Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: results from the CLIMHET study group

Minimally Invasive Right Hemicolectomy With Intracorporeal Anastomosis-Eliminating the Painful 12 mm Port Paradox

BackgroundMinimally invasive right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) with relocation of the 12 mm port to the Pfannenstiel specimen incision is associated with reduced length of stay and postoperative ileus while preserving surgical and oncologic outcomes when compared to extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA).MethodsAn institutional review board (IRB)-approved retrospective review was conducted at a single center for all patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic right hemicolectomy from 2015 to 2023. The 12 mm port for anastomosis stapler was placed in the planned Pfannenstiel specimen extraction site in all patients undergoing ICA.Results112 patients underwent minimally invasive right hemicolectomy (33 laparoscopic ECA, 1 robotic ECA, 51 laparoscopic ICA, 27 robotic ICA). Median operative times for ECA vs ICA were 149.8 and 183.1 minutes, respectively (P < .01). The median length of stay was shorter for ICA (2 vs 3 days, P < .01). Postoperative ileus was greater in the ECA group (8.8% vs 2.6%, P = .140). Hospital readmissions were higher in the ECA group (3 vs 1, P = .048). The rate of no evidence of disease at time of last oncology follow-up was in the ECA group (93.6%) vs in the ICA group (98.5%), P = .092. Recurrence rate was not significantly different when comparing the ECA group vs the ICA group (6.45% vs 4.55%, P = .708).DiscussionMinimally invasive right hemicolectomy with ICA is associated with a lower rate of postoperative ileus and shorter length of stay. Relocating the 12-mm port for the bowel stapler to the Pfannenstiel extraction site eliminates the painful 12-mm port paradox.

Short-term outcomes for intracorporeal vs. extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colonic cancer-a prospective cohort study (ICEA-study)

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare short-term outcomes and 1-year incisional hernia rates between intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for management of right-sided colonic cancer. The primary outcome was the complication rate assessed by the comprehensive complication index (CCI). Secondary outcomes included time to bowel movement, length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission rate, early warning scores, and 1-year incisional hernia rate.

METHOD

This was a single-center, prospective cohort study. Patients with right-sided colonic cancer eligible for laparoscopic surgery with primary anastomosis were consecutively included. Patients included in the first period underwent EA, while those in the second underwent IA. Clinical data were collected during the hospital admission up to 30 days postoperatively. Complications were evaluated by the CCI. A routine 1-year CT-scan was used to assess hernias.

RESULTS

One hundred three patients (51 in the EA and 52 in the IA groups) were included. Demographics were similar between the two groups. No significant difference in the CCI-score was found (EA: 17.9 (23.9) vs. IA: 15.0 (17.4), p = 0.85). The mean length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the IA group (EA 6.6 days, IA 3.9 days, p = 0.02). The groups had no significant differences regarding other outcomes, including hernia rates (p = 0.12).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with IA significantly reduced the length of hospital stay without increasing complication rates compared to EA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05039762).

Short-term outcomes of extracorporeal versus intracorporeal side-to-side anastomosis after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer: an affiliated study of a multicenter snapshot study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (RHC) is the primary surgical approach for right-sided colon cancer. Different ileo-colonic anastomosis techniques may lead to varied postoperative outcomes. This study aims to compare intracorporeal versus extracorporeal side-to-side anastomosis post laparoscopic RHC for short-term outcomes in right-sided colon cancer patients.

METHODS

This prospective, multicenter, cohort study utilized 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) and inverse propensity of treatment weighting (IPTW) to address baseline imbalances. The primary endpoint was the incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) within 30 days postoperatively, with its definition, diagnosis, and grading criteria standardized according to a published study.

RESULTS

A total of 1028 eligible patients were analyzed, with 316 in the intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) group and 712 in the extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) group. After both PSM and IPTW, all 17 covariates were balanced between groups. No statistically significant difference in AL incidence was found between the two groups (before matching, 1.8% in EA and 1.6% in IA, P = 0.78; PSM, 1.3% in EA and 1.6% in IA, P = 0.74; IPTW, 1.9% in EA and 1.6% in IA, P = 0.76). However, peak C-reactive protein levels within 3 days postoperatively were higher in the EA group (before matching, P < 0.001; PSM, P < 0.001; IPTW, P = 0.003). Patients in the IA group had earlier postoperative defecation (before matching, P = 0.01; PSM, P < 0.001) and a shorter total hospital stay (before matching, P = 0.01; IPTW, P = 0.046). Post-PSM analysis showed earlier flatus in the IA group (P = 0.03), while post-IPTW analysis indicated later postoperative eating resumption in the IA group (P = 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Intracorporeal anastomosis during laparoscopic RHC for right-sided colon cancer does not increase the incidence of AL or other short-term complications. Furthermore, it facilitates postoperative bowel function recovery.

European multicentre analysis of the implementation of robotic complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon tumours

AIM

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is an oncologically driven technique for treating right colon cancer. While laparoscopic CME is technically demanding and has been associated with more complications, the robotic approach might reduce morbidity. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of stepwise implementation of robotic CME.

METHOD

A multicentre retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on robotic right colectomy was performed at five European tertiary centres. Patients were classified for type of surgery: R-RHC (standard right colectomy), R-impCME (learning cases towards robotic CME defined as R-RHC with one but not all the hallmarks of CME) or R-CME (robotic CME). Primary outcomes were overall and severe 30-day complication rates before and after propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

Five hundred and fifty-one consecutive patients undergoing robotic surgery for (pre)malignant lesions of the right colon between 2010 and 2020 were included: R-RHC (n = 101), R-impCME (n = 135) and R-CME (n = 315). Baseline characteristics differed for American Society of Anesthesiologists score (p = 0.0012) and preoperative diagnosis of adenocarcinoma (p < 0.001). Procedure time increased by surgical complexity (p < 0.001). Vascular event rates did not differ, with no superior mesenteric vein injuries. Conversion, complication and anastomotic leak rates, time to flatus/soft diet and length of stay (LOS) did not differ. While R-RHC was performed for a lower rate of malignancies (p < 0.001), lymph node yield was significantly higher in R-CME (p < 0.001). After PSM, analyses on 186 patients documented no differences in overall and severe 30-day complication rate, conversion rate, LOS or 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

R-CME can be implemented without increasing the overall or 30-day severe complication rate.

Laparoscopic assisted colectomy versus laparoscopic complete colectomy: a cost analysis

To compare the short-term outcomes and explore the potential economic benefits of laparoscopic-assisted colectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis (LAC/EA) vs. laparoscopic complete colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (LCC/IA) for patients with non-metastatic resectable colon cancer. Data of patients who underwent laparoscopic hemicolectomy from January 2017 to March 2023 were collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) analyses was carried out to minimize the selection bias. Before PSM, a total of 113 patients met the inclusion criteria (39 in the LCC/IA vs. 74 in the LAC/EA). Clinicopathologic characteristics were comparable except for the median number of removed lymph nodes (P = 0.023). LCC/IA was associated with longer operative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter incision length. The rate of 30-day postoperative complications was similar, but the time to first flatus and soft diet was shorter in the LCC/IA. No deaths were reported in either group within 30 days after surgery. Costs of surgical instruments (25,945.8 ± 1,918.0 vs. 23,551.9 ± 2,665.5 RMB; P < 0.01) were higher for the LCC/IA but overall costs were similar (LCC/IA, 43,220.0 ± 4,954.0 vs. LAC/EA, 41,269.2 ± 6,685.9 RMB; P = 0.112). After PSM, 38 patients in the LCC/IA and 63 patients in the LAC/EA were compared. LCC/IA was superior in terms of intraoperative blood loss, incision length, and postoperative functional recovery. There was an extra charge of 2385.0 RMB regarding surgical instruments in the LCC/IA but the overall cost did not reach statistical significance. LCC/IA is a feasible, safe, and cost-effective surgical treatment for patients with non-metastatic resectable colon cancer.

Clinical Outcomes after Intracorporeal versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy for Colon Cancer

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRHC) is commonly performed for patients with colon cancer, selecting between intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) or extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). However, the impact of ICA versus ECA on patient outcomes remains debatable. The varying levels of experience among surgeons may influence the outcomes. Therefore, this study sought to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of LRHC using ICA versus ECA. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study extracted patient data from the medical records database of Changhua Christian Hospital, Taiwan, from 2017 to 2020. Patients with colon cancer who underwent LRHC with either ICA or ECA were included. Primary outcomes were post-surgical outcomes and secondary outcomes were recurrence rate, overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Between-group differences were compared using chi-square, t-tests, and Fisher's exact tests and Mann-Whitney U tests. Associations between study variables, OS, and CSS were determined using Cox analyses. Results: Data of 240 patients (61 of ICA and 179 of ECA) with a mean age of 65.0 years and median follow-up of 49.3 months were collected. No recognized difference was found in patient characteristics between these two groups. The ICA group had a significantly shorter operation duration (median (IQR): 120 (110-155) vs. 150 (130-180) min) and less blood loss (median (IQR): 30 (10-30) vs. 30 (30-50) mL) than the ECA group (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found in 30-day readmission (ICA vs. ECA: 1.6% vs. 2.2%, p > 0.999) or recurrence (18.0% vs. 13.4%, p = 0.377) between the two groups. Multivariable analyses revealed no significant differences in OS (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-1.44) or CSS (adjusted sub-hazard ratio (aSHR): 0.41, 95% CI: 0.10-1.66) between groups. Conclusions: Both ICA and ECA in LRHC for colon cancer had similar outcomes without statistically significant differences in post-surgical complications, 30-day readmission rates, recurrence rate, and long-term survival outcomes. However, ICA may offer two advantages in terms of a shorter operative duration and reduced blood loss.

Short-term outcome of intracorporeal ileocolonic anastomosis in patients with visceral obesity

The primary objective of this study was to compare short-term outcomes between Intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis (IIA) and extracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis (EIA) after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in patients with visceral obesity. The secondary objective was to identify risk factors associated with prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. This single-center retrospective study analyzed visceral obesity patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for primary bowel cancer between January 2020 and June 2023. Patients were categorized into IIA and EIA groups based on the type of anastomosis, and a 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was performed. A total of 129 patients were initially included in this study, with 45 patients in each group following propensity score matching. The IIA group had significantly longer anastomosis times (p < 0.001), shorter incision length (p < 0.001), and shorter length of stay (p = 0.003) than the EIA group. Meanwhile, the IIA group showed a shorter time to first flatus (p = 0.044) and quicker tolerance of a solid diet (p = 0.030). On multivariate analysis, postoperative use of opioid analgesics is an independent risk factor for PPOI (OR: 3.590 95% CI 1.033-12.477, p = 0.044), while IIA is an independent protective factor (OR: 0.195 95% CI 0.045-0.843, p = 0.029). IIA remains a safe and feasible option for visceral obesity patients. It is also associated with a quicker recovery of bowel function and shorter length of stay when compared to EIA. Additionally, IIA is an independent protective factor for PPOI.

Comparison of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: an updated meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

This meta-analysis was conducted to provide updated evidence regarding perioperative safety and efficacy, of IC and EC anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomies. In this study, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines were applied. The study protocol received a PROSPERO registration (CRD42020214596). A systematic literature search of the electronic scholar databases (Medline, Web of Science and Scopus) was performed. To reduce type I error, a trial sequential analysis (TSA) algorithm was introduced. The quality of evidence was evaluated based on the GRADE methodology. In total, 46 studies were included in this meta-analysis, Pooled comparisons and TSA confirmed that IC is superior in terms of incisional hernia (0.29; 95%CI: 0.19, 0.44), open conversion (0.45; 95%CI: 0.30, 0.67), reoperation (0.62; 95%CI: 0.46, 0.84]), LOS (- 0.76; 95%CI: - 1.03, - 0.49), blood loss (- 11.50; 95%CI: - 18.42, - 4.58), and cosmesis (- 1.71; 95%CI: - 2.01, - 1.42). Postoperative pain and return of bowel function were, also, shortened when the anastomosis was fashioned intracorporeally. The grading of most evidence ranged from 'low' to 'high'. Due to the discrepancy in the results of RCTs and non-RCTs, and the proportionally smaller sample size of the former, further randomized trials are required to increase the evidence of this comparison.

Intracorporeal Anastomosis and ERAS Program: The Winning Combination of Optimized Postoperative Outcomes After Laparoscopic Right Colectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic technique and the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol have become the standard of care in patients undergoing right colon cancer surgery, reducing hospital stay and postoperative morbidity. However, the optimal anastomosis technique [intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) or extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA)] remains debated. This study aimed to determine the optimal perioperative approach (ICA vs. ECA combined with the ERAS program vs. standard care) for patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy for cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This single-center, retrospective study evaluated all consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer between January 2012 and June 2021. Patient data were analyzed in 4 treatment groups according to the type of anastomosis and the care protocol. The primary endpoint was total postoperative hospital stay (THS). The secondary endpoints were recovery time and overall morbidity rate.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of the 373 included patients were comparable between the 4 groups. THS was significantly shorter in the ICA/ERAS group than in the ECA/standard and ICA/standard groups ( P <0.01), but there was no significant difference between the ICA/ERAS and ECA/ERAS groups (5.7 vs. 6.4 d; P =0.17). Recovery time was significantly shorter in the ICA/ERAS group ( P <0.01). The overall morbidity rate, including anastomotic morbidity, was comparable among the 4 groups. Regression analysis showed that ICA and the ERAS program were both predictive factors to reduce the THS and recovery time.

CONCLUSIONS

ICA combined with the ERAS program achieves the best outcomes and thus seems to be the optimal approach for the management of patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy for cancer.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The surgical procedure for laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) is not standardized. Some published studies show the superiority of ileocolic anastomosis (IIA), but the evidence so far is insufficient. This study aimed to investigate the potential advantages in postoperative recovery and safety of IIA in LRC.

METHODS

A total of 114 patients who underwent LRC with IIA (n = 58) or extracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis (EIA, n = 56) between January 2019 and September 2021 were enrolled. We collected certain factors as clinical features, intraoperative characteristics, oncological outcomes, postoperative recovery, and short-term outcomes. Our primary outcome was time to gastrointestinal (GI) function recovery. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications within 30 days, postoperative pain, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Faster GI recovery and less postoperative pain were observed in patients with IIA compared to EIA [time to first flatus: (2.4 ± 0.7) vs (2.8 ± 1.0) days, p < 0.01; time to liquid intake: (3.5 ± 0.7) vs (4.0 ± 1.1) days, p = 0.01; postoperative visual analogue scale score: (3.9 ± 1.0) vs (4.3 ± 0.6), p = 0.02]. No significant differences were detected in oncological outcomes or postoperative complications. IIA, rather than EIA, tended to be performed in patients with higher body mass index [(23.93 ± 3.52) vs (22.36 ± 2.87) kg/m², p = 0.01].

CONCLUSIONS

IIA is associated with faster GI function recovery and less postoperative pain and may be more favorable for obese patients.

Safe implementation of robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis

The robotic platform can overcome technical difficulties associated with laparoscopic colon surgery. Transitioning from laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) to robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) is associated with a learning phase. This study aimed at determining the length of this learning phase and its associated morbidity. We retrospectively analyzed all laparoscopic right colectomies with ECA (n = 38) and robotic right colectomies with ICA (n = 67) for (pre)malignant lesions performed by a single surgeon between January 2014 and December 2020. CUSUM-plot analysis of total procedure time was used for learning curve determination of robotic colectomies. Non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis. Compared to laparoscopy, the learning phase robotic right colectomies (n = 35) had longer procedure times (p < 0.001) but no differences in anastomotic leakage rate, length of stay or 30-day morbidity. Conversion rate was reduced from 16 to 3 percent in the robotic group. This study provides evidence that robotic right colectomy with ICA can be safely implemented without increasing morbidity.

Extracorporeal Hand-Sewn vs. Intracorporeal Mechanic Anastomosis During Laparoscopic Right Colectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcomes of extracorporeal hand-sewn side-to-side isoperistaltic ileocolic anastomosis (EHSIA) versus intracorporeal mechanic side-to-side isoperistaltic ileocolic anastomosis (IMSIA) during laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

This is a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of prospectively collected data. Fifty-four patients who underwent surgery with EHSIA (intervention group) were paired with 54 patients who underwent surgery with IMSIA (control group) based on patients' demographics and type of surgery (standard right hemicolectomy or extended right hemicolectomy).

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were included for each group. Statistically significant differences between groups were not observed in patients' demographics and type of surgery. Conversion occurred in three patients of the intervention group due to intra-abdominal adhesions for previous surgery (5.6%) (p = 0.079). Median operative time was statistically significant shorter in the control group in comparison to the intervention group (85 and 117.5 minutes, respectively, p ≤ 0.0001). In both groups one anastomotic leakage was observed (1.9%) (Clavien-Dindo grade III-a). In the control group one patient (1.9%) underwent reintervention for acute postoperative anemia (Clavien-Dindo grade III-b). Median number of harvested lymph-nodes was 17 and 12 (p ≤ 0.0001), in the intervention and the control group, respectively. Median hospital stay was statistically significant lower in the control group in comparison to the intervention group (5 and 6.5 days, respectively, p ≤ 0.013).

CONCLUSION

IMSIA showed lower operative time and hospital stay in comparison to EHSIA. Further randomized studies are required to draw definitive conclusions about the best anastomotic technique during laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

Bowel function after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a randomized controlled trial comparing intracorporeal anastomosis and extracorporeal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is the standard surgical treatment for right-sided colon cancer. The continuity of the digestive tract is restored through ileocolic anastomosis which can be performed extracorporeally or intracorporeally. The study aimed to compare both anastomotic techniques in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-blinded two-armed randomized control trial with 1:1 parallel allocation carried out from 2016 to 2020 in a single center. The follow-up period was 30 days. Compared interventions involved extracorporeal and intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. The main outcome of the study was bowel recovery measured as the time to the first stool. Other outcomes involved the time to the first flatus, morbidity, and duration of surgery.

RESULTS

One hundred and seventeen patients undergoing a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with curative intent were eligible for the trial. Eight patients refused to participate. One hundred and two patients were analyzed, 52 in the intracorporeal group and 50 in the extracorporeal group. The groups did not differ in terms of cancer stage or body mass index, but did differ in age and sex. Intracorporeal anastomosis was associated with a shorter time to the first stool than extracorporeal, 32.8 h (26.0-43.7) vs. 41.7 (35.9-50.0), p = 0.017. There was no significant difference in the time to the first flatus, 30 h (23.2-42.3) vs. 26.6 h (21.8-37.3), p = 0.165. Similarly, overall complications did not differ (EC 12/50 vs. IC 10/52, p = 0.56). There were no differences in length of surgery, 190 min (150-230) and 190 min (180-220), p = 0.55.

CONCLUSION

Intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis following laparoscopic right hemicolectomy results in slightly faster bowel recovery, with no differences in morbidity and duration of surgery.

Does Intracorporeal Anastomosis Decrease the Rate of Surgical Site Infection in Laparoscopic Colon Cancer Surgery?

Objective

This study aimed to compare the surgical site infection (SSI) rates between intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA).

Summary of background data

Laparoscopic surgery is recommended for colonic malignancies because of its superior clinical outcomes and comparable oncologic results. Laparoscopic colectomy with ICA has the advantages of incision length and free extraction site choice. However, ICA may be associated with a risk of SSI due to enterotomy inside the abdominal cavity.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed patients with colon cancer who underwent radical surgery at Korea University Ansan Hospital between January 2017 and June 2020. We compared the SSI rates and other clinical variables between the ICA and ECA groups.

Results

Of the 502 patients who underwent radical surgery for colorectal cancer during the study period, 234 were eligible for inclusion. ECA and ICA were performed in 62.4% and 37.6% of patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant intergroup differences in clinicopathologic variables. The overall SSI rate did not differ between the groups (P = 0.801), but organ/space SSIs were more common in the ICA group than in the ECA group (P = 0.048).

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in overall SSI or anastomotic leakage (AL) rates between the ICA and ECA groups, but the organ/space SSI rate was higher in the ICA group when AL cases were excluded. Further high-quality studies are needed to assess the risk of organ/space SSIs in the ICA after colon cancer surgery.

Right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for cancer: a prospective comparison between robotics and laparoscopy

Robotics in right colectomy are still under debate. Available studies compare different techniques of ileocolic anastomosis but results are non-conclusive. Our study aimed to compare intraoperative outcomes, and short-term postoperative results between robotic and standard laparoscopic right colectomies for cancer with intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) fashioned with the same technique. All consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic or robotic right hemicolectomies with ICA for cancer in two hospitals, one of which is a tertiary care centre, were prospectively enrolled in our prospective observational study, from April 2018 to December 2019. ICA was fashioned with the same stapled hand-sewn technique. Continuous and categorical variables were analysed using t test and chi-squared test as required. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Forty patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 48 underwent robotic right colectomy and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Operative time was not statistically different between the two groups (robotic group 265.9 min vs laparoscopic group 254.2 min, p = 0.29). The robotic group had a significantly shorter time for stump oversewing (ileum reinforcement: robotic group 9.3 min vs laparoscopic group 14.2 min, p < 0.001; colon reinforcement: robotic 7.7. min, laparoscopy 13.9 min, p < 0.001) and for ICA (robotic 31.6 min vs laparoscopy 43.0, p < 0.001). One patient underwent extracorporeal anastomosis in the robotic group. The short-term outcomes were comparable between standard laparoscopic and robotic right colectomies with ICA. The limitation of the study is its small sample size and the fact that it was done in two institutions under the supervision of one person. Our data demonstrate that intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis is safe, and faster and easier with robotic systems. Robotics can facilitate more challenging ICA in minimally invasive surgery.

Comparison of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis and resection in right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic surgery is the standard surgical approach for colon cancer. However, there is no standard surgery for right colectomy. Selection between total laparoscopic right colectomy (TLRC) and laparoscopic-assisted right colectomy (LARC) is a topic of interest. In this systematic review, we compared the short-term outcomes of TLRC and LARC in the treatment of right colon cancer.

METHODS

We identified studies (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase) comparing TLRC and LARC up to February 2021. Surgical duration; volume of intraoperative blood loss; number of harvested lymph nodes; incision length; hospitalization duration; time to first flatus; time to first defecation; and anastomotic leakage, ileus, and wound infection were compared.

RESULTS

Thirty studies (TLRC, 1948 patients; LARC, 2369 patients) were evaluated. All studies were retrospective, except seven prospective studies, three RCTs, and three case-control studies. TLRC demonstrated lesser intraoperative blood loss volume (P < 0.01), less frequent intraoperative conversion to laparotomy (P = 0.02), shorter hospitalization duration (P < 0.01), smaller incision length (P < 0.01), shorter time to first flatus (P < 0.01) and first defecation (P < 0.01), and lesser frequent wound infection (P < 0.01) compared with LARC. The surgical duration, number of harvested lymph nodes, anastomotic leakage, and ileus were similar between TLRC and LARC (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

TLRC is associated with significantly earlier bowel recovery, lesser blood loss, smaller incision length, lower rate of conversion, shorter hospitalization duration, and lesser frequent wound infection compared with LARC.

Surgical stress and metabolic response after totally laparoscopic right colectomy

No clear consensus on the need to perform an intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) after laparoscopic right colectomy is currently available. One of the potential benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis may be a reduction in surgical stress. Herein, we evaluated the surgical stress response and the metabolic response in patients who underwent right colonic resection for colon cancer. Fifty-nine patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for right colon cancer were randomized to receive an intracorporeal or an extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). Data including demographics (age, sex, BMI and ASA score), pathological (AJCC tumour stage and tumour localization) and surgical results were recorded. Moreover, to determine the levels of the inflammatory response, mediators, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin 1β (IL-1β), IL-6, IL-10, and IL-13, were evaluated. Similarly, cortisol and insulin levels were evaluated as hormonal responses to surgical stress. We found that the proinflammatory mediator IL-6, CRP, TNF and IL-1β levels, were significantly reduced in IA compared to EA. Concurrently, an improved profile of the anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-10 and IL-13 was observed in the IA group. Relative to the hormone response to surgical stress, cortisol was increased in patients who underwent EA, while insulin was reduced in the EA group. Based on these results, surgical stress and metabolic response to IA justify advocating the adoption of a totally laparoscopic approach when performing a right colectomy for cancer.This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03422588).

Feasibility of robotic right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision and intracorporeal anastomosis: short-term outcomes of 161 consecutive patients

Technical and oncological aspects are still debated when dealing with minimally-invasive right colectomy. Main controversial issues still remain about whether the anastomosis should be performed intra- or extracorporeally and if a complete mesocolic excision (CME) should be carried out. We report the feasibility of robotic right colectomy with CME and intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) for right sided colon cancer. Data from patients who underwent robotic right colectomy with IA and CME from January 2015 to April 2020 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Intraoperative outcomes and complications (minor I-II and major III-IV according to Clavien-Dindo classification), conversion rate, 30-day postoperative outcomes and pathological outcomes were the variables assessed. A total of 161 patients undergoing robotic right colectomy for cancer met the inclusion criteria. Mean operative time was 185 min, no intraoperative complications were observed, and the conversion rate was 3.7% (6 patients requiring elective conversions). Overall, mean postoperative stay was 4.9 days and the overall 30-day complication rate was 16.1%. 20 patients (12.4%) had minor complications, while major postoperative complications occurred in six patients (3.7%). Anastomotic leak was recorded in one patient (0.6%) and the 30-day re-admission rate was 0.6%. Mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 21.9. Patients requiring conversion experienced two minor complications, with a mean length of stay of 7 days. Robotic right colectomy with CME and IA is feasible and it is associated with good intraoperative and short-term postoperative clinical outcomes.

The impact of intracorporeal anastomosis in right laparoscopic colectomy in the surgical site infections and the hospital stay: a cohort study

Ileocolic anastomosis in laparoscopic-assisted right colectomy is frequently performed extracorporeally. Intracorporeal anastomosis could be associated with several short-term benefits. However, it is a more technically demanding procedure. The primary endpoint of the study aimed to evaluate the postoperative surgical-site infection rate and its impact on the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared to extracorporeal anastomoses. Between 2010 and 2019, 108 unselected consecutive patients underwent right colectomy. An observational comparative cohort study of two anastomosis techniques, intracorporeal (IA) versus extracorporeal (EA), was conducted. Data were extracted from a prospectively maintained colorectal surgery database of a university-affiliated hospital and retrospectively analyzed. The main exclusion criteria were emergency surgery and medical or anesthetic contraindication for laparoscopy. 53 patients underwent right colectomy with IA, and 55 had extracorporeal anastomoses. The groups did not differ in demographics, anesthetic risk, intraoperative data, pathological outcomes, or overall survival. Mean operative time was longer in the IA group (156.9 vs. 146.0 min; p = 0.061). A significant reduction in the anastomotic leak rate was observed in the IA group compared with the EA group (0 vs. 7.3%; p = 0.045) with no differences in the intraabdominal abscess rate (IA: 1.9% vs. EA: 1.8%; p = 0.97). The wound infection rate was 5.7% for IA and 10.9% for EA (p = 0.324). The hospital stay was significantly shorter for those who had intracorporeal anastomoses (5.2 ± 3.3 vs. 10.8 ± 9.6 days; p = 0.000). Right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis was associated with less surgical-site infections and a significantly shorter hospital stay than EA technique. Surgeons should consider the IA as the first option when performing laparoscopic right colectomy. Registration number: NCT04350203 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Laparoscopic versus robotic right colectomy with extra-corporeal or intra-corporeal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) versus robotic right colectomy (RRC) using homogeneous subgroup analyses for extra-corporeal anastomosis (EA) and intra-corporeal anastomosis (IA).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched up to April 2020 for prospective or retrospective studies comparing LRC versus RRC on at least one short- or long-term outcome. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay (LOS). The secondary outcomes included operative and pathological results, survival, and total costs. LRC and RRC were compared using three homogeneous subgroups: without distinction by the type of anastomosis, EA only, and IA only. Pooled data analyses were performed using mean difference (MD) and random effects model.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven of 448 studies were selected. The included patients were 21,397 for the LRC group and 2796 for the RRC group. Regardless for the type of anastomosis, RRC showed shorter LOS, lower blood loss, lower conversion rate, shorter time to flatus, and lower overall complication rate compared with LRC, but longer operative time and higher total costs. In the EA subgroup, RRC showed similar LOS, longer operative time, and higher costs compared with LRC, the other outcomes being similar. In the IA subgroup, RRC showed shorter LOS and longer operative time compared with LRC, with no difference for the remaining outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Most included articles are retrospective, providing low-quality evidence and limiting conclusions. The more frequent use of the IA seems to explain the advantages of RRC over LRC.

Intra-versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: a meta-analysis of 3699 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) has become a gold standard. However, a major current concern is still whether anastomosis should be performed extracorporeally or entirely laparoscopically. This meta-analysis assesses and compares peri- and postoperative outcomes of intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) versus extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in LRC.

METHODS

The research used the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for studies comparing IA with EA during LRC. Our main endpoint was parietal abscess. Secondary endpoints were 30-day morbidity, mortality, time to onset of gas and stools, length of stay, number of lymph nodes removed and postoperative incisional hernia rates. The MINORS criteria were used to evaluate the quality of the studies examined.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles comprising 3699 patients, published between 2004 and 2020, were included in this meta-analysis. After sensitivity analysis, IA was associated with a decrease in parietal abscesses (OR 0.526, IC 0.333-0.832, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis finds that IA allows a decrease in parietal abscesses and time to first gas and stools, surgical repair and length of stay, with similar overall complications.