos recomendaron la tomografía computarizada abdominopélvica más la exploración intraoperatoria (consenso moderado, 72%) para la localización del tumor y el registro del ángulo esplénico. La colectomía segmentaria fue la técnica preferida para el tratamiento del cáncer de ángulo esplénico en el caso de ser electivo (72%). Se logró un consenso moderado sobre la técnica de escisión completa del mesocolon y los principios de ligadura vascular a nivel central para el cáncer de ángulo esplénico (74%). Solo se logró un fuerte consenso sobre el abordaje quirúrgico para la cirugía mínimamente invasiva (88%).LIMITACIONES:Decisiones subjetivas basadas en la experiencia clínica de expertos individuales y no basadas en evidencia.CONCLUSIONES:Este es el primer estudio internacional de consenso Delphi realizado sobre el cáncer de ángulo esplénico. Si bien encontramos un consenso moderado sobre las modalidades de diagnóstico preoperatorio y el manejo quirúrgico, la definición de ángulo esplénico sigue siendo ambigua. Para comparar de manera más efectiva los resultados oncológicos entre diferentes registros de cáncer, se deben desarrollar pautas para estandarizar cada dominio y evitar definiciones arbitrarias. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C143 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto ).

The impact of laparoscopic, open, extended right, and left colectomy on clinical outcomes of splenic flexure colon cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgical intervention is the recommended line for the management of colon cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of different surgical techniques (laparoscopic, open, extended right, and left colectomy) on clinical outcomes such as mortality, postoperative complications, operation and hospitalization time, and oncological factors.

METHODS

A total of 15 studies have been included in the current study. The outcomes of these studies were analyzed using a random-effect model and it was used to calculate the mean difference with 95% confidence intervals to quantify the impact of open, laparoscopic, extended right, and left colectomy. Inclusion criteria included studies in which subjects undergo splenic flexure colon cancer surgery with 2 comparable different surgical techniques.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic splenic flexure colon cancer surgery showed a significant beneficial impact on the length of hospital stay (P < .001), the volume of blood loss during surgery (P < .001), postoperative complications (P < .001), and time to an oral diet (P < .001). On the other hand, there was no significance regarding anastomotic leakage, infection of the surgical site, and operation time. Regarding the comparison between extended right colectomy (ERC) and lift colectomy (LC), analysis findings showed a significant (P = .001) higher efficacy of ERC in harvested number of lymph nodes compared with LC. On the other hand, there was no significant difference for the rest of the parameters. The neoadjuvant therapy as an influencing factor on postoperative outcome showed a beneficial impact regarding the overall survival rate.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic splenic flexure colon cancer surgery showed a significant beneficial impact compared with open surgery as proved by clinical outcomes. On the other hand, ERC and LC resulted in similar findings except for harvested lymph nodes, results were in favor of ERC.

Impact of primary tumor resection on the survival of patients with unresectable colon cancer liver metastasis at different colonic subsites: a propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) on the prognosis of patients with unresectable colon cancer liver metastasis (UCCLM) at seven colonic subsites using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

METHODS

Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance selection bias using all available variables that could be of potential relevance. After matching, the groups were redefined in a 1:1 ratio using the nearest method. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was compared among the patients of PTR and non-PTR groups. Cox regression models were used to identify the prognostic factors for CSS.

RESULTS

CSS was significantly different between all groups. Cox regression analysis showed that PTR was an independent prognostic factor for all groups. After PSM, PTR significantly prolonged CSS for all groups. Subgroup analysis showed that PTR did not improve the prognosis of N2 stage patients in the cecum, ascending colon, and descending colon groups; T1 + T2 stage patients in the hepatic flexure group; and patients with a tumor size ≤5 cm in the splenic flexure group. Segmental colectomy could prolong CSS of patients in the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, splenic flexure, and sigmoid colon groups, while extended colectomy could prolong CSS of patients in the hepatic flexure and descending colon groups.

CONCLUSION

At different colonic subsites, UCCLM patients had different CSS. PTR could improve their prognosis, however, N stage, T stage, and tumor size are important reference indicators. In addition to patients in the hepatic flexure and descending colon groups, we suggested that patients in other groups should choose segmental colectomy.

Best surgical approach for splenic flexure colon cancers: Extended versus segmental resection?

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical treatment approach for splenic flexure colon cancers remains controversial regarding the type of resection.

METHODS

We hypothesized that both extended and segmental resections have similar surgical and oncologic outcomes. A retrospective review of prospectively collected database was performed on all patients who had colectomy for splenic flexure colon cancer between 1996 and 2018.

RESULTS

Of 142 patients, 119 underwent extended resection; therefore, this group was compared with the group which underwent segmental resection (n = 23). The groups were similar in age, sex, ASA scores, operative times, estimated blood loss, hospital length of stay, and postoperative complication rates (p > 0.05). Median follow-up was 9.58 years (IQR:5.46-16.48). Multivariable regression models demonstrated no significant association between resection approach and disease-free survival (HR 1.63 [95%CI:0.91-2.92]), as well as overall survival (HR 1.80 [95%CI:0.97; 3.36]).

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of splenic flexure colon cancer, segmental colon resections have similar oncologic outcomes when compared to extended colectomies.

Short and long-term oncologic outcomes of patients with colon cancer of the splenic flexure

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus on surgical management of splenic flexure adenocarcinoma (SFA).

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgical resection for SFA between 1993 and 2015 were identified. Postoperative outcomes were compared between patients who underwent segmental (SR) vs. anatomical resection (AR).

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirteen patients underwent SR and 89 underwent AR. More patients in the SR group had open resections, but there were otherwise no differences in demographics or surgical characteristics between the two groups. There were no differences in overall (p = 0.29) or recurrence-free(p = 0.37) survival. On multivariable analysis, increased age (HR 1.04, 1.01-1.07, p = 0.005), higher American Society of Anesthesiology classification (HR 3.1, 1.7-5.71, p < 0.001), and higher tumor stage (HR 8.84, 3.76-20.82, p < 0.001) were predictive of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Short and long-term outcomes after SR and AR for SFA are not different, making SR a viable option for SFA surgical management.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for descending colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The clinical impact of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for descending colon cancer (DCC) is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of SILS for DCC compared with multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 137 consecutive patients with stage I-III DCC who underwent SILS or MPLS at two high-volume multidisciplinary tertiary hospitals between April 2008 and December 2018, using propensity score-matched analysis.

RESULTS

After propensity score-matching, we enrolled 88 patients (n = 44 in each group). SILS was successful in 97.7% of the matched cohort. Compared with the MPLS group, the SILS group showed significantly less blood loss and a greater number of harvested lymph nodes. Morbidity rates were similar between groups. Recurrence pattern did not differ between groups. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of 3-year disease-free and overall survivals.

CONCLUSION

SILS appears safe and feasible and can provide satisfactory oncological outcomes for patients with DCC.

European multicenter propensity score match study of laparoscopic vs. open colectomy for splenic flexure carcinomas: Results from the Splenic Flexure Cancer (SFC) Study Group

AIM OF THE STUDY

This European multicenter study aims to compare the results of laparoscopic versus laparotomy approach for the resection of splenic flexure colon carcinoma (SFC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with SFC who required curative resection by laparoscopy (LAP) or laparotomy (OPEN) between 2000 and 2018 were included. Three types of interventions were considered: extended right hemi-colectomy, left hemi-colectomy and splenic flexure resection. The LAP and OPEN groups were matched according to propensity score and compared with Chi-square, Mann-Whitney tests, and multivariate regression models. Overall survival and recurrence-free survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 399 patients, including 297 operated by LAP and 102 by OPEN. Extended right hemi-colectomy was performed in 35.8% of cases, left hemi-colectomy in 32.8% and splenic flexure resection in 31.4%. After propensity score matching, the LAP (n=64) and OPEN (n=64) groups were comparable for all pre-operative variables and tumor characteristics. The LAP group showed less blood loss and a shorter interval to return of transit and feeding compared to the OPEN group, regardless of the resection technique. There were no differences between the groups in terms of overall survival and 5-year recurrence-free survival.

CONCLUSION

These results support the application of laparoscopy for the resection of SFC.

Surgical Treatment of SplenicFlexure Colon Cancer: Analysisof Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Three DifferentSurgical Procedures

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of splenic flexure colectomy (SFC), left hemicolectomy (LHC) and extended left hemicolectomy (ELHC) for splenic flexure colon cancer.

METHODS

Between January 2011 and December 2018, 117 patients with splenic flexure cancer were enrolled in the study. We retrospectively compared the postoperative, pathological and long-term outcomes of patients with splenic flexure cancer.

RESULTS

Of the 117 patients, 73 (62.4%) underwent SFC, 22 (18.8%) underwent LHC, and 22 (18.8%) underwent ELHC. No statistically significant differences were found among the groups regarding postoperative complications, pathological data or recurrence. No metastatic lymph nodes at the root of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) were observed; lymph node metastasis appeared at the root of the middle colic artery (MCA), but in a low proportion of cases (4.4%). Looking at long-term prognosis, no differences were observed among the three groups regarding both 5-year overall survival (94.0% vs 90.2% vs 94.1%) and disease-free survival (88.2% vs 90.2% vs 83.0%).

CONCLUSION

Our retrospective review suggests that splenic flexure colectomy in minimally invasive surgery is a safe and effective treatment option for splenic flexure colon cancer. The rate of metastatic lymph nodes at the root of the central artery and gastroepiploic arcade node was relatively low.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision With Central Vascular Ligation for Descending Colon Cancer

Background

Single-incision laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation for descending colon cancer is technically challenging. Standardization of the surgical procedures is therefore needed.

Methods

In a Trendelenburg position with left side elevated, the sigmoid mesocolon is mobilized using a medial-to-lateral approach, and the left colic artery and inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) are divided after radical lymphadenectomy along the inferior mesenteric artery, preserving the superior rectal artery. The descending mesocolon is mobilized from the retroperitoneal planes up to the dorsal surface of the pancreas using medial and lateral approaches. Next, changing the surgical position to a reverse Trendelenburg position with left side elevated, the omental bursa is opened, and the transverse mesocolon is separated from the inferior border of the pancreas. The splenocolic ligament and lateral attachment are then divided, matching the previous medial dissection of the retroperitoneum, and the splenic flexure is fully mobilized. The IMV is divided again at the inferior border of the pancreas. The left branch of the middle colic artery is also divided.

Results

Forty-seven consecutive patients with DCC underwent single-incision laparoscopic CME with CVL. One patient required an additional port. Median operative time, blood loss, and number of harvested lymph nodes were 240 min (interquartile range [IQR], 195-257 min), 5 mL (IQR, 5-52 mL), and 21 (IQR, 13-29), respectively. Morbidity rate was 5.9%. Median duration of hospitalization was 9 days (IQR, 7-11 days).

Conclusions

Single-incision laparoscopic CME with CVL is safe and feasible for DCC.

What Is the Optimal Elective Colectomy for Splenic Flexure Cancer: End of the Debate? A Multicenter Study From the GRECCAR Group With a Propensity Score Analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal elective colectomy in patients with splenic flexure tumor is debated.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare splenic flexure colectomy, left hemicolectomy, and subtotal colectomy for perioperative, histological, and survival outcomes in this setting.

DESIGN

This is a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic splenic flexure tumor who underwent elective colectomy were included.

PATIENTS

Between 2006 and 2014, 313 consecutive patients were operated on in 15 French Research Group of Rectal Cancer Surgery centers.

INTERVENTIONS

Propensity score weighting was performed to compare short- and long-term outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was disease-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, quality of surgical resection, overall postoperative morbidity, surgical postoperative morbidity, and rate of anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

The most performed surgery was splenic flexure colectomy (59%), followed by subtotal colectomy (23%) and left hemicolectomy (18%). Subtotal colectomy was more often performed by laparotomy compared with splenic flexure colectomy and left hemicolectomy (93% vs 61% vs 56%, p < 0.0001), and was associated with a longer operative time (260 minutes (120-460) vs 180 minutes (68-440) vs 217 minutes (149-480), p < 0.0001). Postoperative morbidity was similar between the 3 groups, but the median length of hospital stay was significantly longer after subtotal colectomy (13 days (5-56) vs 10 (4-175) vs 9 (4-55), p = 0.0007). The median number of harvested lymph nodes was significantly higher after subtotal colectomy compared with splenic flexure colectomy and left hemicolectomy (24 (8-90) vs 15 (1-81) vs 16 (3-52), p < 0.0001). The rate of stage III disease and the number of patients treated by adjuvant chemotherapy were similar between the 3 groups. There was no difference in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival between the 3 procedures.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

In the elective setting, splenic flexure colectomy is safe and oncologically adequate for patients with nonmetastatic splenic flexure tumor. However, given the oncological clearance after splenic flexure colectomy, it seems that the debate is not completely closed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B703.

CUL ES LA COLECTOMA ELECTIVA PTIMA PARA EL CNCER DE NGULO ESPLNICO FIN DEL DEBATE UN ESTUDIO MULTICNTRICO DEL GRUPO GRECCAR CON UN ANLISIS DE PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN

ANTECEDENTES:La colectomía electiva óptima en pacientes con tumores del ángulo esplénico continua en debate.OBJETIVO:Comparar la colectomía de ángulo esplénico, hemicolectomía izquierda y colectomía subtotal para los resultados perioperatorios, histológicos y de supervivencia en este escenario.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo multicéntrico.ESCENARIO:Se incluyeron pacientes diagnosticados de tumores del ángulo esplénico no metastásicos que se sometieron a colectomía electiva.PACIENTES:Entre 2006 y 2014, 313 pacientes consecutivos fueron intervenidos en 15 centros GRECCAR.INTERVENCIONES:Se realizó una ponderación del puntaje de propensión para comparar los resultados a corto y largo plazo.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El criterio de valoración principal fue la supervivencia libre de enfermedad. Los criterios de valoración secundarios incluyeron la supervivencia general, la calidad de la resección quirúrgica, la morbilidad posoperatoria general, la morbilidad posoperatoria quirúrgica y la tasa de fuga anastomótica.RESULTADOS:La cirugía más realizada fue la colectomía del ángulo esplénico (59%), seguida de la colectomía subtotal (23%) y la hemicolectomía izquierda (18%). La colectomía subtotal se realizó con mayor frecuencia mediante laparotomía en comparación con la colectomía de ángulo esplénico y la hemicolectomía izquierda (93% frente a 61% frente a 56%, p <0.0001), y se asoció con un tiempo quirúrgico más prolongado (260 min [120-460] frente a 180 min [68-440] frente a 217 min [149-480], p <0.0001). La morbilidad posoperatoria fue similar entre los tres grupos, pero la duración media de la estancia hospitalaria fue significativamente más prolongada después de la colectomía subtotal (13 días [5-56] frente a 10 [4-175] frente a 9 [4-55], p = 0.0007). La mediana del número de ganglios linfáticos extraídos fue significativamente mayor después de la colectomía subtotal en comparación con la colectomía del ángulo esplénico y la hemicolectomía izquierda (24 [8-90] frente a 15 [1-81] frente a 16 [3-52], p <0.0001). La tasa de enfermedad en estadio III y el número de pacientes tratados con quimioterapia adyuvante fueron similares entre los 3 grupos. No hubo diferencias en términos de supervivencia libre de enfermedad y supervivencia general entre los 3 procedimientos.LIMITACIONES:El estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:En un escenario electivo, la colectomía del ángulo esplénico es segura y oncológicamente adecuada para pacientes con tumores del ángulo esplénico no metastásicos. Sin embargo, dado el aclaramiento oncológico tras la colectomía del ángulo esplénico, parece que el debate no está completamente cerrado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B703.

Segmental resection of splenic flexure colon cancers provides an adequate lymph node harvest and is a safe operative approach - an analysis of the ACS-NSQIP database

Introduction

Fewer than 10% of colon cancers are found at the splenic flexure. A standard surgical approach to these cancers has not been defined. The goal of this study was to compare lymph node harvest and post-operative morbidity between segmental resection and formal left hemicolectomy for splenic flexure colon cancers.

Method

Patients diagnosed with a splenic flexure cancer were identified from the 2012–2018 ACS-NSQIP colectomy-targeted database. Patients were categorized based on type of surgical resection – left hemicolectomy with colorectal anastomosis or segmental colectomy with colocolonic anastomosis. Demographic, clinicopathologic, and post-operative outcomes were compared between groups. Factors independently associated with lymph node harvest, operative time, and post-operative morbidity were investigated by linear and binomial logistic regression models.

Results

A total of 3,049 patients underwent colectomy for a splenic flexure cancer. Of these, 83.6% had a segmental colectomy and 73% were performed by a minimally invasive approach. T- and N-stage did not differ between segmental and left hemicolectomy groups (p = 0.703 and p = 0.429, respectively). Inadequate nodal harvest (< 12 nodes) was infrequent and similar between the two procedures (7.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.13). Operative time was significantly shorter for segmental colectomy (213 ± 83.5 min vs. 193 ± 84.1 min, p < 0.0001) and major morbidity was similar between the two surgical techniques (8.4% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.75). After accounting for demographic, clinicopathologic, and operative factors, binomial logistic regression showed that type of procedure was not significantly associated with LN harvest (OR 0.80, 95%CI 0.54–1.17) or major morbidity (OR 1.17, 95%CI 0.36–3.81). However, on linear regression, segmental splenic flexure resection was associated with shorter operative time (estimate 20.29, 95%CI 12.61–27.97, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Splenic flexure resection for colon cancer is associated with an adequate lymph node harvest. Compared to a formal left hemicolectomy, a segmental resection also has a shorter operative time with equivalent post-operative morbidity.

Emergency surgery for obstructive splenic flexure colon cancer: results of a multicentric study of the French Surgical Association (AFC)

Management of malignant left-sided colonic obstruction remains challenging and requires a stoma in 40-65% of patients. In those with obstructive splenic flexure colon cancer (OSFCC), a debate still exists regarding the most appropriate surgery. The aim of this muticenter study was to report and compare the different surgical procedures in OSFCC patients with a special focus on operative and histological characteristics and survival outcomes including 12-month stoma-free survival. Between 2000 and 2015, 2325 patients were treated for obstructive colon cancer in centers members of the French National Surgical Association (AFC). Among them, 198 underwent surgery for OSFCC and were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with OSFCC and proximal colonic ischemia or perforation were excluded. Four procedures were performed: decompressing stoma (DS, 39%), splenic flexure colectomy (SFC, 39%), subtotal colectomy (STC, 17%,) and left hemicolectomy (LHC, 5%). All patients treated with LHC underwent a Hartmann's procedure. There was no significant difference between groups for postoperative mortality and morbidity. Hospital stay was significantly longer after DS. The length of the specimen, longitudinal resection margins and number of harvested lymph nodes were significantly higher in the STC group. There was no difference for overall and disease-free survival. Stoma-free survival was significantly lower after LHC (62%) in comparison with the other groups (p < 0.0001). At the end of follow-up, 50% of patients who underwent LHC had a permanent stoma. In OSFCC patients without proximal colonic ischemia or peritonitis, LHC should no longer be recommended due to a high risk of permanent stoma.

Single-docking robotic-assisted artery-guided segmental splenic flexure colectomy for splenic flexure cancer-a propensity score-matching analysis

Background

Splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is a rare condition in colorectal cancer (CRC). The appropriate surgical treatment for SFC remains controversial. In recent years, we have used artery-guided segmental splenic flexure colectomy (ASFC) to treat SFC in which robotic access is gradually applied. The study sought to assess the clinical and oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted ASFC compared to laparoscopic-assisted ASFC for SFC by undertaking a propensity score-matching analysis.

Methods

Seventy patients underwent a robotic-assisted ASFC (n=19) or laparoscopic-assisted ASFC (n=51) to treat SFC from Dec 2015 to Dec 2019. Their data were prospectively collected. The patients were matched at a ratio of 1:1 according to sex, age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (≤2 or >2), previous abdominal surgeries, and pathologic stage.

Results

No statistically significant differences were found between the robotic- and laparoscopic-assisted ASFC groups in relation to operation time, estimated blood loss, length of postoperative hospital stay, time to liquid diet, postoperative complications, tumor size, distal resection margins, histology, lymph node harvest, metastatic lymph nodes, and neuro-vascular invasion. Additionally, no case was converted to a laparotomy. There were no cases readmission or mortality within 30 days of surgery. The distal resection margins were longer in the robotic-assisted ASFC group than the laparoscopic-assisted ASFC group. The robotic-assisted ASFC group had significantly higher operation expenses than the laparoscopic-assisted ASFC group. However, there was no significant difference in the surgical material expenses between the two groups. There were 2 cases of complications in each group; both cases were classified as grade I or II under Dindo's classification of surgical complications.

Conclusions

With the exception of operation expenses, robotic-assisted ASFC rivals laparoscopic-assisted ASFC in many respects. ASFC meets the recommended oncological criteria in terms of resection margins and lymph node harvest. We await the results for the long-term oncologic outcomes.

Primary tumor resection improves prognosis of unresectable carcinomas of the transverse colon including flexures with liver metastasis: a preliminary population-based analysis

PURPOSE

Studies on unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastasis(CRLM) rarely analyze the prognosis of the patients from the point of colonic subsites. We aimed to evaluate the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) and different scope of colectomy on the prognosis of patients with unresectable transverse colon cancer liver metastasis (UTCLM), hepatic flexure cancer liver metastasis (UHFLM), and splenic flexure cancer liver metastasis (USFLM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The patients were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2015. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to identify prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS). Kaplan-Meier analyses and log-rank tests were conducted to assess the effectiveness of PTR on survival.

RESULTS

In total, this study included a cohort of 1960 patients: 556 cases of UHFLM, 1008 cases of UTCLM, and 396 cases of USFLM. The median survival time of whole patients was 11.0 months, ranging from 7.0 months for UHFLM patients to 15.0 months for USFLM patients. USFLM patients had the best OS and CSS, followed by UTCLM patients. UHFLM patients had the worst OS and CSS (All P < 0.001). PTR could improve the OS and CSS of UTCLM, UHFLM, and USFLM (All P < 0.001). Subgroups analysis revealed that USFLM patients with tumor size≤5 cm and negative CEA had not demonstrated an improved OS and CSS after PTR. Multivariate analysis showed that PTR and perioperative chemotherapy were common independent prognostic factors for UHFLM, UTCLM, and USFLM patients. There was no difference between segmental colon resection and larger colon resection on CSS of UHFLM, UTCLM, and USFLM patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed the different survival of patients with UTCLM, UHFLM, and USFLM, and for the first time, we proved that PTR could provide survival benefits for patients with unresectable CRLM from the perspective of colonic subsites of transverse colon, hepatic flexure, and splenic flexure. Besides, PTR may not improve the prognosis of USFLM patients with CEA- negative or tumor size≤5 cm. For oncologic outcomes, we concluded that segmental colon resection seemed an effective surgical procedure for UTCLM, UHFLM, and USFLM.

Emergency surgery for splenic flexure cancer: results of the SFC Study Group database

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of surgical treatment for splenic flexure carcinomas (SFCs) in emergency settings remains unexplored. This study aims to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of different alternatives for emergency SFC resection.

METHOD

This multicenter retrospective study was based on the SFC Study Group database. For the present analysis, SFC patients were selected if they had received emergency surgical resection with curative intent between 2000 and 2018. Extended right colectomy (ERC), left colectomy (LC), and segmental left colectomy (SLC) were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

The study sample was composed of 90 SFC patients who underwent emergency ERC (n = 55, 61.1%), LC (n = 18, 20%), or SLC (n = 17, 18.9%). Bowel obstruction was the most frequent indication for surgery (n = 75, 83.3%), and an open approach was chosen in 81.1% of the patients. A higher incidence of postoperative complications was observed in the ERC group (70.9%) than in the LC (44.4%) and SLC groups (47.1%), with a significant procedure-related difference for severe postoperative complications (Dindo-Clavien ≥ III; adjusted odds ratio for ERC vs. LC:7.23; 95% CI 1.51-34.66; p = 0.013). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 8 (11.2%) patients, with no differences between the groups (p = 0.902). R0 resection was achieved in 98.9% of the procedures, and ≥ 12 lymph nodes were retrieved in 92.2% of patients. Overall and disease-free survival rates at 5 years were similar between the groups and were significantly associated with stage pT4 and the presence of synchronous metastases.

CONCLUSION

In the emergency setting, ERC and open surgery are the most frequently performed procedures. ERC is associated with increased odds of severe postoperative complications when compared to more conservative SFC resections. Nonetheless, all the alternatives seem to provide similar pathologic and long-term outcomes, supporting the oncological safety of more conservative resections for emergency SFCs.

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.

Extended right colectomy, left colectomy, or segmental left colectomy for splenic flexure carcinomas: a European multicenter propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical resection of the splenic flexure carcinoma (SFC) is challenging and the optimal surgical procedure for SFCs remains a matter of debate. The present study aimed to compare in a multicenter European sample of patients the short- and long-term outcomes of extended right (ERC) vs. left (LC) vs. segmental left colectomy (SLC) for SFCs.

METHODS

This retrospective multicenter study analyzed the surgical and oncological outcomes of SFC patients undergoing elective curative intent surgery between 2000 and 2018. Descriptive and exploratory analyses were first conducted on the whole sample. Outcomes of the different procedures (ERC vs. LC vs. SLC) were then compared using propensity score matching for multilevel treatment. Overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

From a total of 399 SFC patients, 143 (35.8%) underwent ERC, 131 (32.8%) underwent LC, and 125 (31.4%) underwent SLC. Overall, 297 (74.4%) were laparoscopic procedures. An increase in operative time, time to flatus, time to regular diet, and hospital stay was observed with the progressive extension of SFC resection. ERC was associated with significantly increased risk of postoperative ileus compared to both LC and SLC. A significantly greater number of lymph nodes were retrieved by ERC, but the objective of at least 12 retrieved lymph nodes was achieved in 85% of patients, without procedure-related differences. No differences were observed in OS or DFS between ERC, LC, and SLC.

CONCLUSION

The present study supports the resection of SFCs by colon-sparing surgical techniques, such as SLC.

Comparison of extended right hemicolectomy, left hemicolectomy and segmental colectomy for splenic flexure colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The aim of this work was to compare the outcomes of extended right hemicolectomy (ERH), left hemicolectomy (LH) and segmental colectomy (SC) for the surgical management of splenic flexure tumours.

METHOD

In compliance with PRISMA statement standards, a systematic review was performed to identify all studies comparing outcomes of ERH, LH and SC for the surgical management of splenic flexure tumours. Primary outcomes included anastomotic leakage and all postoperative complications. The secondary outcomes included operative time, R0 resection, number of harvested lymph nodes, > 12 harvested lymph nodes, severe complications, postoperative mortality, paralytic ileus, wound infection, pancreatic fistula, intra-abdominal abscess, need for reoperation, length of hospital stay, 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival. The ROBINS-I tool and GRADE system were used to assess the risk of bias and certainty of evidence, respectively.

RESULTS

Analysis of 956 patients from seven observational studies showed that ERH was associated with more paralytic ileus than LH (OR 2.74, P = 0.002) and SC (OR 6.67, P < 0.0001) and the operative time was shorter in SC than in ERH (mean difference 25.48, P < 0.0001) and LH (mean difference -17.94, P = 0.0002). There were no differences between ERH, LH and SC in terms of anastomotic leakage, postoperative complications, R0 resection, severe complications, postoperative mortality, wound infection, pancreatic fistula, intra-abdominal abscess, need for reoperation, length of hospital stay, > 12 harvested lymph nodes, 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence, limited to observational studies, suggests that there is no difference between ERH, LH and SC in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality, lymph node yield and cancer survival. Randomized controlled trials are required for definite conclusions.

Which is more important in the management of splenic flexure colon cancer: strict central lymph node dissection or adequate bowel resection margin?

BACKGROUND

What qualifies as optimal lymph node (LN) dissection in the surgical management of splenic flexure colon cancer (SFCC) still remains controversial because few studies have evaluated the distribution of LN metastasis of SFCC. The aim of this study was to clarify detailed distribution of LN metastasis and long-term outcomes of SFCC.

METHODS

This retrospective study enrolled patients who had curative colectomy for primary transverse or descending colon cancer of pathological stage I, II, or III at a single high-volume cancer center between April 2002 and December 2018. The 538 eligible patients were divided into three groups: patients with SFCC (SFCC group, n = 168), patients with proximal transverse colon cancer (PTCC group, n = 290), and patients with distal descending colon cancer (DDCC group, n = 80). LNs were classified into horizontal (pericolic) and vertical (intermediate and main) nodes. Intermediate and main LN station numbers were defined according to the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum classification. Distributions of LN metastasis and long-term outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

In the SFCC group, the mean age was 67.3 ± 10.5 years and 110 patients (65.5%) were male. The proportion of patients with LN metastasis in the intermediate or main region was significantly lower in the SFCC group (8%) than in the PTCC (37%) (p < 0.01) or DDCC group (29%) (p < 0.01) in pathological stage III patients. In the SFCC group, the incidence of pericolic LN metastasis on the oral side of tumor (43%) was significantly higher than in the PTCC group (21%) (p < 0.01) and was similar to that in the DDCC group (42%) (p = 0.51), while in the SFCC group, the incidence of pericolic LN metastasis on the anal side of tumor (17%) was lower than in the PTCC group (31%) and was also similar to that in the DDCC group (21%). There were no significant differences in disease-specific survival rates among all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LN metastasis occurred mainly in the pericolic region, especially on the oral side of the tumor in SFCC. It may, therefore, be important to have an adequate bowel resection margin, especially on the oral side, for SFCC.

Elective surgery for tumours of the splenic flexure: a French inter-group (AFC, SFCD, FRENCH, GRECCAR) survey

BACKGROUND

In an elective setting, there is no consensus regarding the type of colectomy that is best for patients with tumors of the splenic flexure: segmental left colectomy (or splenic flexure colectomy), left hemicolectomy or subtotal colectomy (or extended right hemicolectomy). In the United Kingdom, extended right hemicolectomy is preferred by surgeons. The aim of the present survey was to report on the practices in France for this particular tumor location.

METHODS

Between 15/07/17 and 15/10/17, members of two French surgical societies [the French Association of Surgery (AFC) and the French Society of Digestive Surgery (SFCD)] and two French surgical cooperative groups [the French Federation of Surgical Research (FRENCH) and the French Research Group of Rectal Cancer Surgery (GRECCAR)] were solicited by email to answer an online anonymous questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 190 out of 420 surgeons participated in this study (response rate 45%). The preferred procedure was splenic flexure colectomy (70%), followed by left hemicolectomy (17%) and subtotal colectomy (13%). The most used surgical approach was laparoscopy (63%), followed by laparotomy (31%) and hand-assisted laparoscopy (6%). Lymph node dissection was extended to the middle colic artery in 29% of splenic flexure colectomies and in 33% of left hemicolectomies. Twenty-nine percent of responders thought that tumors of the splenic flexure had a worse prognosis in comparison with other colonic sites, because of insufficient lymph node dissection (73%) or a more advanced stage (50%) at diagnosis. However, this opinion did not change the type of colectomy performed.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a strong consensus in France to operate tumors of the splenic flexure with a splenic flexure colectomy and lymph node dissection limited to the left colic artery.