Long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic versus open rectal cancer resection: a high-quality population-based analysis in a Southern German district

Transanal total mesorectal excision: short- and long-term results of four certified colorectal cancer centers in Germany

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME), a novel approach for treating low rectal cancer, holds promise. However, concerns exist in certain countries about their oncologic safety due to less-than-optimal outcomes on global studies. This research seeks to evaluate the long-term oncologic outcomes focusing on local recurrence rate and overall survival after TaTME surgery in Germany.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study analyzed data from patients who underwent elective TaTME surgery between 2014 and 2021 in four certified colorectal cancer centers in Germany. Primary endpoints were 3-year local recurrence rate and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). Secondary outcomes encompassed overall survival (OS), operative time, completeness of local tumor resection, lymph node resection, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 378 patients were analyzed (mean age 61.6 years; 272 males, 72%). After a median follow-up period of 2.5 years, 326 patients with UICC-stages I-III and tumor operability included in survival analyses. Local recurrence was observed in 8 individuals, leading to a 3-year cumulative local recurrence rate of 2.2% and a 3-year LRFS rate of 88.1%. The 3-year OS rate stood at 88.9%. Within 30 days after surgery, anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 cases (5%), whereas a presacral abscess was present in 12 patients (3.2%).

CONCLUSION

TaTME proves effective in addressing the anatomical and technical challenges of low rectal surgery and is associated with pleasing short- and long-term results. However, its safe integration into surgical routine necessitates sufficient knowledge and a previously completed training program.

Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has been endorsed by clinical guidelines for colon cancer, but not for rectal cancer on account of unapproved oncologic equivalence with open surgery.

AIMS

We started this largest-to-date meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy in the treatment of rectal cancer compared with open surgery.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Both randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic proctectomy and open surgery between January 1990 and March 2020 were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase Databases (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020211718). The data of intraoperative, pathological, postoperative and survival outcomes were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs and 93 NRCTs including 216,615 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with 48,888 patients received laparoscopic surgery and 167,727 patients underwent open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery group showed faster recovery, less complications and decreased mortality within 30 days. The positive rate of circumferential margin (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.85, p < 0.0001) and distal margin (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.85 p < 0.0001) was significantly reduced in the laparoscopic surgery group, but the completeness of total mesorectal excision showed no significant difference. The 3-year and 5-year local recurrence, disease-free survival and overall survival were all improved in the laparoscopic surgery group, while the distal recurrence did not differ significantly between the two approaches.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer with respect to oncological outcomes and long-term survival. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery provides short-term advantages, including faster recovery and less complications.

Influence of Certification Program on Treatment Quality and Survival for Rectal Cancer Patients in Germany: Results of 13 Certified Centers in Collaboration with AN Institute

INTRODUCTION

The certification of oncological units as colorectal cancer centers (CrCCs) has been proposed to standardize oncological treatment and improve the outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). The proportion of patients with CRC in Germany that are treated by a certified center is around 53%. Lately, the effect of certification on the treatment outcomes has been critically discussed.

AIM

Our aim was to investigate the treatment outcomes in patients with rectal carcinoma at certified CrCCs, in German hospitals of different medical care levels.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective, multicentric database (AN Institute) of adult patients who underwent surgery for rectal carcinoma between 2002 and 2016. We included 563 patients from 13 hospitals of different medical care levels (basic, priority, and maximal care) over periods of 5 years before and after certification.

RESULTS

The certified CrCCs showed a significant increase in the use of laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer surgery (5% vs. 55%, p < 0.001). However, we observed a significantly prolonged mean duration of surgery in certified CrCCs (161 Min. vs. 192 Min., p < 0.001). The overall morbidity did not improve (32% vs. 38%, p = 0.174), but the appearance of postoperative stool fistulas decreased significantly in certified CrCCs (2% vs. 0%, p = 0.036). Concerning the overall in-hospital mortality, we registered a positive trend in certified centers during the five-year period after the certification (5% vs. 3%, p = 0.190). The length of preoperative hospitalization (preop. LOS) was shortened significantly (4.71 vs. 4.13 days, p < 0.001), while the overall length of in-hospital stays was also shorter in certified CrCCs (20.32 vs. 19.54 days, p = 0.065). We registered a clear advantage in detailed, high-quality histopathological examinations regarding the N, L, V, and M.E.R.C.U.R.Y. statuses. In the performed subgroup analysis, a significantly longer overall survival after certification was registered for maximal medical care units (p = 0.029) and in patients with UICC stage IV disease (p = 0.041). In patients with UICC stage III disease, we registered a slightly non-significant improvement in the disease-free survival (UICC III: p = 0.050).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study indicate an improvement in terms of the treatment quality and outcomes in certified CrCCs, which is enforced by certification-specific aspects such as a more differentiated surgical approach, a lower rate of certain postoperative complications, and a multidisciplinary approach. Further prospective clinical trials are necessary to investigate the influence of certification in the treatment of CRC patients.

Long-term oncological outcome of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (single-incision plus one port) as a technical option for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to clarify the oncological safety of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (single-incision plus one port) (RPS) for patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

The clinicopathological data of 63 selected patients with clinical Stage I-III (T1-3 and N0-2) rectal cancer who underwent RPS of radical anterior resection between 2012 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The median distance of tumor from anal verge was 11 cm. Ordinarily, a multiport platform with three channels was placed in the 3-cm umbilical incision, and another 5- or 12-mm port was placed in the right lower abdomen.

RESULTS

The median operative time, amount of intraoperative bleeding, number of harvested lymph nodes, and length of distal margin were 272 min, 10 mL, 22 nodes, and 4.0 cm, respectively, and there was one (2%) patient with involvement of the radial margin. There were eight patients (13%) who required additional ports, and one patient (2%) who converted to open surgery. Intra- and postoperative complications occurred in one (2%) and 12 patients (19%), respectively. The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 8 days. The median follow-up period was 79 months, and incisional hernia was observed in 3 (5%) patients at the platform site not the port site, and cancer recurrence occurred in four patients (6%). The 5-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were 100% and 100% in the patients with pathological Stage I disease, 94% and 100% in the patients with pathological Stage II disease, and 83% and 89% in the patients with pathological Stage III disease, respectively.

CONCLUSION

RPS in the selected patients with rectal cancer, performed by an expert laparoscopic surgeon, may be technically safe and oncologically acceptable as well as multiport laparoscopic surgery.

Elderly patients over 80 years undergoing colorectal cancer resection: Development and validation of a predictive nomogram for survival

BACKGROUND

Surgery remains the primary treatment for localized colorectal cancer (CRC). Improving surgical decision-making for elderly CRC patients necessitates an accurate predictive tool.

AIM

To build a nomogram to predict the overall survival of elderly patients over 80 years undergoing CRC resection.

METHODS

Two hundred and ninety-five elderly CRC patients over 80 years undergoing surgery at Singapore General Hospital between 2018 and 2021 were identified from the American College of Surgeons – National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database. Prognostic variables were selected using univariate Cox regression, and clinical feature selection was performed by the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression. A nomogram for 1- and 3-year overall survival was constructed based on 60% of the study cohort and tested on the remaining 40%. The performance of the nomogram was evaluated using the concordance index (C-index), area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and calibration plots. Risk groups were stratified using the total risk points derived from the nomogram and the optimal cut-off point. Survival curves were compared between the high- and low-risk groups.

RESULTS

Eight predictors: Age, Charlson comorbidity index, body mass index, serum albumin level, distant metastasis, emergency surgery, postoperative pneumonia, and postoperative myocardial infarction, were included in the nomogram. The AUC values for the 1-year survival were 0.843 and 0.826 for the training and validation cohorts, respectively. The AUC values for the 3-year survival were 0.788 and 0.750 for the training and validation cohorts, respectively. C-index values of the training cohort (0.845) and validation cohort (0.793) suggested the excellent discriminative ability of the nomogram. Calibration curves demonstrated a good consistency between the predictions and actual observations of overall survival in both training and validation cohorts. A significant difference in overall survival was seen between elderly patients stratified into low- and high-risk groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We constructed and validated a nomogram predicting 1- and 3-year survival probability in elderly patients over 80 years undergoing CRC resection, thereby facilitating holistic and informed decision-making among these patients.

Long term oncological outcomes for laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer - A population-based nationwide noninferiority study

AIM

The aim of this work was to compare the 5-year overall survival in a national cohort of patients undergoing curative abdominal resection for rectal cancer by laparoscopic (LAP) or open (OPEN) surgery.

METHOD

All patients diagnosed with clinical Stage I-III rectal cancer and who underwent LAP or OPEN abdominal curative surgery in Sweden between 2010 and 2016 were retrieved from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. A noninferiority study design was employed with a statistical power of 90%, a one-side type I error of 2.5% and a noninferiority margin of 2%. The analyses were performed as intention-to-treat and the relationship between surgical technique and overall mortality within 5 years was analysed. Multilevel regression models with the patients matched by propensity scores adjusted for patient- and tumour-related variables were used.

RESULTS

A total of 8410 Stage I-III cancer patients were included. This group underwent 2094 LAP (24.9%) and 6316 OPEN (75.1%) procedures and were followed until 31 December 2020. Multivariable Cox regression demonstrated that 5-year overall survival was higher in the LAP group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.877; 95% CI 0.775-0.993]. [Correction added on 21 November 2022, after first online publication: In the preceding sentence, the CI value for LAP group has been corrected from "0.877" to "0.775" in this version.] The outcome was similar when multiple imputation and propensity score matching were employed. When cT4 patients were excluded there was no difference (HR 0.885; 95% CI 0.790-1.033). At 5-years' follow-up local recurrence was not different, at 2.9% for the LAP group and 3.6% for the OPEN group (p = 0.075), while metastatic disease was more frequent in the OPEN group (19.6% compared with 15.6% for LAP; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the LAP technique was not inferior to OPEN surgery with regard to overall 5-year survival. These results support the use of laparoscopic surgery.

Completion Total Mesorectal Excision After Transanal Local Excision of Early Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Completion total mesorectal excision is recommended when local excision of early rectal cancers demonstrates high-risk histopathological features. Concerns regarding the quality of completion resections and the impact on oncological safety remain unanswered.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to summarize and analyze the outcomes associated with completion surgery and undertake a comparative analysis with primary rectal resections.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included PubMed, Cochrane library, MEDLINE, and Embase databases up to April 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies reporting any outcome of completion surgery after transanal local excision of an early rectal cancer were selected. Case reports, studies of benign lesions, and studies using flexible endoscopic techniques were not included.

INTERVENTION

The intervention was completion total mesorectal excision after transanal local excision of early rectal cancers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome measures included histopathological and long-term oncological outcomes of completion total mesorectal excision. Secondary outcome measures included short-term perioperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies including 646 patients met the eligibility criteria, and 8 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Patients undergoing completion surgery have longer operative times (standardized mean difference, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.23-0.75; p = 0.0002) and higher intraoperative blood loss (standardized mean difference, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.01-0.5; p = 0.04) compared with primary resections, but perioperative morbidity is comparable (risk ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98-1.62; p = 0.08). Completion surgery is associated with higher rates of incomplete mesorectal specimens (risk ratio, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.41-6.62; p = 0.005) and lower lymph node yields (standardized mean difference, -0.26; 95% CI, -0.47 to 0.06; p = 0.01). Comparative analysis on long-term outcomes is limited, but no evidence of inferior recurrence or survival rates is found.

LIMITATIONS

Only small retrospective cohort and case-control studies are published on this topic, with considerable heterogeneity limiting the effectiveness of meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides the strongest evidence to date that completion surgery is associated with an inferior histopathological grade of the mesorectum and finds insufficient long-term results to satisfy concerns regarding oncological safety. International collaborative research is required to demonstrate noninferiority.

REGISTRATION NO

CRD42021245101.

Magnetic Resonance Image under the Low-Rank Matrix Denoising Algorithm in Evaluating the Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemo-Radiotherapy for Rectal Cancer

This study was to explore the application value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images obtained by low-rank matrix recovery algorithm (LRMR algorithm) in evaluating the curative effect of rectal cancer patients receiving the neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy (nCRT). In this study, an image denoising model was designed based on the LRMR algorithm, the original low-rank data matrix was recovered from the error, and the low-rank matrix was restored by solving the optimal kernel norm, so as to effectively separate the image data information and the interference noise. In addition, the model was applied to 60 patients with rectal cancer who received nCRT to extract the texture parameters and lesion-related data from the MRI images. The results showed that the MRI images optimized by LRMR algorithm were clearer than the original images, contained less excess noise, and had improved imaging accuracy and image quality. The results of typical cases suggested that the front of the rectal wall membrane of a patient in the T-downstage group was not smooth before treatment, the internal angiography was blurred, and the wall membrane was thickened, but the wall membrane became thinner after treatment, the highest position was reduced from 1.46 cm to 0.38 cm, the average value of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) increased from 0.732 × 10−3 mm2/s to 1.196 × 10−3 mm2/s, and the lesion tissue was thicker. It was found that the height, length, and ADC of the lesion after the nCRT showed statistically great difference in contrast to the values before the treatment $\left(P<0.05\right)$ . Such results indicated that the nCRT showed obvious effects in the clinical treatment of rectal cancer. In short, the LRMR algorithm could remove the interference noise in the MRI image, and from the information about rectal cancer tumor lesions extracted from that, the height value and length value of tumor lesions in patients given neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy were reduced compared with those before treatment, and the apparent diffusion coefficient value was increased, indicating that neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy has a significant effect in the clinical treatment of rectal cancer.

Transanal total mesorectal excision: short- and long-term results of the first hundred cases of a certified colorectal cancer center in Germany

BACKGROUND

Since 2010, laparoscopic transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has been increasingly used for low and very low rectal cancer. It is supposed to improve visibility and access to the dissection planes in the pelvis. This study reports on short- and long-term outcomes of the first 100 consecutive patients treated with TaTME in a certified German colorectal cancer center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were derived from digital patient files and official cancer registry reports for patients with TaTME tumor surgery between July 2014 and January 2020. The primary outcome was the 3-year local recurrence rate and local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OAS), disease-free survival (DFS), operation time, completeness of local tumor resection, lymph node resection, and postoperative complications. The Kaplan-Meier method was employed for the survival analyses; competing risks were considered in the time-to-event analysis.

RESULTS

During the observation period, the average annual operation time decreased from 272 to 178 min. Complete local tumor resection was achieved in 97% of the procedures. Major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo 3-4) occurred in 11% of the cases. At a median follow-up time of 2.7 years, three patients had suffered from a local recurrence. Considering competing risks, this corresponds to a 3-year cumulative incidence rate for local recurrence of 2.2% and a 3-year LRFS of 81.9%. 3-year OAS was 82.9%, and 3-year DFS was 75.7%.

CONCLUSION

TaTME is associated with favorable short and long-term outcomes. Since it is technically demanding, structured training programs and more research on the topic are indispensable.

Prognostic implications of surgical specimen quality on the oncological outcomes of open and laparoscopic surgery in mid and low rectal cancer

Purpose

Determine differences in pathologic outcomes between laparoscopic (LAP) and open surgery (OPEN) for mid and low rectal cancer and its influence in long-term oncological outcomes.

Methods

Retrospective case matched study at a tertiary institution. Adults with rectal cancer below 12 cm from the anal verge operated between January 2005 and September 2018 were included. Primary outcomes were quality of specimen, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence (LR).

Results

The study included 311 patients, LAP = 108 (34.7%), OPEN = 203 (65,3%). A successful resection was accomplished in 81% of the LAP group and in 84.5% of the OPEN (p = 0.505). No differences in free distal margin (LAP = 100%, OPEN = 97.5%; p = 0.156) or circumferential resection margin (LAP = 95.2%, OPEN = 93.2%; p = 0.603) were observed. However, mesorectum quality was incomplete in 16.2% for LAP and in 8.1% for OPEN (p = 0.048). OS was 91.1% for LAP and 81.1% for OPEN (p = 0.360). DFS was 81.4% for LAP and 77.5% for OPEN (p = 0.923). Overall, LR was 2.3% without differences between groups.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic approach could affect the quality of surgical specimen due to technical aspects. However, if principles of surgical oncology are respected, minor pathologic differences in the quality of the mesorectum may not influence on the long-term oncologic outcomes.

Improved perioperative outcomes and reduced inflammatory stress response in malignant robot-assisted colorectal resections: a retrospective cohort study of 298 patients

Background

Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly implemented for the resection of colorectal cancer, although the scientific evidence for adopting this technique is still limited. This study’s main objective was to compare short-term complication rates, oncological outcomes, and the inflammatory stress response after colorectal resection for cancer performed laparoscopic or robot-assisted.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing the robot-assisted approach to laparoscopic surgery for elective malignant colorectal neoplasm. Certified colorectal and da Vinci ® robotic surgeons performed resections at a Danish tertiary colorectal high volume center from May 2017 to March 2019. We analyzed the two surgical groups using uni- and multivariate regression analyses to detect differences in intra- and postoperative clinical outcomes and the inflammatory stress response.

Results

Two hundred and ninety-eight patients were enrolled in the study. Significant differences favoring robot-assisted surgery was demonstrated for; length of hospital stay (4 days, interquartile range (4, 5) versus 5 days, interquartile range (4–7), p < 0.001), and intraoperative blood loss (50 mL, interquartile range (20–100) versus 100 mL, interquartile range (50–150), p < 0.001) compared to laparoscopic surgery. The inflammatory stress response was significantly higher after laparoscopic compared to robot-assisted surgery reflected by an increase in C-reactive protein concentration (exponentiated coefficient = 1.23, 95% confidence interval (1.06–1.46), p = 0.008). No differences between the two groups were found concerning mortality, microradical resection rate, conversion to open surgery, and surgical or medical short-term complication rates.

Conclusion

Robot-assisted surgery is feasible and can be safely implemented for colorectal resections. The robot-assisted approach, when compared to laparoscopic surgery, was associated with improved intra- and postoperative outcomes. Extensive prospective studies are needed to determine the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer.

Comparison of Survival between Single-Access and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer

Introduction

Innovative laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer can be classified into 2 types: firstly, new instruments such as robotic surgery and secondly, new technique such as single-access laparoscopic surgery (SALS) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME). Most reports of SALS for rectal cancer have shown pathologic outcomes comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS); however, SALS is considered to be superior to CLS in terms of lower levels of discomfort and faster recovery rates. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes of the two approaches.

Methods

From 2011 to 2014, 84 cases of adenocarcinoma of the rectum and anal canal were enrolled. The operations were anterior, low anterior, intersphincteric, and abdominoperineal resections. Data collected included postoperative outcomes. The oncological outcomes recorded included 3-year and 5-year survival, local recurrence, and metastasis.

Results

SALS was performed on 41 patients, and CLS was utilized in 43 cases. The demographic data of the two groups were similar. Intraoperative volumes of blood loss and conversion rates were similar, but operative time was longer in the SALS group. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications or pathological outcomes. The oncologic results were similar in terms of 3-year survival (100% and 97.7%; p = 1.00), 5-year survival (78.0% and 86.0%; p = 0.401), local recurrence rates (19.5% vs 11.6%, p = 0.376), and metastasis rates (19.5% vs 11.6%; p = 0.376) for SALS and CLS, respectively.

Conclusion

SALS and CLS for rectal and anal cancer had comparable pathological and survival results, but SALS showed some superior benefits in the early postoperative period.

Laparoscopic vs open colorectal surgery: Economic and clinical outcomes in the Brazilian healthcare

Laparoscopic surgery has become the preferred surgical approach of several colorectal conditions. However, the economic results of this are quite controversial. The degree of adoption of laparoscopic technology, as well as the aptitude of the surgeons, can have an influence not only in the clinical outcomes but also in the total procedure cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgeries, compared to open procedures in Brazil.All patients who underwent elective colorectal surgeries between January 2012 and December 2013 were eligible to the retrospective cohort. The considered follow-up period was within 30 days from the index procedure. The outcomes evaluated were the length of stay, blood transfusion, intensive care unit admission, in-hospital mortality, use of antibiotics, the development of anastomotic leakage, readmission, and the total hospital costs including re-admissions.Two hundred eighty patients, who met the eligibility criteria, were included in the analysis. Patients in the laparoscopic group had a shorter length of stay in comparison with the open group (6.02 ± 3.86 vs 9.86 ± 16.27, P < .001). There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. The total costs were similar between the 2 groups, in the multivariate analysis (generalized linear model ratio of means 1.20, P = .074). The cost predictors were the cancer diagnosis and age.Laparoscopic colorectal surgery presents a 17% decrease in the duration of the hospital stay without increasing the total hospitalization costs. The factors associated with increased hospital costs were age and the diagnosis of cancer.

Standardised approach to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective multi-centre analysis

PURPOSE

Two non-inferiority randomised control trials have questioned the utility of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer by failing to prove that pathological markers of high-quality surgery are equivalent to those achieved by open technique. We present short- and long-term post-operative outcomes from the largest single surgeon series of consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer. We describe the standardised laparoscopic technique developed by the principal surgeon, and the short-term outcomes from three surgeons who were trained in and subsequently adopted the same approach.

METHODS

Prospectively acquired data from consecutive patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer by the principal surgeon at the minimally invasive colorectal unit in Portsmouth between 2006 and 2014 were analysed along with data acquired between 2010 and 2017 from surgeons at three further international centres. Endpoints were overall and disease-free survival at 5 years, and early post-operative clinical and pathological outcomes.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-three consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic TME surgery by the principal surgeon. At 5 years, overall survival was 82.9% (Dukes' A = 94.4%; B = 81.6%; C = 73.7%); disease-free survival was 84.0% (Dukes' A = 93.3%; B = 86.8%; C = 72.6%). Post-operative length of stay, lymph node harvest, mean operating time, rate of conversion, major morbidity and 30-day mortality were not significantly different between the principal surgeon and those he had trained when subsequently in independent practices.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic TME produces excellent long-term survival outcomes for patients with rectal cancer. A standardised approach has the potential to improve outcomes by setting benchmarks for surgical quality, and providing a step-by-step method for surgical training.

Laparoscopic and open surgery in rectal cancer patients in Germany: short and long-term results of a large 10-year population-based cohort

Background

Rectal cancer is frequent in Germany and worldwide. Several studies have assessed laparoscopic surgery as a treatment option and most have shown favorable results. However, long-term oncologic safety remains a controversial issue.

Methods

The current dataset derives from 30 clinical cancer registries in Germany and includes 16,378 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between 2007 and 2016. Outcomes were 90-day mortality, overall survival (OS), local recurrence-free survival (RFS) and relative survival of patients treated with either open or laparoscopic surgery. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate factors that affected the probability of a patient undergoing laparoscopic surgery as well as to evaluate short-term mortality. OS and RFS were analyzed by Kaplan–Meier plots and multivariable Cox regression conducted separately for UICC stages I–III, tumor location, and sex as well as by propensity score matching followed by univariable and multivariable survival analysis.

Results

Of 16,378 patients, 4540 (27.7%) underwent laparoscopic surgery, a trend which increased during the observation period. Patients undergoing laparoscopy attained better results for 90-day mortality (odds ratio, OR 0.658, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.526–0.822). The 5-year OS rate in the laparoscopic group was 82.6%, vs. 76.6% in the open surgery group, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.819 in multivariable Cox regression (95% CI 0.747–0.899, p < 0.001). The laparoscopic group showed a better 5-year RFS, with 81.8 vs. 74.3% and HR 0.770 (95% CI 0.705–0.842, p < 0.001). The 5-year relative survival rates were also in favor of laparoscopy, with 93.1 vs. 88.4% (p = 0.012).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer can be performed safely and, according to this study, is associated with an oncological outcome superior to that of the open procedure. Therefore, in the absence of individual contraindications, it should be considered as a standard approach.

Laparoscopic and open resection of rectal cancer-is age an effect modifier for short- and long-term survival?

INTRODUCTION

Rectal cancer is a frequently diagnosed tumor worldwide. Various studies have shown the noninferiority or even slight superiority of laparoscopic resection. However, there is no clear recommendation on whether age should influence the choice of surgical approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study compared outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery in rectal cancer patients. Perioperative mortality and 5-year overall, relative, and recurrence-free survival rates were analyzed separately for three age groups. Data originate from 30 regional German cancer registries that cover approximately one quarter of the German population. All primary nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma cases with surgery between 2005 and 2014 were eligible for inclusion. To compare survival rates, Kaplan-Meier analysis, a relative survival model, and multivariable Cox regression were used; a sensitivity analysis assessed bias by exclusion.

RESULTS

Ten thousand seven hundred fifty-four patients were included in the analysis. The mean laparoscopy rate was 23.0% and increased over time. Analysis of 30-day postoperative mortality rates revealed advantages for laparoscopically treated patients, although the significance level was not reached in any age group. Regarding 5-year overall survival, laparoscopy generally seems to be the superior approach, whereas for recurrence-free survival, an age-dependent gradient in effect size was observed: with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.703 for laparoscopy, patients under 60 years benefitted more from the minimally invasive approach than older patients (septuagenarians, HR 0.923).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy shows similar results to the open approach in terms of postoperative survival in all age groups. Concerning long-term outcomes, younger patients benefitted most from the minimally invasive approach.

A propensity-score-matched analysis of laparoscopic vs open surgery for rectal cancer in a population-based study

AIM

The oncological risk/benefit trade-off for laparoscopy in rectal cancer is controversial. Our aim was to compare laparoscopic vs open surgery for resection of rectal cancer, using unselected data from the public healthcare system of Catalonia (Spain).

METHODS

This was a multicentre retrospective cohort study of all patients who had surgery with curative intent for primary rectal cancer at Catalonian public hospitals from 2011 to 2012. We obtained follow-up data for up to 5 years. To minimize the differences between the two groups, we performed propensity score matching on baseline patient characteristics. We used multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses to assess locoregional relapse at 2 years and death at 2 and 5 years.

RESULTS

Of 1513 patients with Stage I-III rectal cancer, 933 (61.7%) had laparoscopy (conversion rate 13.2%). After applying our propensity score matching strategy (2:1), 842 laparoscopy patients were matched to 517 open surgery patients. Multivariate Cox analysis of death at 2 years [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65, 95% CI 0.48, 0.87; P = 0.004] and 5 years (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.5, 0.75; P < 0.001) and of local relapse at 2 years (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27, 0.72; P = 0.001) showed laparoscopy to be an independent protective factor compared with open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy results in lower locoregional relapse and long-term mortality in rectal cancer in unselected patients with all-risk groups included. Studies using long-term follow-up of cohorts and unselected data can provide information on clinically relevant outcomes to supplement randomized controlled trials.