Outcome of Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Transverse Colon Cancer

Gastrointestinal perforation associated with bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the risk factors for gastrointestinal perforation in metastatic colorectal cancer patients receiving bevacizumab.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 217 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving bevacizumab to investigate the risk factors for gastrointestinal perforation. Three patients occurred intestinal perforation after receiving bevacizumab. We analyzed the clinical characteristics of three patients with intestinal perforation.

RESULTS

All patients receiving bevacizumab. Three of 217 patients occurred intestinal perforation after receiving bevacizumab. Patient no. 1 was 70 years old, female, having history of intestinal obstruction. The patient occurred intestinal perforation and ultimately died after receiving bevacizumab. Patient no. 2 was 59 years old, female, having history of intestinal obstruction. The patient occurred intestinal perforation after receiving bevacizumab, and recovered smoothly after symptomatic treatment. Patient no. 3 was 60 years old, female, having history of intestinal obstruction. The patient occurred intestinal perforation and ultimately died after receiving bevacizumab.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving bevacizumab are at risk of gastrointestinal perforation. The patient's age, gender and history of bowel obstruction may be associated with gastrointestinal perforation.

Analysis of surgical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for locally advanced mid-transverse colon cancer

PURPOSE

This study compared the surgical outcomes between laparoscopic colectomy (LC) and open colectomy (OC) for mid-transverse colon cancer (MTC).

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study compared the short- and long-term surgical outcomes for patients with advanced MTC (T3 and T4 with or without nodal involvement) who underwent LC or OC between January 2008 and December 2019 using a propensity score-matched analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 177 patients with advanced MTC were enrolled. After matching, 58 cases for the OC and LC groups were selected. No significant differences in age, sex, tumor progression, or procedure type (extended resection or segmental resection) existed between groups. The LC group had significantly less blood loss (20 mL vs. 50 mL, p=0.048) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (8 days vs. 12 days, p<0.001) than the OC group. Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2) occurred in 27.6% and 25.9% of the OC and LC groups respectively (p=1). Three patients (5.2%) and one patient (1.7%) of the OC and LC groups respectively developed anastomotic leakage (p=0.62). Re-operation was required in five patients (8.6%) in the OC group and one patient (1.7%) in the LC group (p=0.21). No surgery-related deaths occurred in either group. The 3-year overall survival rates (stage II: LC 100% vs. OC 92.8%, p=0.15; stage III: 88.9% vs. 84.3%, p=0.88, respectively) were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

LC is a minimally invasive technique with lesser blood loss, shorter postoperative hospital stays, and oncologic equivalence to OC. Hence, LC is useful for MTC treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000042676.

Comparison of survival outcomes between laparoscopic and open colectomy for transverse colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare laparoscopic with open resection for transverse colon cancer (TCC) regarding long-term survival outcomes.

METHODS

Systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane Library for studies comparing laparoscopic with open resection for TCC. The last search was performed on October 7, 2022. Oncological and survival outcomes were collected and analyzed. This meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software (v 5.3).

RESULTS

This study included fifteen studies published between 2014 and 2022 with 2556 patients in total. When compared with the laparoscopic group, the open group had significantly more tumors locating on middle transverse colon (P = 0.006, OR = 0.67, 95%CI [0.50, 0.89], I² = 12%) and more patients received transverse colectomy (P = 0.03, OR = 0.66, 95%CI [0.46, 0.96], I² = 53%) as results. Comparable tumor stage (P = 0.13, OR = 0.81, 95%CI [0.62, 1.06], I² = 55%) and number of lymph node harvested (P = 0.22, WMD =  -0.81, 95%CI [-2.09, 0.47], I² = 73%) were observed between the two groups. As for survival outcomes, no significant difference was observed between the two groups for 5-year disease-free survival (DFS; P = 0.61, OR = 0.93, 95%CI [0.72, 1.21], I² = 0%), 5-year overall survival (OS; P = 0.83, OR = 0.97, 95%CI [0.71, 1.32], I² = 0%), 3-year DFS (P = 0.97, OR = 0.96, 95%CI [0.69, 1.32], I² = 0%), and 3-year OS (P = 0.67, OR = 0.92, 95%CI [0.63, 1.35], I² = 0%). In the subgroup analysis according to tumor stage, the results did not change.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence based on studies demonstrated that laparoscopic procedure could be safely performed for TCC, and it would not affect the long-term survival. Randomized clinical trials with a larger sample size are warranted in the future for further investigation.

Clinical and survival outcomes of colectomy for transverse colon cancer in elderly patients

It remains controversial whether elderly patients with transverse colon cancer present worse prognoses. Our study utilized evidence from multi-center databases to evaluate the perioperative and oncology outcomes of radical resection of colon cancer in elderly and nonelderly patients. In this study, we analyzed 416 patients with transverse colon cancer who underwent radical surgery from January 2004 to May 2017, including 151 elderly (aged ≥ 65 years) and 265 nonelderly (aged < 65 years) patients. We retrospectively compared the perioperative and oncological outcomes between these 2 groups. The median follow-up in the elderly and nonelderly groups was 52 and 64 months, respectively. There were no significant differences in the overall survival (OS) (P = .300) and disease-free survival (DFS) (P = .380) between the elderly and nonelderly groups. However, the elderly group had longer hospital stays (P < .001), a higher complication rate (P = .027), and fewer lymph nodes harvested (P = .002). The N classification and differentiation were significantly associated with OS based on univariate analysis, and the N classification was an independent prognostic factor for OS based on multivariate analysis (P < .05). Similarly, the N classification and differentiation were significantly correlated with the DFS based on univariate analysis. However, multivariate analysis indicated that the N classification was an independent prognostic factor for DFS (P < .05). In conclusion, the survival and surgical outcomes in elderly patients were similar to nonelderly patients. The N classification was an independent factor for OS and DFS. Even though elderly patients with transverse colon cancer present a higher surgical risk than nonelderly patients, performing radical resection in elderly patients can be an appropriate choice for treatment.

Nonmicroradical Resection Margin as a Predictor of Recurrence in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer Undergoing Complete Mesocolic Excision: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of the present definition of microradicality in colon cancer is poorly understood, especially considering the vast influence it has in rectal cancer prognosis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate whether the risk of recurrence after complete mesocolic excision for stage III colon cancer is associated with the distance from tumor tissue to resection margin and whether the location of the involved margin is of any significance.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort of patients was stratified into 2 groups to distinguish between direct margin invasion (0-mm resection margin) and a ≤1-mm resection margin without direct invasion or 3 groups to distinguish between the location of margin involvement (lateral tumor resection margin, central vascular ligation margin, and nonperitonealized mesocolic resection margin). Patients with microradical resections were used as a control group.

SETTINGS

We included all patients undergoing elective complete mesocolic excision for International Union Against Cancer stage III colon cancer at Nordsjællands Hospital between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2016.

PATIENTS

A total of 276 patients met all inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was risk of recurrence after 3.2 years.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients (15%) had a nonmicroradical resection. The 3.2-year cumulative incidence of recurrence for a 0-mm margin was 43% and 24% for a ≤1-mm margin without direct invasion, corresponding with an HR of 4.3 (p = 0.0146) and 1.3 (p = 0.474). The location of the involved margin showed no significant differences.

LIMITATIONS

This was a single-center study containing a limited number of patients with a nonmicroradical resection with a risk of type II error.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no increased risk of recurrence for a ≤1-mm margin without direct invasion, indicating that the present classification of microradicality might not be justified if an intact posterior mesocolic fascia without invasion of tumor tissue is present. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B625.

MARGEN DE RESECCIN NO MICRORRADICAL COMO PREDICTOR DE RECURRENCIA EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE COLON EN ESTADIO III SOMETIDOS A ESCISIN MESOCLICA COMPLETA UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE PROSPECTIVO

ANTECEDENTES:El valor pronóstico de la definición actual de microrradicalidad en el cáncer de colon es poco conocido, especialmente considerando la gran influencia que tiene en el pronóstico del cáncer de recto.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo investigar si el riesgo de recurrencia después de la escisión mesocólica completa (CME) para el cáncer de colon en estadio III está asociado con la distancia desde el tejido tumoral hasta el margen de resección y si la localización del margen afectado tiene alguna importancia.DISEÑO:Una cohorte prospectiva de pacientes se estratificó en dos grupos para distinguir entre la invasión del margen directo (margen de resección de 0 mm) y un margen de resección ≤1 mm sin invasión directa, o tres grupos para distinguir entre la localización de la afectación del margen (resección lateral del margen del tumor, margen de ligadura vascular central y margen de resección mesocólica no peritonizada). Los pacientes con resecciones microrradicales se utilizaron como grupo control.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Incluimos a todos los pacientes sometidos a CME electiva por cáncer de colon en estadio III de la UICC en el Hospital Nordsjællands, Dinamarca, entre el 1 de enero de 2008 y el 31 de diciembre de 2016.PACIENTES:Un total de 276 pacientes cumplieron todos los criterios de inclusión y ninguno de los criterios de exclusión.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue el riesgo de recurrencia después de 3 · 2 años.RESULTADOS:Un total de 41 (15%) pacientes tuvieron una resección no microrradical. La incidencia acumulada de recurrencia a los 3,2 años para un margen de 0 mm fue del 43% y del 24% para un margen ≤1 mm sin invasión directa, lo que corresponde a un cociente de riesgo de 4,3 (p = 0,0146) y 1,3 (p = 0,474) respectivamente. La localización del margen afectado no mostró diferencias significativas.LIMITACIONES:Estudio unicéntrico con un número limitado de pacientes con resección no microrradical con riesgo de error tipo II.CONCLUSIONES:No encontramos un mayor riesgo de recurrencia para un margen ≤1 mm sin invasión directa, lo que indica que la clasificación actual de microrradicalidad podría no estar justificada si está presente una fascia mesocólica posterior intacta sin invasión del tejido tumoral. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B625. (Traducción-Dr Yazmin Berrones-Medina).

Outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery in nonagenarian patients: a multicenter retrospective study

Background

The use of surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) aged ≥90 years remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of CRC surgery in patients within this age group.

Methods

A total of 151 consecutive nonagenarian patients who underwent CRC surgery were included from 3 different hospitals. The Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) was used to grade postoperative complications. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with CCI and overall survival (OS).

Results

The patients had a mean age of 92.8 years (standard deviation ±1.9 years). Forty-six patients (30.5%) underwent emergency surgery, and 105 patients (69.5%) underwent elective surgery. The postoperative complications rate was 66.2% (100/151), and the mean CCI was 26.3 (±30.8). Twenty-three patients (15.2%) died postoperatively, and the perioperative mortality rates for elective surgery and emergency surgery were 7.6% (8/105) and 32.6% (15/46), respectively (P<0.001). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 77.5%, 53.9%, and 38.6%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed emergency surgery and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score to be predictors of postoperative complications. Advanced tumor stage, palliative surgery, ASA score ≥4, and CCI >17 were associated with poor OS.

Conclusions

CRC surgery should not be denied to nonagenarian patients. Surgical treatment can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality, and achieves long-term survival in a select group.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with extracorporeal anastomosis for transverse colon cancer: comparison of triangulating anastomosis with functional end-to-end anastomosis

BACKGROUND

We compared triangulating anastomosis (TRI) with functional end-to-end anastomosis (FEEA) in terms of patient demographics, clinicopathological features, and short- and long-term outcomes in this study.

METHODS

From November 2005 to May 2016, 315 patients with transverse colon cancer underwent laparoscopic resection. TRI was performed in 62 patients and FEEA in 253 patients. Patients with another concomitant cancer, who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and/or who underwent another operation at the same time were excluded.

RESULTS

The patients' backgrounds were comparable in each group. Transverse colectomy was selected more frequently in TRI and right hemicolectomy in FEEA. The operation time was shorter in TRI. The rate of anastomotic leakage was comparable (1.6% in TRI vs. 0.8% in FEEA). Stricture was more common in TRI (8.1% vs. 0%) and bleeding was more common in FEEA (1.6% vs. 10.6%). The rate of long-term complications was comparable in each group. Overall survival of stage 0-III patients was comparable in each group (94.7% in TRI vs. 93.7% in FEEA). 5-year disease-free survival of stage 0-III, stage II, and stage III patients was also comparable in each group (94.8% vs. 93.0%, 100% vs. 92.1%, and 80.3% vs. 79.2% in TRI and FEEA, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The short- and long-term outcome rates were acceptable in both groups. Specific attempts to prevent complications are required for each anastomotic procedure.

Stent as a bridge to surgery versus urgent surgery for malignant right colonic obstruction: A multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The impact of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) for malignant right colonic obstruction remains undefined. The aim of this study was to compare short-term postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes of colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery (SBTS) and urgent colectomy for patients with malignant right-sided obstruction.

METHODS

A total of 98 consecutive patients who underwent SEMS placement during the period 2004-2015 from three hospitals were included. For comparative analyses, patients were matched (1:2) with 196 patients treated with emergency colectomy from our prospective database.

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable in terms of demographics and tumor characteristics. The proportion of patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy was higher in SBTS group than urgent colectomy group (75.5% vs. 37.2%; p < 0.001). Patients treated with SBTS were less likely to have a temporary stoma constructed (3.1% vs. 10.7%; p = 0.024). SBTS was associated with significantly less median estimated blood loss (90 vs. 100 ml; p = 0.029), shorter length of hospital stay (11 vs. 12 days; p < 0.001), lower overall postoperative complication rate (18.4% vs. 31.3%; p = 0.018), and wound-related complication rate (5.1% vs. 14.3%; p = 0.019) compared with urgent surgery. Reoperation rate, 30-day mortality, and lymph nodes harvested were not significantly different between two groups. Disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS insertion is safe and feasible for treating malignant right-sided obstruction. SBTS is associated with better short-term outcomes and equivalent long-term oncologic results compared with urgent colectomy.

Laparoscopic versus open radical resection for transverse colon cancer: evidence from multi-center databases

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic approach is still a controversy for transverse colon cancer. Our investigation aimed to evaluate the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open radical resection for transverse colon cancer based on evidence from multi-center databases.

METHODS

416 patients with transverse colon cancer undergoing radical surgery were analyzed including 181 laparoscopic resections and 235 open resections from January 2004 to May 2017 based on multi-center databases. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

No statistical differences regarding the baseline characteristics were observed between the two groups except the procedure type. Compared with open approach, laparoscopic approach was associated with statistically longer operation time (209.96 vs. 173.31 min, P = 0.002), significantly shorter time to soft food intake (4.73 vs. 6.01 days, P = 0.034), and shorter postoperative hospitalization (12.05 vs. 14.44 days, P = 0.001). In terms of oncologic outcomes, laparoscopic resection was correlated with statistically more lymph node retrieval (13.52 vs. 15.91, P = 0.002) and similar 5-year overall survival (91.2% vs. 89.1%, P = 0.356) and disease-free survival (89.6% vs. 86.0%, P = 0.873), compared with open resection.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with transverse colon cancer, laparoscopic approach can achieve several short-term advantages without decreasing long-term oncologic survival.

Comparing the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open colectomy in transverse colon cancer: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

In order to compare the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic (LC) and open colectomy (OC) for transverse colon cancer (TCC) patients, the present systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was designed.

METHODS

This study was conducted following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic screening of the electronic databases was performed (Medline, Web of Science and Scopus). The validity of the pooled results was verified through the performance of trial sequential analysis (TSA). The level of evidence was estimated using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Overall, 21 studies and 2498 patients were included in our study. Pooled comparisons and TSA analyses reported a superiority of LC over OC in terms of postoperative complications (OR 0.64, p = 0.0003), blood loss (WMD - 86.84, p < 0.00001), time to first flatus (WMD - 0.94, p < 0.00001) and oral diet (WMD - 1.25, p < 0.00001), and LOS (WMD - 2.39, p < 0.00001). Moreover, OC displayed a lower operation duration (p < 0.00001). A higher rate of complete mesocolic excision (p = 0.001) was related to OC. Although inconclusive in TSA, the recurrence rate in LC group was lower. LC and OC were equivalent in terms of postoperative survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering several limitations of the eligible studies and the subsequent low level of evidence, further RCTs of a higher quality and methodological level are required to verify the findings of our meta-analysis.

Four-directional approach to the meso-transverse attachment combined with preoperative radiological vascular simulation facilitates short-term surgical outcomes in laparoscopic transverse colon cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Transverse colon resection is one of the most difficult laparoscopic procedures because of anatomic hazards such as variations in the mesenteric vascular anatomy and the complex structure of organs and surrounding membranes.

METHODS

We evaluated the short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic transverse colon resection using a creative approach. This approach included preoperative surgical simulation using virtual surgical anatomy by CT, a four-directional approach to the mesentery, and 3-D imaging during laparoscopic surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 45 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for transverse colon cancer from June 2013 to December 2017 were enrolled in this study. All procedures were completed safely, with minor postoperative complications, including two patients with anastomotic stenosis, two with intra-abdominal phlegmon, one with delayed gastric emptying, and one with pneumonia, all treated non-operatively. There were no conversions to open resection. Operation time was 203 min (range, 125-322 min), and the estimated blood loss during surgery was 5 mL (range, 0-370 mL). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 10 days (range, 7-21 days), and no patients required readmission.

CONCLUSION

Short-term surgical outcomes after laparoscopic transverse colon resection demonstrated that this creative approach was safe and feasible. The four-directional approach to the meso-transverse attachment combined with preoperative radiological simulation can facilitate laparoscopic transverse colon surgery.

Optimal Surgery for Mid-Transverse Colon Cancer: Laparoscopic Extended Right Hemicolectomy Versus Laparoscopic Transverse Colectomy

BACKGROUND

Although the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer have been shown by the recent studies, the optimal laparoscopic approach for mid-transverse colon cancer is controversial.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with the mid-transverse colon cancer at our institutions between January 2007 and April 2017. Thirty-eight and 34 patients who received extended right hemicolectomy and transverse colectomy, respectively, were enrolled.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in operating time, blood loss, and hospital stay between the two groups. Postoperative complications developed in 10 of 34 patients (29.4%; wound infection: 2 cases, anastomotic leakage: 2 cases, bowel obstruction: 1 case, incisional hernia: 2 cases, others: 3 cases) for the transverse colectomy group and in 4 of 38 patients (10.5%; wound infection: 1 case, anastomotic leakage: 0 case, bowel obstruction: 2 cases, incisional hernia: 0 case, others: 1 case) for the extended right hemicolectomy group (P = 0.014). Although the median number of harvested #221 and #222 LNs was similar between the two groups (6 vs. 8, P = 0.710, and 3 vs. 2, P = 0.256, respectively), that of #223 was significantly larger in extended right hemicolectomy than in transverse colectomy (3 vs. 1, P = 0.038). The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates were 92.4 and 90.3% for the extended right hemicolectomy group, and 95.7 and 79.6% for the transverse colectomy group (P = 0.593 and P = 0.638, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy and laparoscopic transverse colectomy offer similar oncological outcomes for mid-transverse colon cancer. Laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy might be associated with fewer postoperative complications.

Long-Term Survival in Octogenarians After Surgical Treatment for Colorectal Cancer: Prevention of Postoperative Complications is Key

Background

Whether to treat octogenarians with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the same manner as younger patients remains a challenging issue. The purpose of this study was to analyse postoperative complications and long-term survival in a consecutive cohort of octogenarians who were surgically treated for CRC.

Methods

Octogenarians with primary CRC suitable for curative surgery between January 2008 and December 2011 were included. Data about comorbidities, tumour stage, and complications were retrospectively collected from patient files. Data about survival were retrieved with use of the Dutch database for persons and addresses. To identify factors associated with severe postoperative complications and postoperative survival, logistic regression analyses, and Cox regression analyses were performed. Odds ratios and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated.

Results

In a series of 108 octogenarians, median age was 83 years (range 80–94 years). Median follow-up was 47 (range 1–107) months. Major postoperative complications occurred in 25% of the patients. No risk factors for development of severe postoperative complications could be identified. The 30-day mortality was 7%; 1- and 5-year mortality was 19% and 56%, respectively. Overall median survival was 48 months: 66 months in patients without complications versus 13 months in patients with postoperative complications. Postoperative complications were most predictive of decreased survival (HR 3.16; 95% CI 1.79–5.59), even including tumour characteristics, comorbidity, and emergency surgery.

Conclusions

Long-term survival in octogenarians deemed fit for surgery is reasonably good. Prevention of major postoperative complications could further improve clinical outcome.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The survival benefits, oncological adequacy, effectiveness, and safety of laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LTC) were compared with that of open transverse colectomy (OTC) using a meta-analysis.

METHODS

EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched for the last 20 years. Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the inverse variance hazard ratio method.

RESULTS

No survival benefits were detected between the two LTC and OTC cohorts. OTC showed shorter operative time by 38 min compared to LTC [mean difference (MD) = 38(15.23-60.77), p = 0.001]. However, LTC was associated with earlier postoperative recovery. The time to flatus and time to oral intake for LTC were MD = -1.12(-1.68 to -0.55, p = 0.001) and MD = -1.57(-2.38 to -0.76, p = 0.001), respectively. In addition, LTC was associated with a shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days [MD = -4.64(-7.52 to -1.75), p = 0.002].

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to OTC, LTC provides similar survival benefits, earlier postoperative recovery, and shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days.

Assessing the economic advantage of laparoscopic vs. open approaches for colorectal cancer by a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSES

This study investigated the surgical outcomes and potential economic advantage of open vs. laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer using a propensity score matching analysis.

METHODS

We examined the surgical and economic outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic (N = 127) and open surgery (N = 253) for colorectal cancer and then compared these outcomes in two groups (N = 103 each) using a propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Compared to open surgery, the laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly lower overall morbidity rate (14 vs. 40%; P < 0.001) and shorter mean (± standard deviation) postoperative hospital stay (12.6 ± 8.3 vs. 16.8 ± 9.9 days, respectively; P = 0.001). Despite generating higher mean surgical costs (Japanese yen) (985,000 ± 215,000 vs. 812,000 ± 222,000 yen; P < 0.001), utilizing a laparoscopic approach significantly reduced the non-surgical costs (773,000 ± 440,000 vs. 1075,000 ± 508,000 yen; P < 0.001). The mean total cost of laparoscopic-assisted surgery (1758,000 ± 576,000 yen) was decreased by approximately 130,000 yen compared with open surgery (1886,000 ± 619,000 yen), although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.125).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is advantageous in reducing morbidity and facilitating an early discharge and does not increase hospital costs. These findings are consistent with the general consensus supporting the benefits of laparoscopic surgery as a minimally invasive approach.

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Colon Cancer

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons is dedicated to ensuring high-quality patient care by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus. The Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee is composed of society members who are chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery. This committee was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus. This is accompanied by developing Clinical Practice Guidelines based on the best available evidence. These guidelines are inclusive and not prescriptive. Their purpose is to provide information on which decisions can be made, rather than to dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, health care workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. It should be recognized that these guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient.

The current status of treatment for colorectal cancer in China: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers all over the world, but its epidemiology is obviously different in various regions.

METHODS

The treatment of CRC also has varying characteristics due to differences in economy, geography, disease onset, chemotherapy, and other factors, although international guidelines are used to guide the treatment of CRC in China.

RESULTS

This paper summarizes the current status of CRC treatment, including surgical therapy, neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy, postoperative chemotherapy, targeted therapy, maintenance therapy, and immunotherapy, according to the clinical situation in China, so as to provide better therapy and improve clinical practice for patients with CRC.

CONCLUSION

This research shows that the treatment of colorectal cancer continues to progress, and the patient's efficacy and quality of life have improved.

Short-term outcomes of overlapped delta-shaped anastomosis, an innovative intracorporeal anastomosis technique, in totally laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer

AIM

To introduce an innovative intracorporeal anastomosis technique named overlapped delta-shaped anastomosis (ODA) for colon cancer cases undergoing totally laparoscopic colectomy (TLC) and to assess its feasibility and safety.

METHODS

From January 2016 to March 2017, a total of 20 consecutive patients with colon cancer accepted TLC and the ODA technique at our medical center. Patient demographics, operative outcomes, perioperative complications, and pathological results were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

We successfully completed TLC and the ODA procedure in all 20 cases, including 6 (30%) males and 14 (70%) females. In total, 11 (55%), 2 (10%), and 7 (35%) cases accepted right hemicolectomy, transverse hemicolectomy, and left hemicolectomy, respectively. None of the surgeries were converted to an open operation. Mean operative time was 178.5 min, and mean estimated blood loss was 58.5 mL. Mean time to first flatus was 2.5 d, and mean postoperative hospitalization duration was 6.8 d. No severe complications occurred, such as anastomotic leakage, snastomotic stenosis, anastomotic bleeding, and wound infection, except for one case who suffered from an abdominal infection and another case who suffered from gastric paralysis syndrome. Tumor recurrence was not observed in any patient during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

The ODA technique for colon cancer cases undergoing TLC appears to be safe and feasible, although our current results need to be verified in further studies.

Enhanced recovery programme following laparoscopic colorectal resection for elderly patients

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and safety of an enhanced recovery programme (ERP) in patients aged ≥75 years who undergo laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients were divided into two groups according to perioperative management: the ERP group (Group A, n = 94) and the conventional perioperative care group (Group B, n = 157). The postoperative outcomes were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

There were no differences in terms of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, operative time or blood loss between two groups. Postoperative return of gastrointestinal function was significantly faster in Group A compared to Group B, including time to first flatus (2 versus 3 days, P < 0.001), first stool (3 versus 4 days, P = 0.001) and oral intake (1 versus 4 days, P < 0.001). Group A was associated with lower overall postoperative complication rate (26.6% versus 44.6%, P = 0.004) and general complication rate (14.9% versus 31.2%, P = 0.004). The median postoperative hospital stay was 6 days in Group A and 8 days in Group B (P < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ERP following laparoscopic colorectal resection for elderly patients is associated with faster postoperative recovery, shorter postoperative hospital stay and fewer complications compared with conventional perioperative care.

Laparoscopic Colectomy Versus Open Colectomy for Treatment of Transverse Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of transverse colon cancer (TCC) is still not standardized. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of laparoscopic colectomy (LC) for treatment of TCC in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes compared with open colectomy.

METHOD

A systematic literature search with no limits was performed in PubMed and Embase. The last search was performed on September 15, 2016. The short-term outcomes included intraoperative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and oncological surgical quality. The long-term outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Thirteen articles and one conference abstract published between 2010 and 2016 with a total of 1728 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. LC was associated with significant less estimated blood loss, fewer total postoperative complications, and shorter time to first flatus, time to liquid diet, length of hospital stay, and length of postoperative hospital stay. However, longer operative time was needed in LC. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups concerning the intraoperative complications, mortality, ileus, anastomotic leakage, bleeding, wound infection, abdominal infection, lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, distal resection margin, OS, or DFS.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that LC is a safe and feasible technique for TCC associated with less estimated blood loss, fewer total postoperative complications, quicker recovery of intestinal function, shorter length of hospital stay, and equivalent long-term outcomes. Furthermore, a large-scaled, prospective randomized controlled study is warranted to verify those results.

Laparoscopic vs open approach for transverse colon cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of short and long term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Transverse colon malignancies have been excluded from all randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic against open colectomies, potentially due to the advanced laparoscopic skills required for dissecting around the middle colic vessels and the associated morbidity. Concerns have been expressed that the laparoscopic approach may compromise the oncological clearance in transverse colon cancer. This study aimed to comprehensively compare the laparoscopic (LPA) to the open (OPA) approach by performing a meta-analysis of long and short term outcomes.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Scopus and Web of Knowledge databases were interrogated. Selected studies were critically appraised and the short-term morbidity and long term oncological outcomes were meta-analyzed. Sensitivity analysis according to the quality of the study, type of procedure (laparoscopic vs laparoscopically assisted) and level of lymphadenectomy was performed. Statistical heterogeneity and publication bias were also investigated.

RESULTS

Eleven case control trials (1415 patients) were included in the study. There was no difference between the LPA and the OPA in overall survival [Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.83 (0.56, 1.22); P = 0.34], disease free survival (p = 0.20), local recurrence (p = 0.81) or distant metastases (p = 0.24). LPA was found to have longer operative time [Weighted mean difference (WMD) = 45.00 (29.48, 60.52); P < 0.00001] with earlier establishment of oral intake [WMD = -1.68 (-1.84, -1.53); P < 0.00001] and shorter hospital stay [WMD = -2.94 (-4.27, -1.62); P = 0.0001]. No difference was found in relation to anastomotic leakage (p = 0.39), intra-abdominal abscess (p = 0.25), lymph nodes harvested (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

LPA seems to be safe with equivalent oncological outcomes to OPA and better short term outcomes in selected patient populations. High quality Randomized control trials are required to further investigate the role of laparoscopy in transverse colon cancer.

Short-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Along with an aging society, the number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer treated with a surgical modality has gradually increased. Our purpose is to verify the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer in elderly patients.

METHODS

We compared the short-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic surgery in patients aged 80 years or older with colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2014.

RESULTS

Of 150 elderly colorectal patients, 62 patients received laparoscopic surgery, and 88 patients, open surgery. In the laparoscopic surgery group, two patients were converted to open surgery due to extensive adhesion. The amount of blood loss was smaller in patients treated with laparoscopic surgery than those with open surgery (44.0 ± 86.5 vs. 329.9 ± 482.1 ml, P < 0.01). In the laparoscopic surgery group, days until oral intake (5.3 ± 1.9 vs. 7.0 ± 3.0 days, P < 0.01) and hospital stay (17.2 ± 6.8 vs. 22.0 ± 14.0 days, P < 0.01) were shorter. Morbidity (30.6 vs. 42.0 %) and mortality (1.6 vs. 1.1 %) in laparoscopic and open surgery groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer was a safe and less invasive alternative to open surgery, with less blood loss and shorter hospital stay.

Reduced port laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer is safe and feasible in terms of short-term outcomes: comparative study with conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery

Purpose

Laparoscopic surgery was previously accepted as an alternative surgical option in treatment for colorectal cancer. Nowadays, single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is introduced as a method to maximize advantages of minimally invasive surgery. However, SPLS has several limitations compared to conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CMLS). To overcome those limitations of SPLS, reduced port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) was introduced. This study aimed at evaluating the short-term outcomes of RPLS.

Methods

Patients who underwent CMLS and RPLS of colon cancer between August 2011 and December 2013 were included in this study. Short-term clinical and pathological outcome were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

Thirty-two patients underwent RPLS and 217 patients underwent CMLS. Shorter operation time, less blood loss, and faster bowel movement were shown in RPLS group in this study. In terms of postoperative pain, numeric rating scale (NRS) of RPLS was lower than that of CMLS. Significant differences were shown in terms of tumor size, harvested lymph node, perineural invasion, and pathological stage. No significant differences were confirmed in terms of other surgical outcomes.

Conclusion

In this study, RPLS was technically feasible and safe. Especially in terms of postoperative pain, RPLS was comparable to CMLS. RPLS may be a feasible alternative option in selected patients with colon cancer.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for transverse colon cancer: a retrospective multicenter study

Purpose

The purpose of the present study was to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery for transverse colon cancer.

Patients and methods

We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent surgery for transverse colon cancer at six Hallym University-affiliated hospitals between January 2005 and June 2015. The perioperative outcomes and oncologic outcomes were compared between laparoscopic and open surgery.

Results

Of 226 patients with transverse colon cancer, 103 underwent laparoscopic surgery and 123 underwent open surgery. There were no differences in the patient characteristics between the two groups. Regarding perioperative outcomes, the operation time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (267.3 vs 172.7 minutes, P<0.001), but the time to soft food intake (6.0 vs 6.6 days, P=0.036) and the postoperative hospital stay (13.7 vs 15.7 days, P=0.018) were shorter in the laparoscopic group. The number of harvested lymph nodes was lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (20.3 vs 24.3, P<0.001). The 5-year overall survival (90.8% vs 88.6%, P=0.540) and disease-free survival (86.1% vs 78.9%, P=0.201) rates were similar in both groups.

Conclusion

The present study showed that laparoscopic surgery is associated with several perioperative benefits and similar oncologic outcomes to open surgery for the resection of transverse colon cancer. Therefore, laparoscopic surgery offers a safe alternative to open surgery in patients with transverse colon cancer.

Clinical application of hand-assisted laparoscopy in transverse colectomy for middle transverse colon cancer

AIM: To assess the safety, feasibility and clinical application value of hand-assisted laparoscopy in transverse colectomy for middle transverse colon cancer.

METHODS: From April 2012 to April 2015, a total of 20 patients with middle transverse colon cancer underwent radical transverse colon resection at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, of whom 11 underwent hand assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS), and 9 underwent laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS). The clinical data of all the patients were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS: All the 20 patients had successful surgery. There was no conversion to open surgery or no operative death. Operative time was significantly shorter in the HALS group than in the LAS group (153.6 min ± 28.1 min vs 190.6 min ± 35.0 min, P = 0.017). There were no significant differences between the two groups in blood loss (121.8 mL ± 79.4 mL vs 116.1 mL ± 78.1 mL), number of lymph nodes harvested (15.4 ± 5.4 vs 17.6 ± 11.7), rate of postoperative complications (9.1% vs 11.1%), postoperative exhaust time (3.1 d ± 0.7 d vs 2.9 d ± 0.6 d), or postoperative hospital stay (7.4 d ± 0.7 d vs 7.8 d ± 1.1 d) (P > 0.05). The patients were followed for 2-38 months. In the HALS group, one patient developed intestinal obstruction at 1 mo and one patient developed liver metastases at 8 mo. In the LAS group, one patient died of extensive abdominal metastasis.

CONCLUSION: The hand-assisted laparoscopic technique is feasible and safe in the radical resection of middle transverse colon cancer. Due to a small number of patients included and short follow-up time in this study, further studies are required.