Short-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:5550-5557. [PMID: 27752818 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-4921-y]

Laparoscopic and robotic surgery for colorectal cancer in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

As life expectancy has been increasing, older patients are becoming more central to the healthcare system, leading to more intensive care use and longer hospital stays. Nevertheless, advancements in minimally invasive surgical techniques offer safe and effective options for older patients with colorectal diseases. This study aims to provide comprehensive evidence on the role of minimally invasive surgery in treating colorectal diseases in older patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All articles directly compared the minimally invasive approach with open surgery in patients aged ≥65 years. The present metanalysis took 30-day complications as primary outcomes. Length of hospital stay, readmission, and 30-day mortality were also assessed, as secondary outcomes. Further subgroup analyses were carried out based on surgery setting, lesion features, and location.

RESULTS

After searching the main databases, 84 articles were included. Evaluation of 30-day complications rate, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality significantly favored minimally invasive approaches. The outcome readmission did not show any significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

The current metanalysis demonstrates clear advantages of minimally invasive techniques over open surgery in colorectal procedures for older patients, particularly in reducing complications, mortality, and hospitalization. This suggests that prioritizing these techniques, based on available expertise and facilities, could improve outcomes and quality of care for older patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults

BACKGROUND

As the population ages, more older adults are presenting for surgery. Age-related declines in physiological reserve and functional capacity can result in frailty and poor outcomes after surgery. Hence, optimizing perioperative care in older patients is imperative. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) may influence surgical outcomes, but current use and impact on older adults patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations on perioperative care of older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Expert consensus determined working definitions for key terms and metrics related to perioperative care. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for 24 pre-defined key questions in the topic areas of prehabilitation, MIS, and ERAS in major abdominal surgery (colorectal, upper gastrointestinal (UGI), Hernia, and hepatopancreatic biliary (HPB)) to generate evidence-based recommendations following the GRADE methodology.

RESULT

Older adults were defined as 65 years and older. Over 20,000 articles were initially retrieved from search parameters. Evidence synthesis was performed across the three topic areas from 172 studies, with meta-analyses conducted for MIS and ERAS topics. The use of MIS and ERAS was recommended for older adult patients particularly when undergoing colorectal surgery. Expert opinion recommended prehabilitation, cessation of smoking and alcohol, and correction of anemia in all colorectal, UGI, Hernia, and HPB procedures in older adults. All recommendations were conditional, with low to very low certainty of evidence, with the exception of ERAS program in colorectal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS and ERAS are recommended in older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery, with evidence supporting use in colorectal surgery. Though expert opinion supported prehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence supporting use. This work has identified evidence gaps for further studies to optimize older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Surgery in Very Elderly Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Survival Analysis and Comparative Study

(1) Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a global health concern, particularly among the elderly population. This study aimed to assess the impact of laparoscopic surgery on CRC patients aged ≥80 years. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive CRC patients who underwent surgery at our institution between July 2018 and July 2023. The patients were categorized into three groups: those aged over 80 who underwent laparoscopic surgery (Group A), those aged over 80 who underwent open surgery (Group B), and those under 80 who underwent laparoscopic surgery (Group C). We examined various clinical and surgical parameters, including demographic data, medical history, surgical outcomes, and survival. (3) Results: Group A (N = 113) had shorter hospital stays than Group B (N = 23; p = 0.042), with no significant differences in complications or 30-day outcomes. Compared to Group C (N = 269), Group A had higher comorbidity indices (p < 0.001), more emergency admissions, anemia, low hemoglobin levels, colonic obstruction (p < 0.001), longer hospital stays (p < 0.001), and more medical complications (p = 0.003). Laparotomic conversion was associated with obstructive neoplasms (p < 0.001), and medical complications with ASA scores (p < 0.001). Both the medical and surgical complications predicted adverse 30-day outcomes (p = 0.007 and p < 0.001). Survival analysis revealed superior overall survival (OS) in Group A vs. Group B (p < 0.0001) and inferior OS vs. Group C (p < 0.0001). After a landmark analysis, the OS for patients aged 80 or older and those under 80 appeared to be similar (HR 2.55 [0.75-8.72], p = 0.136). (4) Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery in very elderly CRC patients shows comparable oncological outcomes and surgical complications to younger populations. Survival benefits are influenced by age, comorbidities, and medical complications. Further prospective multicenter studies are needed in order to validate these findings.

Short- and long-term results of open vs laparoscopic multisegmental resection and anastomosis for synchronous colorectal cancer located in separate segments

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether laparoscopic multisegmental resection and anastomosis (LMRA) is safe and advantageous over traditional open multisegmental resection and anastomosis (OMRA) for treating synchronous colorectal cancer (SCRC) located in separate segments.

AIM

To compare the short-term efficacy and long-term prognosis of OMRA as well as LMRA for SCRC located in separate segments.

METHODS

Patients with SCRC who underwent surgery between January 2010 and December 2021 at the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and the Peking University First Hospital were retrospectively recruited. In accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 109 patients who received right hemicolectomy together with anterior resection of the rectum or right hemicolectomy and sigmoid colectomy were finally included in the study. Patients were divided into the LMRA and OMRA groups (n = 68 and 41, respectively) according to the surgical method used. The groups were compared regarding the surgical procedure's short-term efficacy and its effect on long-term patient survival.

RESULTS

LMRA patients showed markedly less intraoperative blood loss than OMRA patients (100 vs 200 mL, P = 0.006). Compared to OMRA patients, LMRA patients exhibited markedly shorter postoperative first exhaust time (2 vs 3 d, P = 0.001), postoperative first fluid intake time (3 vs 4 d, P = 0.012), and postoperative hospital stay (9 vs 12 d, P = 0.002). The incidence of total postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade: ≥ II) was 2.9% and 17.1% (P = 0.025) in the LMRA and OMRA groups, respectively, while the incidence of anastomotic leakage was 2.9% and 7.3% (P = 0.558) in the LMRA and OMRA groups, respectively. Furthermore, the LMRA group had a higher mean number of lymph nodes dissected than the OMRA group (45.2 vs 37.3, P = 0.020). The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates in OMRA patients were 82.9% and 78.3%, respectively, while these rates in LMRA patients were 78.2% and 72.8%, respectively. Multivariate prognostic analysis revealed that N stage [OS: HR hazard ratio (HR) = 10.161, P = 0.026; DFS: HR = 13.017, P = 0.013], but not the surgical method (LMRA/OMRA) (OS: HR = 0.834, P = 0.749; DFS: HR = 0.812, P = 0.712), was the independent influencing factor in the OS and DFS of patients with SCRC.

CONCLUSION

LMRA is safe and feasible for patients with SCRC located in separate segments. Compared to OMRA, the LMRA approach has more advantages related to short-term efficacy.

Decreasing Postoperative Pulmonary Complication Following Laparoscopic Surgery in Elderly Individuals with Colorectal Cancer: A Competing Risk Analysis in a Propensity Score-Weighted Cohort Study

Simple Summary

As the effect of laparoscopic surgery on elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) remains unclear, this propensity score–weighted cohort study revealed that laparoscopic surgery is a favorable method for elderly patients with CRC than open surgery in terms of less pulmonary-related postoperative morbidity and mortality, less hospital stay and similar oncological outcomes.

Abstract

Advanced age is a risk factor for major abdominal surgery due to a decline in physical function and increased comorbidities. Although laparoscopic surgery provides good results in most patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), its effect on elderly patients remains unclear. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes between open and laparoscopic surgeries in elderly patients with CRC. Total 1350 patients aged ≥75 years who underwent curative resection for stage I–III primary CRC were enrolled retrospectively and were divided into open surgery (846 patients) and laparoscopy (504 patients) groups. After propensity score weighting to balance an uneven distribution, a competing risk analysis was used to analyze the short-term and long-term outcomes. Postoperative mortality rates were lower in the laparoscopy group, especially due to pulmonary complications. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group than in the open surgery group. Overall survival, disease-free survival, and competing risk analysis showed no significant differences between the two groups. Laparoscopic surgery for elderly patients with CRC significantly decreased pulmonary-related postoperative morbidity and mortality in this large cohort study. Laparoscopic surgery is a favorable method for elderly patients with CRC than open surgery in terms of less hospital stay and similar oncological outcomes.

Short-term and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for elderly patients with colorectal cancer aged over 80 years: a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

There has been an increase in the percentage of elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). However, few studies have reported the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for elderly patients with CRC aged over 80 years.

METHODS

This study included 529 patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for clinical stage 0-III CRC at Kobe University Hospital between January 2010 and December 2018. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to create balanced cohorts of the elderly (aged ≥ 80, n = 113) and the non-elderly (aged < 80, n = 113). Their clinical outcomes were compared after PSM.

RESULTS

After matching, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level was higher in the non-elderly group, and adjuvant chemotherapy was less frequently employed in the elderly group. D3 dissection was performed more frequently and the number of the harvested lymph nodes tended to be larger in the non-elderly group. There was no significant difference in the rates of postoperative complications, reoperation within 30 days, and 30-day mortality between the groups. The 5-year relapse-free survival rate was not statistically different between the two groups (77.3% for the non-elderly vs. 62.7% for the elderly, p = 0.13). The multivariate analyses for the whole cohort showed that the factors of sex, tumor location, operation time, and conversion to open surgery, but not the age, were significant predictors of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer patients aged over 80 years is technically and oncologically safe.

National disparities in use of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is safe and improves outcomes in older persons with rectal cancer but may be underutilized. As older persons are the largest surgical population, investigation of the current use and factors impacting MIS use is warranted. Our goal is to investigate the trends and disparities that affect utilization of MIS in older persons with rectal cancer.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was reviewed for persons 65 years and older who underwent curative resection for rectal adenocarcinoma from 2010 to 2017. Cases were stratified by surgical approach (open or MIS [laparoscopic or robotic]). Univariate analysis compared patient and provider demographics across approaches. Multivariate analysis investigated variables associated with MIS use. Main outcome measures were trends and factors associated with MIS use in older persons.

RESULTS

Of 31,910 patients analyzed, 51.9% (n = 16,555) were open and 48.1% (n = 15,355) MIS. The MIS cohort was 66.7% (n = 10,236) laparoscopic and 33.3% (n = 5119) robotic. MIS increased from 29% in 2010 (n = 1197; 25% laparoscopic, 4% robotic) to 65% in 2017 (n = 2382; 35% laparoscopic, 30% robotic), likely from annual increases in robotics (OR 1.24/year, p < 0.0001). In the unadjusted analysis, there were significant differences in MIS use by age, race, comorbidity, socioeconomic status, and facility type. In multivariate analysis, patients with advancing age (OR 0.93, p < 0.001), major comorbidity (OR 0.75, p < 0.001), total proctectomy (OR0.78, p < 0.001), and advanced pathologic stage (OR 0.51, p < 0.001) were less likely to undergo MIS.

CONCLUSION

Nationwide, less than half of rectal cancer cases in older persons were performed with MIS, despite steady robotic growth. Patient and facility factors impacted MIS use. Further work on regionalizing rectal cancer care and ensuring equitable MIS access and training could improve utilization.

Clinical and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer: a retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is commonly used in elderly patients over 80 years old. The purpose of this study was to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of patients aged ≥ 80 years who underwent curative resection of colorectal cancer at six Hallym University-affiliated hospitals. The perioperative outcomes and oncologic outcomes were compared between laparoscopic and open surgery RESULTS: Of 294 elderly patients, 104 (35.3%) underwent open surgery and 190 (64.7%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. The postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.019) and time to soft diet (P = 0.009) were shorter in the laparoscopic group than in the open group. Postoperative complications were less frequent in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (P < 0.001), including wound infection (P = 0.005), ileus (P = 0.005), and pneumonia (P = 0.001). The 3-year overall survival (OS) (P = 0.982) and recurrence-free survival rates (RFS) (P = 0.532) were similar in both groups. In multivariable analyses, positive lymph node status was the only independent factor associated with OS (P = 0.019) and RFS (P = 0.012). Laparoscopic surgery was not associated with OS (P = 0.874) and RFS (P = 0.772).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery offers several perioperative advantages over open surgery and similar long-term oncological outcomes for elderly patients with colorectal cancer. Therefore, we suggest that laparoscopic surgery can be safely performed for the treatment of elderly patients (≥ 80 years old) with colorectal cancer.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer: A single institutional matched case-control study

INTRODUCTION

The number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer has gradually increased. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is widely used to approach colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term outcomes in octogenarians who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

This study included 158 patients aged 80 or over who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer between 2010 and 2015. We compared long-term outcomes of a laparoscopic colorectal surgery group with those of an open colorectal surgery group by propensity score matching equalizing factors that could affect prognosis such as prognostic nutritional index and Charlson comorbidity index score.

RESULTS

Forty-eight pairs were selected after propensity score matching. The cancer-specific 5-year survival rate was 97.1% in the laparoscopic colorectal surgery group and 87.6% in the open colorectal surgery group (P = .17). The overall 5-year survival rate was 77.3% in the laparoscopic colorectal surgery group and 73.9% in the open colorectal surgery group (P = .32). The 5-year recurrence-free survival rate was 95.1% in the laparoscopic colorectal surgery group and 85.4% in the open colorectal surgery group (P = .14).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for octogenarians with colorectal cancer achieves similar oncological outcomes to open colorectal surgery and should be considered as a treatment option.

Nomogram for predicting overall survival in colorectal cancer with distant metastasis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cancer burden, and prognosis is determined by many demographic and clinicopathologic factors. The present study aimed to construct a prognostic nomogram for colorectal cancer patients with distant metastasis.

METHODS

Colorectal cancer patients with distant metastasis diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify independent prognostic factors. A nomogram was constructed to predict survival, and validation was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 7099 stage IV colorectal cancer patients were enrolled in the construction cohort. The median overall survival was 20.0 (95% CI 19.3-20.7) months. Age at diagnosis, marital status, race, primary tumour site, tumour grade, CEA level, T stage, N stage, presence of bone, brain, liver and lung metastasis, surgery for primary site and performance of chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors. The nomogram was constructed and the calibration curve showed satisfactory agreement. The C-index was 0.742 (95% CI 0.726-0.758). In the validation cohort (7098 patients), the nomogram showed satisfactory discrimination and calibration with a C-index of 0.746 (95% CI 0.730-0.762).

CONCLUSION

A series of factors associated with the survival of CRC patients with distant metastasis were found. Based on the identified factors, a nomogram was generated to predict the survival of stage IV colorectal cancer patients. The predictive model showed satisfactory discrimination and calibration, which can provide a reference for survival estimation and individualized treatment decisions.

Advantage of laparoscopy surgery for elderly colorectal cancer patients without compromising oncologic outcome

Background

Laparoscopic surgery has achieved significant results in elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). In this study, we compared the short-term and long-term outcomes of open surgery and laparoscopic surgery in patients with CRC aged above 75 years at a single tertiary medical center.

Methods

We analyzed 967 patients who underwent curative resection for primary colorectal adenocarcinoma without distant metastasis between January 2009 and December 2015, in a single institution. Of the enrolled patients, 305 underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 662 received open laparotomy surgery.

Results

Compared to the patients who underwent open surgery, those who received laparoscopic surgery had significantly shorter postoperative stay (10.3 vs. 13.5 days p < 0.001) and similar postoperative morbidity (p = 0.354) and mortality (p = 0.082). In the laparoscopy cohort, six of 305 patients were converted to open surgery and one died. The long-term overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and recurrence rate were similar between both cohorts in each stage.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgery is suitable for elderly patients owing to shorter postoperative stay, similar long-term outcomes with open surgery, and acceptable low conversion rates. For long-term overall and oncological outcomes, the results of laparoscopic surgery were similar to that of open surgery in each TNM stage.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly aged over 80 years old versus non-elderly: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Recently, colorectal cancer has increased in elderly patients worldwide, with laparoscopic colorectal surgery increasing in elderly patients with colorectal cancer. However, whether laparoscopic colorectal surgery is an optimal procedure for colorectal cancer in the elderly remains unclear. This study aimed to verify safety and curability of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly patients ≥80 years old.

Methods

Patients undergoing curative colorectal surgery from 2006 to 2014 were enrolled and classified into the laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients aged ≥80 years (LAC-E) group, open surgery in elderly patients (OC-E) group, and laparoscopic surgery in non-elderly patients (LAC-NE) group. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between these groups.

Results

The LAC-E, OC-E, and LAC-NE groups comprised 85, 25, and 358 patients, respectively. Intraoperative blood loss and incidence of postoperative complications were significantly lower in the LAC-E versus OC-E group (97 vs. 440 mL, p < .01 and 14% vs. 32%, p < .05, respectively). Long-term outcomes were not different between these two groups. Operation time was significantly shorter in the LAC-E versus LAC-NE group (249 vs. 288 min, p < .01). Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were similar between the groups. Although the 5-year overall survival rate in the LAC-E group was lower than that in the LAC-NE group (64% vs. 80%, p < .01), there was no difference in 5-year disease-specific survival between the groups.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is technically and oncologically safe for colorectal cancer in the elderly as well as the non-elderly and can be an optimal procedure for colorectal cancer in the elderly.

Long-term results of a randomized study comparing open surgery and laparoscopic surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients (Eld Lap study)

BACKGROUND

We reported favorable short-term results of laparoscopic surgery in a randomized study comparing open and laparoscopic surgery for elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The purpose of this study is to clarify the long-term outcomes of the laparoscopic surgery for elderly patients with CRC.

METHODS

The inclusion criteria were ≥ 75 years, adenocarcinoma, ≤ T4a, M0 and elective surgery. The patients were randomly allocated to open or laparoscopic surgery according to the tumor location. The survival rates, recurrence and reasons for death were compared.

RESULT

One hundred patients (right colon 43, left colon 28, rectum 29) were included in each group. Eight patients who underwent open surgery and 2 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were excluded from the analysis because of metastatic diseases and other malignancies found during the operations. One hundred ninety patients (98 open, 98 laparoscopic) were analyzed. There was no difference in the backgrounds excluding more patients with vascular invasion in the laparoscopic rectal cancer. There were no differences in the 5-year overall survival rate (open vs. laparoscopic; 78.9% vs. 82.1%, p = 0.638), 5-year disease-free survival rate (70.5% vs. 62.8%, p = 0.276), 5-year recurrence-free survival rate (76.1% vs. 72.1%, p = 0.419), or 5-year cancer-specific survival rate (86.1% vs. 80.5%, p = 0.208). No differences in survival were detected in the analyses of stage and tumor location. There was no significant difference in the overall recurrence rate or recurrence site. However, distant lymph node metastases and local recurrences were more common after laparoscopic surgery than after open surgery. There was no difference in the cause of death. More than half of the patients died from other diseases in both groups (57.9% vs. 52.6%, p = 0.765).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery showed similar long-term results compared to open surgery in elderly patients with CRC. Laparoscopic surgery is an effective surgical procedure for elderly patients with CRC.

Impact of ASA-score, age and learning curve on early outcome in the initiation phase of an oncological robotic colorectal program

The ASA score is known to be an independent predictor of complications and mortality following colorectal surgery. We evaluated early outcome in the initiation phase of a robotic oncological colorectal resection program in dependence of comorbidity and learning curve. 43 consecutive colorectal cancer patients (median age: 74 years) who underwent robotic surgery were firstly analysed defined by physical status (group A = ASA1 + 2; group B = ASA3). Secondly, outcome was evaluated relating to surgery date (group E: early phase; group L: late phase). There were no differences among groups A and B with regard to gender, BMI, skin-to-skin operative times (STS), N- and M-status, hospital-stay as well as overall rate of complications according to Dindo-Clavien and no one-year mortality. GroupA when compared to group B demonstrated significantly lower mean age (65.5 years ± 11.4 years vs 75.8 years  ± 8.9 years), T-stage and ICU-stay. When separately analyzed for patients age ICU-stay was comparable (> 75 years vs. < 75 years). Group E and L demonstrated comparable characteristics and early outcome except more frequent lymphatic fistulas in group E. STS was reduced in group L compared to group E. Beyond learning curve aspects in our series, we could demonstrate that patient's physical condition according to ASA rather than age may have an impact on early outcome in the initial phase of a robotic oncological colorectal program.

Clinical outcomes of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in octogenarian with locally advanced rectal cancer

The number of elderly patients who receive surgical treatment for rectal cancer has gradually increased with aging of the population. In recent years, preoperative chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgical treatment, has been widely used for treating patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. The aim of the present study was to evaluate if preoperative chemoradiotherapy is efficacious and safe for the treatment of rectal cancer in patients older than 80 years. A total of 293 patients with rectal cancer, who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy from 2007 to 2017, were studied. Comorbidities and the short- and long-term outcomes in elderly patients (aged ≥80 years old) were investigated and compared to younger patients. The elderly group comprised of 17 patients (5.8%). Pulmonary disease was the most common comorbidity (23.5%). No significant difference between the two groups regarding the rate of completeness of chemoradiotherapy was detected (P=0.26). Curative resection was performed in 14 patients in the elderly group and 252 patients in the younger group. Among 7 patients from both groups who could not receive curative resection due to their poor general condition, 4 patients had decreased lower respiratory function due to pneumonia (3 patients) or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (1 patient). Morbidity and mortality rates were similar in elderly and younger groups (35.7% vs. 27.0%, 0% vs. 0%, respectively; P=0.54, P=1.00). No significant difference was found regarding recurrence between the two groups (P=1.00). To conclude, preoperative chemoradiotherapy in elderly patients with rectal cancer is safe and well tolerated.

Laparoscopic-assisted colorectal surgery benefits visceral obesity patients: a propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to determine the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS) in visceral obesity patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively collected the clinical data of consecutive patients who underwent colorectal surgery for CRC between August 2014 and July 2018. The third lumbar vertebra visceral fat area was measured to diagnose visceral obesity. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare the short-term outcomes between the open surgery (OS) and LAS in visceral obesity patients. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the risk factors of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 280 visceral obesity patients were included in this study with 140 patients for each group. Compared with the OS group, the LAS group had more lymph nodes harvested, longer surgical duration, and shorter postoperative hospital stay. The overall incidence of complications in OS was significantly higher than LAS (32.1 vs. 20.0%, P=0.021). Multivariate analysis revealed that age of at least 65 years (odds ratio: 1.950, 95% confidence interval: 1.118-3.403; P=0.019) was an independent risk factor for postoperative complications, whereas LAS (odds ratio: 0.523, 95% confidence interval: 0.302-0.908; P=0.021) was a protective factor.

CONCLUSION

LAS in visceral obesity patients with CRC was a safer and less invasive alternative than open surgery, with fewer complications within the first 30 days postoperatively.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery in Elderly Patients: A Propensity Score Match Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer remains controversial. The study aimed to compare the operative, postoperative, and oncologic outcomes of robotic (robotic colorectal resection surgery [RCRS]) versus laparoscopic colorectal resection surgery (LCRS) in elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare patients aged 70 years and more undergoing elective RCRS or LCRS for colorectal cancer between 2010 and 2017.

RESULTS

Overall, 160 patients underwent elective curative LCRS (n = 102) or RCRS (n = 58) for colorectal cancer. Before PSM, the mean preoperative Charlson score and the tumor size were significantly lower in the robotic group. After matching, 43 RCRSs were compared with 43 LCRSs. The RCRS group showed longer operative times (300.6 versus 214.5 min, P = .03) compared with LCRS, but all other operative variables were comparable between the two groups. No differences were found for postoperative morbidity, mortality, time to flatus, return to regular diet, and length of hospital stay. R0 resection was obtained in 95.3% of procedures. The overall and disease-free survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were similar between RCRS and LCRS patients. The presence of more than one comorbidity before surgery was significantly associated with the incidence of postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

In patients aged 70 years or more, robotic colorectal surgery showed operative and oncologic outcomes similar to those obtained by laparoscopy, despite longer operative times. Randomized trials are awaited to reliably assess the clinical and oncological noninferiority and the costs/benefits ratio of robotic colorectal surgery in elderly populations.

Simultaneous curative resection of double colorectal carcinoma with synchronous bilobar liver metastases

Synchronous colorectal carcinoma (SCRC) indicates more than one primary colorectal carcinoma (CRC) discovered at the time of initial presentation, accounts for 3.1%-3.9% of CRC, and may occur either in the same or in different colorectal segments. The accurate preoperative diagnosis of SCRC is difficult and diagnostic failures may lead to inappropriate treatment and poorer prognosis. SCRC requires colorectal resections tailored to individual patients, based on the number, location, and stage of the tumours, from conventional or extended hemicolectomies to total colectomy or proctocolectomy, when established predisposing conditions exist. The overall perioperative risks of surgery for SCRC seem to be higher than for solitary CRC. Simultaneous colorectal and liver resection represents an appealing surgical strategy in selected patients with CRC and synchronous liver metastases (CRLM), even though the cumulative risks of the two procedures need to be adequately evaluated. Simultaneous resections have the noticeable advantage of avoiding a second laparotomy, give the opportunity of an earlier initiation of adjuvant therapy, and may significantly reduce the hospital costs. Because an increasing number of recent studies have shown good results, with morbidity, perioperative hospitalization, and mortality rates comparable to staged resections, simultaneous procedures can be selectively proposed even in case of complex colorectal resections, including those for SCRC and rectal cancer. However, in patients with multiple bilobar CRLM, major hepatectomies performed simultaneously with colorectal resection have been associated with significant perioperative risks. Conservative or parenchymal-sparing hepatectomies reduce the extent of hepatectomy while preserving oncological radicality, and may represent the best option for selected patients with multiple CRLM involving both liver lobes. Parenchymal-sparing liver resection, instead of major or two-stage hepatectomy for bilobar disease, seemingly reduces the overall operative risk of candidates to simultaneous colorectal and liver resection, and may represent the most appropriate surgical strategy whenever possible, also for patients with advanced SCRC and multiple bilobar liver metastases.

The dark side of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer patients aged 75 years or older

PURPOSE

The rate of postoperative morbidity and mortality is reportedly high in patients aged ≥ 75 years with colorectal cancer (CRC). In such patients, a comparison of the short-term outcome between open method and laparoscopy has not been clearly defined in Taiwan. We aimed to compare postoperative morbidity and mortality parameters after open method and laparoscopy in CRC patients aged ≥ 75 years.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent surgery for CRC from February 2009 to September 2015 at the Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in Taiwan and analyzed their clinicopathological factors. Postoperative morbidity and mortality were analyzed for evaluating if laparoscopic surgery offers more favorable outcomes than open surgery in the elderly.

RESULTS

A total of 1133 patients were enrolled and analyzed in this study; they were divided into two groups (open method vs. laparoscopy = 797 vs. 336). The anastomotic leakage rate was significantly higher in the laparoscopy group than in the open method group (3.3 vs. 0.9%, p = 0.003). Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality rates showed no significant difference between these two groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group than in the open method group (10.4 ± 8.7 vs. 13.8 ± 13.5 days, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that laparoscopy in patients aged ≥ 75 years with CRC had higher anastomosis leakage rate compared with open surgery but is acceptable and offers the benefit of a shorter hospital stay over open surgery.

Safety of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer in patients with liver cirrhosis: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with liver cirrhosis represent a high risk group for colorectal surgery. The safety and effectiveness of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery for cirrhotic patients is not clear. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery with those of open procedure for colorectal cancer in patients with liver cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 62 patients with cirrhosis who underwent radical resections for colorectal cancer from 2005 to 2014 were identified retrospectively from a prospective database according to the technique adopted (laparoscopic or open). Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Comparison of laparoscopic group and open group revealed no significant differences at baseline. In the laparoscopic group, the laparoscopic surgery was associated with reduced estimated blood loss (136 vs. 266 ml, p = 0.015), faster first flatus (3 vs. 4 days, p = 0.002) and shorter days to first oral intake (4 vs. 5 days, p = 0.033), but similar operative times (p = 0.856), number of retrieved lymph nodes (p = 0.400) or postoperative hospital stays (p = 0.170). Despite the similar incidence of overall complications between the two groups (50.0% vs. 68.8%, p = 0.133), we observed lower morbidities in laparoscopic group in terms of the rate of Grade II complication (20.0% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.014). Long-term of overall and Disease-free survival rates did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery appears to be a safe and less invasive alternative to open surgery in some elective cirrhotic patients in terms of less blood loss or early recovery and does not result in additional harm in terms of the postoperative complications or long-term oncological outcomes.

Selection Bias in Colorectal Surgery in a Non-Tertiary Hospital: Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy is used increasingly to treat malignant and benign colorectal surgical diseases. However, this practice is still not offered to all patients. Many barriers halt the widespread use of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Both surgeon's and patient's factors contribute to limit a wider use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 408 consecutive colorectal resections in a 4-year period, to find out if a selection bias exists in using laparotomy or laparoscopy for colorectal surgical diseases, and which factors are associated with a poor use of laparoscopy or to a preferred laparotomy.

RESULTS

In our practice, advanced disease, American Society of Anesthesiologist class III and IV, and emergency status are all patient-related factors associated with laparotomy. Surgeon's age more than 52 years and lack of laparoscopic training are surgeon-related factors that negatively affect the chance of being operated on with the laparoscopic technique.

CONCLUSIONS

An extensive laparoscopic colorectal training and a supporting environment, especially during the night shift, are needed to facilitate the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery avoiding a bias in selecting surgical candidates to one technique or another.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in octogenarians with colorectal cancer: a single-institution analysis

PURPOSE

The number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with surgery has gradually increased. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes in patients ≥80 years of age who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery for CRC using a propensity score-matched analysis to make uniform the patient background characteristics affecting the postoperative morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

We compared the short-term outcomes of open vs. laparoscopic surgery in patients with CRC ≥80 years of age between 2010 and 2015. Fifty-two patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy for CRC were matched to 52 patients undergoing open colectomy with respect to gender, age, body mass index, performance status, prognostic nutritional index, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, tumor-node-metastasis stage, and tumor location. The operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were investigated.

RESULTS

Blood loss was less during laparoscopic surgery than during open surgery (40 vs. 140 ml, p < 0.001). In the laparoscopic surgery group, the hospital stay was shorter (11 vs. 14 days, p < 0.001) and the morbidity rate lower (21.2 vs. 40.4%) than in the open surgery group. The mortality for both groups was similar (0 vs. 1.9% for laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery in octogenarians with CRC is a safe, low-invasive alternative to open surgery with less blood loss and a shorter hospital stay.

[Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer]

AIM

To assess laparoscopic surgery in treatment of colon cancer patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The results of laparoscopic treatment of patients with colorectal cancer are presented in the article. It was estimated the influence of various clinical parameters including age, gender, comorbidities, tumor localization and stage and complications on laparoscopic management of these patients.

CONCLUSION

It was revealed that efficiency of laparoscopic surgery in patients with colon cancer is affected by tumor stage and presence of complications.