Minimally invasive approach to colorectal cancer: an evidence-based analysis

Short-term efficacy of laparoscopic radical resection for colorectal cancer and risk of unplanned reoperation after surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the first choice of treatment for patients with colorectal cancer. Traditional open surgery imparts great damage to the body of the patient and can easily cause adverse stress reactions. With the continuous development of medical technology, laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery has shown great advantages for the treatment of patients with celiac disease.

AIM

To investigate the short-term efficacy of laparoscopic radical surgery and traditional laparotomy for the treatment of colorectal cancer, and the differences in the risk analysis of unplanned reoperation after operation.

METHODS

As the research subjects, this study selected 100 patients with colorectal cancer who received surgical treatment at the Yulin First Hospital from January 2018 to January 2022. Among them, 50 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical resection were selected as the research group and 50 patients who underwent traditional laparotomy were selected as the control group. Data pertaining to clinical indexes, gastrointestinal hormones, nutrition indexes, the levels of inflammatory factors, quality of life, Visual Analog Scale score, and the postoperative complications of the two groups of patients before and after treatment were collected, and the therapeutic effects in the two groups were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, perioperative bleeding, peristalsis recovery time, and hospital stays were significantly shorter in the research group. After surgery, the levels of gastrin (GAS) and motilin (MTL) were decreased in both groups, and the fluctuation range of GAS and MTL observed in the research group was significantly lower than that recorded in the control group. The hemoglobin (Hb) levels increased after surgery, and the level of Hb in the research group was significantly higher compared with the control group. After the operation, the expression levels of tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, and C-reactive protein and the total incidence of complications were significantly lower in the research group compared with the control group. One year after the operation, the quality of life of the two groups was greatly improved, with the quality of life in the research group being significantly better.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy was effective for colorectal surgery by reducing the occurrence of complications and inflammatory stress reaction; moreover, the quality of life of patients was significantly improved, which warrants further promotion.

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.

Laparoscopic Radical Resection versus Routine Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

For patients with colorectal cancer, minimally invasive surgical methods, particularly laparoscopic methods, are now the preferred course of therapy. This research is performed to investigate the effects of laparoscopic radical resection on patients with colorectal cancer. A total of 100 colorectal cancer patients treated in our hospital from January 2017 to January 2019 were enrolled. The subjects were divided into observation (n = 50) and control (n = 50) groups and treated with laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy, respectively. As well as postoperative complications and survival rates, the levels of inflammatory substances, stress response, immunological function, and perioperative markers were compared between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the postoperative exhaust time between the two groups (P > 0.05). Compared with the control group, the observation group showed longer operation time, faster recovery of intestinal function, shorter hospital stay, and less intraoperative bleeding amount (P < 0.05). The serum contents of hs-CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, norepinephrine, adrenaline, and cortisol at 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d after surgery were significantly higher than before in both groups (P < 0.05). Moreover, the serum contents of hs-CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, norepinephrine, adrenaline, and cortisol in the observation group were significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). At 10 days following surgery, immune index levels had dramatically increased in both groups, with noticeably higher immune index levels in the observation group than in the control group (P < 0.05). There were no appreciable differences in the two groups' 2-year survival rates (P > 0.05), but the complication rate was much greater in the control group (P < 0.05). To sum up, after laparoscopic surgery, patients had fewer complications, shorter hospital stay, lower inflammatory factor expression, less stress response, better immune function, less trauma, faster recovery, and improved quality of life.

Comparison of open and minimally invasive approaches to colon cancer resection in compliance with 12 regional lymph node harvest quality measure

BACKGROUND

There has been a growing trend toward minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colon cancer. Pathological analysis of a minimum of 12 lymph nodes (LNs) is a benchmark for adequate resection. Here, we present a comparison of surgical techniques in achieving a full oncologic resection.

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgery for Stage I-III colon cancer (2010-2016) were identified from the National Cancer Database. Cases were stratified by surgical approach. Trends in approach were assessed, including whether the 12-LN benchmark was met. Uni- and multivariate regression was used to assess overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 290,776 colectomies were analyzed. MIS increased from 32.8% to 57.2% from 2010 to 2016 (p < .001). An overall median of 18 LNs were harvested and compliance with the 12-LN benchmark increased (84.6%-91.6%, p < .001); there were no difference between open and MIS. A subset analysis comparing hospital type revealed that regardless of approach, compliance was lower at community hospitals (p < .001). OS was better for patients treated at academic or National Cancer Institute centers, underwent MIS, and in those meeting the 12-LN benchmark (all p ≤ .002).

CONCLUSION

As MIS colon resections continue to increase, we demonstrate that there is no difference in the ability to achieve the 12-LN benchmark with open and MIS approaches.

Surgical oncology in the age of multimodality therapy for cancer of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract

INTRODUCTION

To date, all efforts to fight gastrointestinal cancer, regardless of its origin and entity, have resulted in complex therapeutic regimens involving a combination of systemic therapy, radiation therapy and surgery. It is generally accepted across all disciplines that not one, but the combination and the proper timing of all modalities result in the best oncologic outcome.

AREAS COVERED

Here, we provide insight into the current and future value of multimodal therapeutic approaches for upper and lower gastrointestinal cancer. Various aspects of treatment as well as open questions regarding indication and timing of multimodal strategies are addressed in this review.

EXPERT OPINION

In order to further improve the survival and quality of life of patients with gastrointestinal tumors in the future, scientifically proven multimodal therapy concepts are needed first and foremost. In addition, markers are pivotal to assign individual patients to a specific concept and to monitor the success of therapy. The main question is in which situation a neoadjuvant, perioperative or adjuvant radio-, chemo- or immunotherapy is superior. In fact, almost every curatively intended concept still contains surgical resection. Thus, improvement in surgical technique is also critical for multimodality concepts.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic approach to colonic obstruction for colon cancer

BACKGROUND

We speculated that a laparoscopic approach to emergent/urgent partial colectomy for colonic obstruction would be associated with less morbidity and shorter length of stay with similar mortality to open colectomy. We compared the outcomes of laparoscopic and open approaches to emergent/urgent partial colectomy for colonic obstruction from colonic cancer using data from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database for the period of 2012-2017.

METHODS

Multivariate analysis compared NSQIP data points following laparoscopic, laparoscopic converted to open, and open colectomy for emergent/urgent colectomy for colonic obstruction from colon cancer from 2012 to 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 1293 patients who underwent emergent colectomy for colon obstruction from colon cancer during 2012-2017 were identified within the NSQIP database. Laparoscopic approach was used for colonic obstruction in 19.3% of operations with a conversion rate of 28.5%. A laparoscopic approach to obstructing colonic cancers was associated with lower morbidity (50% vs. 61.8%, AOR: 0.67, P = 0.01) and shorter hospitalization length (10 days vs. 13 days, mean difference: 3 days, P < 0.01) compared with an open approach. However, the mean operation duration was longer in laparoscopic operations than open operations (159 min vs. 137 min, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic approach to malignant colonic obstruction is associated with decreased morbidity. This suggests that efforts should be directed towards increasing the utilization of laparoscopic approaches for the surgical treatment of colonic obstruction.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Propensity-matched Study From a National Cohort of Patients

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative outcomes of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) in comparison with open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in a national cohort of patients.

BACKGROUND

Limited well-controlled studies exist comparing perioperative outcomes between MIPD and OPD.

METHODS

Patients who underwent MIPD and OPD were abstracted from the 2014 to 2015 pancreas-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. OPD and MIPD patients were matched 3:1 using propensity score, and perioperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 4484 patients were identified with 334 (7.4%) undergoing MIPD. MIPD patients were younger, more likely to be White, and had a lower rate of weight loss. They were more likely to undergo classic Whipple and to have a drain placed. After 3:1 matching, 1002 OPD patients were compared with 334 MIPD patients. MIPD was associated with longer mean operative time (426.6 vs 359.6 minutes; P < 0.01), higher readmission rate (19.2% vs 14.3%; P = 0.04) and lower rate of prolonged length of stay >14 days (16.5% vs 21.6%; P = 0.047). The 2 groups had a similar rate of 30-day mortality (MIPD 1.8% vs OPD 1.3%; P = 0.51), overall complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula, and delayed gastric emptying. A secondary analysis comparing MIPD without conversion or open assist with OPD showed that MIPD patients had lower rates of overall surgical site infection (13.4% vs 19.6%; P = 0.04) and transfusion (7.9% vs 14.4%; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

MIPD had an equivalent morbidity and mortality rate to OPD, with the benefit of a decreased rate of prolonged length of stay, though this is partially offset by an increased readmission rate.

Optimizing Patient Selection for Laparoscopic and Open Colorectal Cancer Resections: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program–Matched Analysis

The aim of this study was to identify patients undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) resection who might benefit specifically from either an open or laparoscopic approach. From the NSQIP database (2012–2013), patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy (LC) or open colectomy (OC) for CRC were identified. The two groups were matched and compared in terms of any, medical, and surgical complications. A wide range of patient characteristics were collected and analyzed. Interaction analysis was performed in a multivariable regression model to identify risk factors that may make LC or OC more beneficial in certain subgroups of patients. Overall, OC (n = 6593) was associated with a significantly higher risk of any [odds ratio (OR) 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.87–2.20], surgical (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.82–2.16), and medical (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.51–1.94) complications than LC (n = 6593). No subgroup of patients benefited from an open approach. Patients with obesity (BMI > 30) (P = 0.03) and older age (>65 years) (P = 0.01) benefited more than average from a laparoscopic approach. For obese patients, LC was associated with less overall complications (OC vs LC: OR 1.92 obese vs 1.21 nonobese patients). For elderly patients, LC was more preferable regarding the risk of medical complications (OC vs LC OR of 1.91 vs 1.34 for younger patients). No subgroup of CRC patients benefited specifically more from an open colorectal resection. This supports that the laparoscopic technique should be performed whenever feasible. For the obese and elderly patients, the benefits of the laparoscopic approach were more pronounced.

Gynecologists May Underestimate the Amount of Blood Loss during Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy

Background

We considered the possibility of underestimation of the amount of bleeding during laparoscopic surgery, and we investigated comparing the amount of bleeding between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery by considering the concentration of hemoglobin before and after surgery as indicators.

Methods

The following procedures were included: A, surgery for ovarian tumor; B, myomectomy; and C, hysterectomy either by laparoscopic surgery or open surgery. Patients who underwent the above procedures in between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were enrolled. We identified 1749 cases (A: 90, B: 105, and C: 325 of open surgery and A: 667, B: 437, and C: 125 of laparoscopic surgery). We considered the sum as an estimation of blood loss during surgery and the change in the value of hemoglobin in laboratory testing one day before and after surgery.

Results

During laparoscopic surgery, the measurements of blood loss included the following: A: 59.8 ml; B: 168.6 ml; and C: 206.8 ml. During open surgery, measurements of blood loss included the following: A: 130.7 ml; B: 236.7 ml; and C; 280.9 ml. The reduction of hemoglobin after surgery compared with that before surgery was less in laparoscopic surgery than that in open surgery in A and B; however, this reduction was not significantly different in C.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that the estimation of the bleeding in A and B was appropriate; however, the estimation might be underestimated in C during laparoscopic surgery.

Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Every colorectal surgeon during his or her career is faced with anastomotic leakage (AL); one of the most dreaded complications following any type of gastrointestinal anastomosis due to increased risk of morbidity, mortality, overall impact on functional and oncologic outcome and drainage on hospital resources. In order to understand and give an overview of the AL risk factors in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, we carried out a careful review of the existing literature on this topic and found several different definitions of AL which leads us to believe that the lack of a consensual, standard definition can partly explain the considerable variations in reported rates of AL in clinical studies. Colorectal leak rates have been found to vary depending on the anatomic location of the anastomosis with reported incidence rates ranging from 0 to 20%, while the laparoscopic approach to colorectal resections has not yet been associated with a significant reduction in AL incidence. As well, numerous risk factors, though identified, lack unanimous recognition amongst researchers. For example, the majority of papers describe the risk factors for left-sided anastomosis, the principal risk being male sex and lower anastomosis, while little data exists defining AL risk factors in a right colectomy. Also, gut microbioma is gaining an emerging role as potential risk factor for leakage.

Impact of radiofrequency energy on intraoperative outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy for cancer in obese patients

Nowadays laparoscopic approach is accepted as a valid alternative to open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Several studies consider this approach to be safe and feasible also in obese patients, even if dissection in these patients may require a longer operative time and involve higher blood loss. To facilitate laparoscopic approach, more difficult in these patients, several energy sources for laparoscopic dissection and sealing, has been adopted recently. The aim of this study is to investigate the possible intraoperative advantages of radiofrequency energy in terms of blood loss and operative time in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic resection for cancer. All patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer from January 2010 to December 2015 were registered in a prospective database. Patients with a body mass index BMI (kg/m2) ≥30 were defined as obese, and patients with a BMI (kg/m2) <30 were defined as non-obese. All 136 obese patients observed were divided retrospectively into 2 groups according to the devices used for dissection: 83 patients (Historical group: B) on whom dissection and coagulation were performed using other energy sources (monopolar electrocautery scissors, bipolar electrical energy, ultrasonic coagulating shears) and 53 patients who were treated with electrothermal bipolar vessel sealing (Caiman group: A). In group A, the Laparoscopic Caiman 5 (Aesculap AG, Tuttlingen, Germany) was the only instrument employed in the whole procedure. The study examined only three types of operation: right colectomy (RC), left colectomy (LC), and anterior resection (AR). Preoperative data were similar for RC, LC, and AR in both groups (A and B). The mean operative time was statistically shorter in the Caiman group than in the Historical group [104 vs 124 min (p 0.004), 116 vs 140 min (p 0.004), and 125 vs 151 min (p 0.003) for RC, LC, and AR between group A and B, respectively]. Also intraoperative blood loss results significantly lower in the Caiman group than in the historical one [52 ml vs 93 for RC (p 0.003); 65 vs 120 ml for LC (p 0.001); 93 vs 145 ml for AR (p 0.002) between group A and B, respectively]. No intraoperative complications were recorded in either group. The mean conversion rate was 4.4% (6 patients). There were no statistical differences in intensive care unit (ICU) stay, functional outcomes, mean hospital stay and overall morbidity rate between the two groups. There was no mortality in either group. The use of the Caiman EBVS instrument shows significant advantages with respect to a small number of intraoperative parameters. We can conclude that use of this radiofrequency device, in the laparoscopic approach, offers advantages in terms of lower intraoperative blood loss and shorter operative time in obese patients with colorectal cancer.