What factors determine specimen quality in colon cancer surgery? A cohort study

Complete mesocolic excision and extended lymphadenectomy: Where should we stand?

Debate regarding the risks and merits of complete mesocolic excision and extended lymphadenectomy is ongoing, particularly for right-sided colon cancers. In this article, we hope to provide a succinct yet encompassing review of the relevant literature. We posit that complete mesocolic excision with D3 dissection is indicated in select patients with colon cancers, particularly those distal to the cecum.

Macroscopic Evaluation of Colon Cancer Resection Specimens

Colon cancer is a common disease internationally. Outcomes have not improved to the same degree as in rectal cancer, where the focus on total mesorectal excision and pathological feedback has significantly contributed to improved survival and reduced local recurrence. Colon cancer surgery shows significant variation around the world, with differences in mesocolic integrity, height of the vascular ligation and length of the bowel resected. This leads to variation in well-recognised quality measures like lymph node yield. Pathologists are able to assess all of these variables and are ideally placed to provide feedback to surgeons and the wider multidisciplinary team to improve surgical quality over time. With a move towards complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation to remove the primary tumour and all mechanisms of spread within an intact package, pathological feedback will be central to improving outcomes for patients with operable colon cancer. This review focusses on the key quality measures and the evidence that underpins them.

Reduced port versus open right hemicolectomy for colorectal cancer: a retrospective comparison study of two centers

PURPOSE

The concept of complete mesocolic excision (CME) in right-sided colorectal cancer is well known for open and laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of reduced port and open surgery for right-sided colorectal cancer.

METHODS

One hundred forty-one patients received elective surgery for right-sided colonic cancer between January 2015 and December 2019 and were included in a retrospective database.

RESULTS

We observed longer operation time in the RP-CME group (145 min vs. 119.43 min, p<0.01). Hospital stay (8 days vs. 14 days, p<0.01) and time to first intestinal passage (42 h. vs. 59 h, p<0.01) were significantly shorter in the reduced port group. Postoperative complications were more likely to be observed in the O-CME group (7.2% vs. 14.1%, p=0.28); anastomotic leakage rate was low in both groups (1.8% vs. 2.4%, p=1.00). Specimen scores (score 1= good: 93.8% vs. 91.7%, p=1.00) and average number of retrieved lymph nodes were comparable (24 vs. 23 p=0.69). In O-CME patients, we observed more advanced tumor stages (UICC III: 21.4% vs. 45.9%, p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study comparing reduced port to open surgery for right-sided colorectal cancer. We could demonstrate that this technique is feasible for oncological right hemicolectomy with observation of shorter hospital stay and lower morbidity rates compared to open surgery. The oncological outcome did not differ in the present study.