Results of laparoscopically assisted colon resection for carcinoma

Laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer: comparable to conventional oncologic surgery?

As a result of the obvious benefits of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, minimally invasive techniques have been applied to more complex gastrointestinal procedures, including colorectal resections. The goal in adapting laparoscopic techniques for colorectal surgery is to offer an operation that results in less pain, shorter hospital stay, more rapid return to normal activities, and improved cosmesis compared with conventional operation. The challenge has been to show that this can be done safely and efficiently and that for cancer patients there is no detrimental oncologic effect. The major issues that have been and continue to be addressed are (1) whether an adequate resection can be performed laparoscopically, (2) whether there is a high rate of wound or port site recurrence following these operations, and (3) whether, by using these techniques, we are trading short-term benefits for a poor long-term oncologic outcome. To answer these fundamental questions, several prospective randomized trials have been conducted and several more are under way. The results of these trials indicate that, in terms of cancer outcome, there is no difference in overall survival, disease-free survival, and wound recurrences in patients treated using laparoscopic techniques compared with conventional operation. In addition, there are short-term benefits associated with the use of these techniques. It can now be said that from an oncologic standpoint, in experienced hands, laparoscopic colectomy for curable colon cancer is equivalent to conventional therapy, and it is superior to conventional operation regarding short-term outcomes. Laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer should be offered to appropriately selected patients.

Laparoscopic colon resection for cancer

LAC has become an acceptable alternative in the treatment of colon carcinoma. New data should elucidate better the potential advantages in postoperative recovery, QOL, and cost reduction. Appropriate credentialing for LAC remains essential for widespread application of LAC while preserving patient safety.

Laparoscopic colon surgery: past, present and future

Since its first described case in 1991, laparoscopic colon surgery has lagged behind minimally invasive surgical methods for solid intra-abdominal organs in terms of acceptability, dissemination, and ease of learning. In colon cancer, initial concerns over port site metastases and adequacy of oncologic resection have considerably dampened early enthusiasm for this procedure. Only recently, with the publication of several large, randomized controlled trials, has the incidence of port site metastases been shown to be equivalent to that of open resection. Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer has also been demonstrated to be at least equivalent to traditional laparotomy in terms of adequacy of oncologic resection, disease recurrence, and long-term survival. In addition, numerous reports have validated short-term benefits following laparoscopic resection for cancer, including shorter hospital stay, shorter time to recovery of bowel function, and decreased analgesic requirements, as well as other postoperative variables. In benign colonic disease, much less high-quality literature exists supporting the use of laparoscopic methods. Two recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated some short-term benefits to laparoscopic ileocolic resection for CD, in addition to evident cosmetic advantages. On the other hand, the current evidence on laparoscopic surgery for UC does not support its routine use among nonexpert surgeons outside of specialized centers. Laparoscopic colonic resection for diverticular disease appears to provide several short-term benefits, although these advantages may not translate to cases of complicated diverticulitis. Despite the increasing acceptability of minimally invasive methods for the management of benign and malignant colonic pathologies, laparoscopic colon resection remains a prohibitively difficult technique to master. Numerous technological innovations have been introduced onto the market in an effort to decrease the steep learning curve associated with laparoscopic colon surgery. Good evidence exists supporting the use of second-generation, sleeveless, hand-assist devices in this context. Similarly, new hemostatic devices such as the ultrasonic scalpel and the electrothermal bipolar vessel sealer may be particularly helpful for extensive colonic mobilizations, in which several vascular pedicles must be taken. The precise role of these hemostatic technologies has yet to be established, particularly in comparison with stapling devices and significantly cheaper laparoscopic clips. Finally, recent advances in camera systems are promising to improve the ease with which difficult colonic dissections can be performed.

Minimally invasive treatment of colon cancer

The advantages of laparoscopy in the treatment of benign diseases have been well demonstrated. Compared with laparotomy, the laparoscopic approach is associated with a shorter hospitalization period, shorter duration of ileus, decreased postoperative pain, earlier return to work, and improved cosmesis. The role of laparoscopy for the treatment of gastrointestinal malignancy has had a slower evolution and been the subject of considerable debate over the past decade. Since 1991, several concerns have limited the widespread use of laparoscopy for attempted cure of colorectal carcinoma. This review aims to analyze the results of several studies published to date on short and long term outcome of laparoscopy for colorectal carcinoma, based on levels of evidence. From the least to the most convincing data, the hierarchy of study designs progresses through a spectrum ranging from retrospective reviews to prospective series, to case-controlled, cohort, and ultimately randomized controlled trials.

Technique and survival after laparoscopically assisted right hemicolectomy

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic colon resection in the management of colon cancer is still controversial. In this article, the surgical strategy and techniques are described, with further consideration of the oncologically relevant aspects.

METHODS

Between March 1993 and July 2003, we performed laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in 56 patients with right colon carcinoma. Average age was 74.5 years (range, 17-92). We performed a standardized surgical procedure that included mobilization from the vascularized mesenteric bridges with a window technique, transection of the ileocolic lymphovascular pedicle, and lateral and proximal mobilization of the ileocecum, ascending colon, right flexure, and proximale transversum. After enlargement of one of the trocar incisions the exteriorized colon was resected and an extracorporeal anastomosis was performed in the standard manner.

RESULTS

There were no conversions to open. The mean operating time was 119 +/- 38 min, the mean length of resected colon was 27.8 +/- 4.48 cm, and the average width of the clear margins was 6.8 +/- 5.3 cm. One patient died. Lymph nodes were positive in 21 patients. The 5-year survival rate in the 48 patients who were operated on with curative intent was 75%. We have had two local recurrences. The overall 5-year mortality-free fraction was 63%. Cox multivariate analysis showed that the mortality-prognostic factors were tumor stage and length of resected colon, whereas Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the mortality-prognostic factors were positive lymph nodes and tumor stage.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer can be performed safely. Complications and recurrence rates are comparable to those for left-sided laparoscopic and open procedures. Therefore, we recommend this procedure as the method of choice. Laparoscopically treated patients with stage II and stage III disease have almost the same cumulative rate of survival.

Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer

Acceptance of laparoscopy for the management of oncological disease has been slow due to the increased complexity of the technique, requirement of technological advances, and fears for the oncological safety of the approach. Laparoscopic oncological surgery has a role in the management of oncological patients at all stages of disease. Good evidence exists for the laparoscopic approach being a viable option for colon cancer patients. Current large multicenter trials will report the true outcomes of laparoscopic colon cancer surgery and how it compares with open surgery. This article examines some of the parameters by which laparoscopic colectomy will be judged.

Laparoscopic TME: better vision, better results?

One of the most controversial discussions on laparoscopic surgery deals with the question of whether to apply this technique to malignant disease and specifically to rectal cancer. The four major issues are the adequacy of oncologic resection, recurrence rates and patterns, long-term survival and quality of life. There is evidence, from nonrandomized studies, suggesting that margins of excision and lymph node harvest achieved laparoscopically reached comparable results to those known from conventional open resection. Our own experience of laparoscopic surgery on rectal cancer is based on 52 patients treated with curative intent. Focusing on the postoperative long-term run, we gained the following results: The median age of patients was 66.7 years and ranged from 42-88. Anastomotic leakage was seen in 6.1% of cases. In a median follow-up of 48 months (36-136), we reached an overall 3-year survival rate of 93% and a 5-year survival rate of 62%. Local recurrence was 1.9%, distant metastasis occurred in 11.5% of cases. We saw no port-site metastasis. To evaluate functional results following laparoscopic surgery a matched pair analysis was carried out. Matching of patients after laparoscopic and conventional open surgery was performed according to sex, age, type of resection, time period of surgery, and stage of disease classified by UICC. Regarding bladder and sexual dysfunction, using the EORTC QLQ CR38 score we found no statistical significant difference between the examined groups. As far as can be seen, laparoscopic surgery in rectal carcinoma may achieve the same or, in selected patients, even better results than open surgery. However, at present no published study has shown much evidence. Many more studies are necessary to define the place of laparoscopic technique in rectal cancer surgery, regarding appropriate selection of patients and evaluating adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment in combination with the laparoscopic approach.

Laparoscopy as a prognostic factor in curative resection for node positive colorectal cancer: results for a single-institution nonrandomized prospective trial

BACKGROUND

Several studies reporting preliminary long-term survival data after laparoscopic resections for colonic adenocarcinoma did not show any detrimental effect in comparison with historic studies of laparotomies. A previous randomized study has reported an unforeseen better long-term survival for node-positive patients treated by laparoscopic colectomy.

METHODS

A single-institution prospective nonrandomized trial compared short- and long-term results of laparoscopic and open curative resection for adenocarcinoma of the left colon or rectum in 255 consecutive patients from January 1996 to December 2000.

RESULTS

In this study, 34 left hemicolectomy, 202 anterior resections, and 19 abdominoperineal resections were performed. A total of 74 patients underwent a laparoscopic resection (LR), and 181, an open resection (OR). The tumor site was the descending colon in 32 cases, the sigmoid colon in 98 cases, and the rectum in 125 cases, including 87 mid-low rectal cancers. Ten LR procedures (13.5%) were converted to open surgery. The hospital mortality was 0.08%, and in hospital morbidity was 16.2% for LR and 13.3% for OR (p = 0.56). The median postoperative stay was 1 day shorter for LR (9 days) than for OR (10 days) (p = 0.09). The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved were 13.8 +/- 5.7 for OR and 12.7 +/- 5; for LR (p = 0.23). Age exceeding 70 years, T stage, N stage, grading, mid-low rectal site, and laparoscopy were found by multivariate analysis to be significant prognostic factors for disease-free and cancer-related survival. When patients were stratified by stage, a trend toward a better disease-free and cancer-related survival was identified in stage III patients undergoing LR.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colonic resection is a safe procedure in terms of postoperative outcome and long-term survival. Multivariate analysis showed that laparoscopy is a positive prognostic factor for disease-free and cancer-related survival. The current data agrees with the data for the only randomized study reported so far. Both suggest a better outcome for node-positive patients treated by laparoscopy.