Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) can avoid segmental colectomy in endoscopically unremovable colonic polyps: a cohort study over 10 years

Colonoscopy-Assisted Laparoscopic Wedge Resection for Colonic Lesions and Its Impact on Quality of Life: Results From the LIMERIC Study

BACKGROUND

The LIMERIC study has proven that colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection effectively and safely removes benign colonic lesions unsuitable for endoscopic removal, thereby avoiding the need for major surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge on health-related quality of life of patients who participated in the LIMERIC study.

DESIGN

Prospective multicenter study.

SETTINGS

The LIMERIC study was performed between 2016 and 2020 in 13 Dutch hospitals. Five-level EuroQoL 5-dimension questionnaires were administered at baseline and 3 months after the procedure.

PATIENTS

Patients with incomplete pre- or postoperative questionnaires or those undergoing combined interventions were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis. Those for whom CAL-WR was not feasible or who underwent completion surgery were excluded from the per-protocol analysis.

INTERVENTION

Colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge for either 1) colon polyp unsuitable for endoscopic resection; 2) nonlifting residual or recurrent polyp within scar tissue after previous polypectomy; or (3) Rx/R1 endoscopic removal of a low-risk pT1 colon carcinoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Three-month health-related quality of life.

RESULTS

Colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge did not affect health-related quality of life in the per-protocol analysis (n = 56) or in the intention-to-treat analysis (n = 67). The majority of patients reported no change in health status (57%). No significant differences were observed in the distribution of responses across all 5 dimensions before and after colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge. Patients'EuroQoL self-rated visual analog scale scores were also unaffected by a colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge, with a median score of 82.5 at baseline and 80 after surgery in the per-protocol analysis ( p = 0.63).

LIMITATIONS

Solely a patient-reported outcome measure evaluating global health-related quality of life was used, rather than one specifically assessing disease-related quality of life, such as the quality of life questionnaire colorectal cancer module 29.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy-assisted laparoscopic wedge has no significant impact on the health-related quality of life in patients with benign colonic lesions and should therefore be considered before major surgery is performed. See Video Abstract.

RESECCIN LAPAROSCPICA EN CUA ASISTIDA POR COLONOSCOPIA PARA LESIONES COLNICAS IMPACTO EN LA CALIDAD DE VIDA RESULTADOS DEL ESTUDIO LIMERIC

ANTECEDENTES:El estudio LIMERIC ha demostrado que la resección laparoscópica en cuña asistida por colonoscopia elimina de forma eficaz y segura las lesiones colónicas benignas inadecuadas para la extirpación endoscópica, evitando así la necesidad de cirugía mayor.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el impacto de la cuña laparoscópica asistida por colonoscopia en la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud de los pacientes que participaron en el estudio LIMERIC.DISEÑO:Estudio multicéntrico prospectivo.ENTORNO:El estudio LIMERIC se realizó entre 2016 y 2020 en 13 hospitales holandeses. Se administraron cuestionarios EQ-5D-5L al inicio y 3 meses después del procedimiento.PACIENTES:Los pacientes con cuestionarios pre o postoperatorios incompletos o aquellos sometidos a intervenciones combinadas fueron excluidos del análisis por intención de tratar. Aquellos en los que la CAL-WR no era factible o que se sometieron a cirugía de finalización fueron excluidos del análisis por protocolo.INTERVENCIÓN:Cuña laparoscópica asistida por colonoscopia para (1) pólipo de colon no apto para resección endoscópica; (2) pólipo residual o recidivante no elevable dentro de tejido cicatricial tras polipectomía previa; o (3) extirpación endoscópica Rx/R1 de un carcinoma de colon pT1 de bajo riesgo.MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO PRINCIPALES:Calidad de vida relacionada con la salud a los tres meses.RESULTADOS:La cuña laparoscópica asistida por colonoscopia no afectó a la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud en el análisis por protocolo (n = 56), ni en el análisis por intención de tratar (n = 67). La mayoría de los pacientes no informaron ningún cambio en su estado de salud (57%). No se observaron diferencias significativas en la distribución de las respuestas en las 5 dimensiones antes y después de la cuña laparoscópica asistida por colonoscopia. La EQ-VAS autoevaluada de los pacientes tampoco se vio afectada por la cuña laparoscópica asistida por colonoscopia, con una puntuación media de la VAS de 82,5 al inicio y 80 después de la cirugía en el análisis por protocolo (p = 0,63).LIMITACIONES:Se utilizó únicamente una medida de resultados comunicada por el paciente que evaluaba la calidad de vida global relacionada con la salud, en lugar de una que evaluara específicamente la calidad de vida relacionada con la enfermedad, como el QLQ-CR29.CONCLUSIONES:La cuña laparoscópica asistida por colonoscopia no tiene un impacto significativo en la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud en pacientes con lesiones colónicas benignas y, por lo tanto, debe considerarse antes de realizar una cirugía mayor. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez ).

Colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection for colonic neoplasms: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The current literature describes a variety of techniques detailed under the name of combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) procedures. This systematic review of literature assessed the outcomes of colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic-wedge resection (CAL-WR) in particular to evaluate its feasibility to remove colonic lesions that do not qualify for endoscopic resection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane) were searched for studies evaluating CAL-WR for the treatment of colonic lesions. Studies with missing full text, language other than English, systematic reviews, and studies with fewer than ten patients were excluded. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Out of 68 results, duplicate studies (n = 27) as well as studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria (n = 32) were removed. Nine studies were included, encompassing 326 patients who underwent a CAL-WR of the colon. The technical success rate varied from 93 to 100%, with an R0 resection rate of 91-100%. Morbidity ranged from 6% to 20%. The quality of the included studies was rated as low to moderate and contained heterogeneous terminology, methodology, and outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient high-quality data and substantial variation in outcome measures to draw firm conclusions regarding the value of CAL-WR. Although CAL-WR is a promising local resection technique for endoscopically unremovable neoplasms of the colon, further investigation of this technique in well-designed prospective, multicenter studies with predefined outcome measures is required.Trial registration: A protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO with the number CRD42023407966.

Ultra-minimally invasive endoscopic techniques and colorectal diseases: Current status and its future

Colorectal diseases are increasing due to altered lifestyle, genetic, and environmental factors. Colonoscopy plays an important role in diagnosis. Advances in colonoscope (ultrathin scope, magnetic scope, capsule) and technological gadgets (Balloon assisted scope, third eye retroscope, NaviAid G-EYE, dye-based chromoendoscopy, virtual chromoendoscopy, narrow band imaging, i-SCAN, etc.) have made colonoscopy more comfortable and efficient. Now in-vivo microscopy can be performed using confocal laser endomicroscopy, optical coherence tomography, spectroscopy, etc. Besides developments in diagnostic colonoscopy, therapeutic colonoscopy has improved to manage lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding, obstruction, perforations, resection polyps, and early colorectal cancers. The introduction of combined endo-laparoscopic surgery and robotic endoscopic surgery has made these interventions feasible. The role of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and management of colorectal diseases is also increasing day by day. Hence, this article is to review cutting-edge developments in endoscopic principles for the management of colorectal diseases.

Colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection versus segmental colon resection for benign colonic polyps: a comparative cost analysis

AIM

The colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection (CAL-WR) is proven to be an effective and safe alternative to a segmental colon resection (SCR) for large or complex benign colonic polyps that are not eligible for endoscopic removal. This analysis aimed to evaluate the costs of CAL-WR and compare them to the costs of an SCR.

METHOD

A single-centre 90-day 'in-hospital' comparative cost analysis was performed on patients undergoing CAL-WR or SCR for complex benign polyps between 2016 and 2020. The CAL-WR group consisted of 44 patients who participated in a prospective multicentre study (LIMERIC study). Inclusion criteria were (1) endoscopically unresectable benign polyps; (2) residual or recurrence after previous polypectomy; or (3) irradically resected low risk pT1 colon carcinoma. The comparison group, which was retrospectively identified, included 32 patients who underwent an elective SCR in the same period.

RESULTS

Colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection was associated with significantly fewer complications (7% in the CAL-WR group vs. 45% in the SCR group, P < 0.001), shorter operation time (50 min in the CAL-WR group vs. 119 min in the SCR group, P < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (median length of stay 2 days in the CAL-WR group vs. 4 days in the SCR group, P < 0.001) and less use of surgical resources (reduction in costs of 32% per patient), resulting in a cost savings of €2372 (£2099 GBP) per patient (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Given the clinical and financial benefits, CAL-WR should be recommended for complex benign polyps that are not eligible for endoscopic resection before major surgery is considered.

Combined endoscopic and laparoscopic surgery (CELS) for early colon cancer in high-risk patients

BACKGROUND

Local excision of early colon cancers could be an option in selected patients with high risk of complications and no sign of lymph node metastasis (LNM). The primary aim was to assess feasibility in high-risk patients with early colon cancer treated with Combined Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgery (CELS).

METHODS

A non-randomized prospective feasibility study including 25 patients with Performance Status score ≥ 1 and/or American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≥ 3, and clinical Union of International Cancer Control stage-1 colon cancer suitable for CELS resection. The primary outcome was failure of CELS resection, defined as either: Incomplete resection (R1/R2), local recurrence within 3 months, complication related to CELS within 30 days (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3), death within 30 days or death within 90 days due to complications to surgery.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with clinical T1 (cT1) and ten with clinical T2 (cT2) colon cancer and without suspicion of metastases were included. Failure occurred in two patients due to incomplete resections. Histopathological examination classified seven patients as having pT1, nine as pT2, six as pT3 adenocarcinomas, and three as non-invasive tumors. In three patients, the surgical strategy was changed intraoperatively to conventional colectomy due to tumor location or size. Median length of stay was 1 day. Seven patients had completion colectomy performed due to histological high-risk factors. None had LNM.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients, CELS resection was feasible, and could spare some patients large bowel resection.

Combined Endoscopic Robotic Surgery for Complex Colon Polyps

BACKGROUND

Combined endoscopic robotic surgery is a surgical technique that modifies traditional endoscopic laparoscopic surgery with robotic assistance to aid in the removal of complex colonic polyps. This technique has been described in the literature but lacks patient follow-up data.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of combined endoscopic robotic surgery.

DESIGN

A retrospective review of a prospective database.

SETTING

East Jefferson General Hospital, Metairie, Louisiana.

PATIENTS

Ninety-three consecutive patients who underwent combined endoscopic robotic surgery from March 2018 to October 2021 were included in the study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Operative time, intraoperative complication, 30-day postoperative complication, hospital length of stay, and follow-up pathology report results were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Combined endoscopic robotic surgery was completed in 88 of 93 participants (95%). Among the 88 participants who completed combined endoscopic robotic surgery, the average age was 66 years (SD = 10), BMI was 28.8 kg/m 2 (SD = 6), and history of previous abdominal surgeries was 1 (SD = 1). Median operative time was 72 minutes (range, 31-184 minutes) and polyp size was 40 mm (range, 5-180 mm). The most common polyp locations were the cecum, ascending colon, and transverse colon (31%, 28%, 25%). Pathology mainly demonstrated tubular adenoma (76%). Data on 40 patients who underwent follow-up colonoscopy were available. The average follow-up time was 7 months (range, 3-22 months). One patient (2.5%) had polyp recurrence at the resection site.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations for our study include a lack of randomization and follow-up rate to assess for recurrence. The low compliance rate may be due to procedure cancelations/difficulty scheduling because of changing coronavirus disease 2019 guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to literature-reported statistics for its laparoscopic counterpart, combined endoscopic robotic surgery was associated with decreased operation times and resection site polyp recurrence. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C208 .

CIRUGA ROBTICA ENDOSCPICA COMBINADA PARA PLIPOS DE COLON COMPLEJOS

ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada es una técnica quirúrgica que modifica la cirugía laparoscópica endoscópica tradicional con asistencia robótica para ayudar en la extracción de pólipos colónicos complejos. Esta técnica está previamente descrita en la literatura, pero carece de datos de seguimiento de los pacientes.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la seguridad y los resultados de la cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva de una base de datos prospectiva.AJUSTE:Hospital General East Jefferson, Metairie LouisianaPACIENTES:Noventa y tres pacientes consecutivos y sometidos a cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada por un solo cirujano colorrectal desde marzo de 2018 hasta octubre de 2021.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tiempo operatorio, complicación intraoperatoria, complicación posoperatoria a los 30 días, duración de la estancia hospitalaria y resultados del informe patológico de seguimiento.RESULTADOS:La cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada se completó en 88 de 93 (95%). Entre los 88 participantes que completaron la cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada, la edad promedio fue de 66 años (desviación estándar = 10), índice de masa corporal de 28,8 (desviación estándar = 6) y el historial de cirugías abdominales previas de 1 (desviación estándar = 1). La mediana del tiempo operatorio y el tamaño de los pólipos fueron 72 minutos (rango 31-184 minutos) y 40 milímetros (rango 5-180 milímetros), respectivamente. Las ubicaciones de pólipos más comunes fueron el ciego, colon ascendente y transverso (31%, 28%, 25%). La patología demostró principalmente adenoma tubular (76%). Los datos de 40 pacientes sometidos a una colonoscopia de seguimiento estaban disponibles. El tiempo medio de seguimiento fue de 7 meses (rango 3-22 meses). Un paciente (2,5%) presentó recurrencia polipoidea en el sitio de resección.LIMITACIONES:Las limitaciones de nuestro estudio incluyeron la falta de aleatorización y la tasa de seguimiento para evaluar la recurrencia. La baja tasa de seguimiento puede deberse a la renuencia del paciente en hacerse una colonoscopia o cancelaciones de procedimientos por la dificultad para programar debido a cambios de COVID-19.CONCLUSIÓN:En comparación con las estadísticas reportadas en la literatura para su contraparte laparoscópica, la cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada se asoció con reducción en tiempos de operación y recurrencia de pólipos en el sitio de resección. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C208 . (Traducción - Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Colonoscopic-Assisted Laparoscopic Wedge Resection for Colonic Lesions: A Prospective Multicentre Cohort Study (LIMERIC-Study)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The use of segmental colectomy in patients with endoscopically unresectable colonic lesions results in significant morbidity and mortality. CAL-WR is an alternative procedure that may reduce morbidity.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre study was performed in 13 Dutch hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were (1) colonic lesions inaccessible using current endoscopic resection techniques (judged by an expert panel), (2) non-lifting residual/recurrent adenomatous tissue after previous polypectomy or (3) an undetermined resection margin after endoscopic removal of a low-risk pT1 colon carcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, technical success rate and radicality were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 118 patients included (56% male, mean age 66 years, SD ± 8 years), 66 (56%) had complex lesions unsuitable for endoscopic removal, 34 (29%) had non-lifting residual/recurrent adenoma after previous polypectomy and 18 (15%) had uncertain resection margins after polypectomy of a pT1 colon carcinoma. CAL-WR was technically successful in 93% and R0 resection was achieved in 91% of patients. Minor complications (Clavien-Dindo I-II) were noted in 7 patients (6%) and an additional oncologic segmental resection was performed in 12 cases (11%). Residual tissue at the scar was observed in 5% of patients during endoscopic follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

CAL-WR is an effective, organ-preserving approach that results in minor complications and circumvents the need for major surgery. CAL-WR therefore deserves consideration when endoscopic excision of circumscribed lesions is impossible or incomplete.