Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: upgrading the level of evidence

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.

A retrospective cohort study of intra-corporeal versus extra-corporeal anastomosis for right hemicolectomy with cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare outcomes and cost effectiveness of extra-corporeal anastomosis (ECA) versus intra-corporeal anastomosis (ICA) for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Programme data.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer from January 2018 to December 2022 were identified. Non-cancer diagnoses, emergency procedures or synchronous resection of other organs were excluded. Surgical characteristics, peri-operative outcomes, long-term survival and hospitalisation costs were compared. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to evaluate cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

A total of 223 patients (175 ECA, 48 ICA) were included in the analysis. Both cohorts exhibited comparable baseline patient, comorbidity, and tumour characteristics. Distribution of pathological TMN stage, tumour largest dimension, total lymph node harvest and resection margin lengths were statistically similar. ICA was associated with a longer median operative duration compared with ECA (255 min vs. 220 min, P < 0.001). There was a quicker time to gastrointestinal recovery, with a shorter median hospital stay in the ICA group (4.0 versus 5.0 days, P = 0.001). Overall complication rates were comparable. ICA was associated with a higher surgical procedure cost (£6301.57 versus £4998.52, P < 0.001), but lower costs for ward accommodation (£1679.05 versus £2420.15, P = 0.001) and treatment (£3774.55 versus £4895.14, P = 0.009), with a 4.5% reduced overall cost compared with ECA. The ICER of -£3323.58 showed ICA to be more cost effective than ECA, across a range of willingness-to-pay thresholds.

CONCLUSION

ICA in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is associated with quicker post-operative recovery and may be more cost effective compared with ECA, despite increased operative costs.

How to do laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction

The key steps of performing a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for overweight colon cancer patients: a case-control study

INTRODUCTION

Either extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) or intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) could be selected for digestive reconstruction in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH). However, whether LRH with IA is feasible and beneficial for overweight right-side colon cancer (RCC) is unclear. This study aims to investigate the feasibility and advantage of IA in LRH for overweight RCC.

METHODS

Forty-eight consecutive overweight RCC patients undergoing LRH with IA were matched with 48 consecutive cases undergoing LRH with EA. Both clinical and surgical data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The incidence of postoperative complications was 20.8% (10/48) in the EA group and 14.6% (7/48) in the IA group respectively, with no statistical difference. Compared to the EA group, patients in the IA group revealed faster gas (40.2 + 7.8 h vs. 45.6 + 7.9 h, P = 0.001) and stool discharge (4.0 + 1.2 d vs. 4.5 + 1.1 d, P = 0.040), shorter assisted incision (5.3 + 1.3 cm vs. 7.5 + 1.2 cm, P = 0.000), and less analgesic used (3.3 + 1.3 d vs. 4.0 + 1.3 d, P = 0.012). There were no significant differences in operation time, blood loss, or postoperative hospital stays. In the IA group, the first one third of cases presented longer operation time (228.4 + 29.3 min) compared to the middle (191.0 + 35.0 min, P = 0.003) and the last one third of patients (182.2 + 20.7 min, P = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

LRH with IA is feasible and safe for overweight RCC, with faster bowel function recovery and less pain. Accumulation of certain cases of LRH with IA will facilitate surgical procedures and reduce operation time.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive right hemicolectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Purpose

Compared with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA), intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) is expected to provide some benefits, including a shorter operation time and less intraoperative bleeding. Nevertheless, the benefits of ICA have mainly been evaluated in nonrandomized studies. Owing to the recent update of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of right hemicolectomy (RHC), the need to measure the actual effect by synthesizing the outcomes of these studies has emerged.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases (from inception to January 30, 2023) for studies that applied ICA and ECA for RHC with MIS. We included 7 RCTs. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate, length of incision, and postoperative outcomes such as ileus, anastomosis leakage, length of hospitalization, and postoperative pain were compared between ICA and ECA.

Results

A total of 740 patients were included in the study. Among them, 377 and 373 underwent ICA and ECA, respectively. There were significant differences in age (P = 0.003) and incision type (P < 0.001) between ICA and ECA. ICA was associated with a significantly longer operation time (P = 0.033). Although the postoperative pain associated with ICA was significantly lower than that associated with ECA on postoperative day 2 (POD 2) (P = 0.003), it was not different on POD 3 between the groups. Other perioperative outcomes were similar between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis, ICA did not significantly improve short-term outcomes compared to ECA; other advantages to overcome ICA's longer operation time are not clear.

Single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic ileocolic resections for Crohn's disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) versus multi-port laparoscopy for ileocolic resection in patients with Crohn's disease (CD).

Patients and Methods

A systematic search of multiple electronic databases was conducted. The peri- and post-operative outcomes were evaluated between Crohn's patients undergoing SILS versus multi-port laparoscopy for ileocolic resection. The primary outcomes included operative time, anastomotic leak rate, post-operative wound infections and length of hospital stay. Analysed secondary outcomes were conversion rates, ileus occurrence, intra-abdominal abscess formation, return to theatre and re-admissions. Revman 5.3 was used to perform the statistical analysis.

Results

Five observational studies with 521 patients (SILS: 211; multi-port: 310) were included in the data synthesis. Patients undergoing SILS had a reduced total operative time compared to multi-port laparoscopy (mean difference [MD]: -16.14, 95% confidence interval: [CI] -27.23 - 5.05, P = 0.004). Post-operative hospital stay was also found to be significantly less in the SILS group (MD: -0.57, 95% CI: -0.73--0.42, P < 0.0001). No significant difference was seen in the anastomotic leak rate (MD: -16.14, 95% CI: 0.18-1.71, P = 0.004) or post-operative wound infections (odds ratio: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.24 - 2.47, P = 0.67) between the two groups. Moreover, all the measured secondary outcomes were comparable.

Conclusion

SILS seems to be a feasible alternative to multi-port laparoscopic surgery for ileocolic resection in patients with CD. Improved outcomes in terms of total operative time and length of hospital stay were observed in patients undergoing SILS surgery. Adopting this procedure into routine clinical practice constitutes the next step in the development of minimally invasive surgery.

Meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive right hemicolectomy: upgrading the level of evidence

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive right hemicolectomy has been increasingly used for the treatment of right hemicolectomy disease, and both intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) are available to restore intestinal continuity. However, the advantages and disadvantages of these two anastomoses are highly controversial. The present meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of ICA versus ECA in minimally invasive right colectomy to improve the grade of evidence.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic or robotic right hemicolectomy published from database inception to February 2023. Two researchers performed the literature review, data extraction, bias assessment, and meta-analysis of the data using Review Manager 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs with a total of 750 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed a lower incidence of postoperative paralytic ileus (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39 ~ 0.99, p = 0.04) and shorter incision length (MD - 1.38; 95% CI: - 1.98 ~  - 0.78, p < 0.00001), but longer operative time (MD 10.69; 95% CI: 2.76 ~ 18.63, p = 0.008). The remaining events including bleeding (RR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.12 ~ 2.04, p = 0.33), anastomotic leak (RR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39 ~ 0.99, p = 0.85), surgical site infection (RR 0.15, 95% CI: 0.22 ~ 1.25, p = 0.15), overall perioperative morbidity (RR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.58 ~ 1.26, p = 0.44), number of harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.75; 95% CI: - 0.15 ~ 1.65, p = 0.10), and length of hospital stay (MD - 0.27; 95% CI: - 0.91 ~ 0.38, p = 0.42) were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to ECA, ICA in minimally invasive right hemicolectomy reduced the risk of postoperative paralytic ileus and shortened the length of the incision but prolonged the operative time.

The effect of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in robotic right colectomy on perianastomotic perfusion: a substudy to a multicenter RCT

PURPOSE

Previous studies have shown that intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) in minimally invasive right colectomy may improve postoperative recovery compared with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). It has been hypothesized that creating the anastomosis extracorporeally may cause mesenteric traction and compromised intestinal perfusion. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of either ICA or ECA on intestinal perfusion.

METHOD

This was a substudy to a multicenter, triple-blind randomized clinical trial comparing ICA with ECA in patients undergoing robotic right colectomy for colonic cancer. Videos from intraoperative Indocyanine Green (ICG) fluorescence imaging were analyzed with quantitative ICG perfusion assessment (q-ICG). q-ICG was performed by extracting perfusion metrics from a time-intensity curve generated from an image analysis software: F_MAX: maximal fluorescence intensity, T_MAX: time until maximal fluorescent signal, T_1/2MAX: time until half-maximal fluorescent signal, time ratio (T_1/2MAX/T_MAX) and slope.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients (33 ICA and 35 ECA) were available for analysis. Demographics were similar between the groups, except for mean arterial blood pressure at the time of ICG infusion, which was significantly lower in the ICA group. We found a significantly steeper slope in the ICA group compared to the ECA group (6.3 vs. 4.7 AU/sec, P = .048). There were no significant differences in F_MAX, T_MAX, T_1/2MAX, and time ratio.

CONCLUSION

We found evidence of an improved intestinal perfusion following ICA compared with ECA. This finding may be related to patient outcomes and should be explored further in the future.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CLINICALTRIALS

gov NCT03130166.

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.

The MERCY Study Collaborating Group, de’Angelis N, Pattacini GC, Winter DC, Aisoni F, Bianchi G, Carcoforo P, Celentano V, Coccolini F, Di Saverio S, Frontali A, Denet C, Fuks D, Genova P, Guerrieri M, Kraft M, Lakkis Z, Antonot C, Vertier J, Le Roy B, Lupinacci RM, Martínez-Perez A, De Palma GD, Milone M, Orci L, Bartoletti S, O’Connell L, Ortenzi M, Paquet JC, Perrotto O, Petri R, Santangelo A, Scabini S, De Rosa R, Tonini V, Valverde A, Andolfi E, Pecchini F, Pellino G, Urbani A, Vidal L, Restivo A, Deidda S, Zorcolo L, Ris F, Espin E, Piccoli M. Predictors of surgical outcomes of minimally invasive right colectomy: the MERCY study

PURPOSE

The optimal approach for minimally invasive (MIS) right colectomy remains under debate. This study aimed to describe surgical trends in the treatment of nonmetastatic right colon cancer and to identify predictors of short-term surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter cohort study of Minimally-invasivE surgery for oncologic Right ColectomY (MERCY) was conducted on patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic right colectomy between 2014 and 2020. Classification tree approach was used to describe the extracorporeal (EA) or intracorporeal (IA) anastomosis choice. Mixed-model regressions were used to identify patient- and surgery-related factors predictive of postoperative outcomes. A questionnaire was used to evaluate the surgeons' perspectives.

RESULTS

The MERCY database comprised 1870 patients; 87.2% underwent laparoscopy, and 68.1% received an EA. A clear surgical trend was noted, with an increasing rate of IA and robotic procedures after 2017. EA represented 41% of anastomoses in centers equipped with a robotic surgical system. Mixed-model regressions (on 1088 patients) showed that age, sex, BMI, comorbidity, robotics, IA, and conversion to open surgery were predictors of surgical outcomes. In particular, IA was a predictor of a shorter time to regular diet and fewer surgical site infections. Based on the questionnaire, IA was the preferred over EA by 72% of surgeons.

CONCLUSION

MIS continues to evolve, with an increasing number of IA being performed in the recent years and when using a robotic surgical system. Understanding the role of predictors of surgical outcomes may help surgeons personalize decision-making among the different MIS options to manage right colon cancer.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer: a nationwide cohort study

PURPOSE

On a national level, the minimally invasive approach is widely adopted in Denmark. The adoption of robotic colorectal surgery is increasing; however, the advantage of a robotic approach in right colectomy is still uncertain. The purpose of this study was to compare robotic right colectomy with laparoscopic right colectomy on a national level.

METHODS

This was a nationwide database study based on data from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database. Patients from all colorectal centers in Denmark in the period 2014-2018 treated with curative intend in an elective setting with either robotic or laparoscopic right colectomy were identified. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounding, and the groups were compared on demographics, disease characteristics, operative data, and postoperative and pathology outcomes. Reporting was done in accordance with the STROBE statement.

RESULTS

In total, 4002 patients were available for analysis. Propensity score matching in ratio 2:1 identified 718 laparoscopic and 359 robotic cases. After matching, we found a higher lymph node yield in the robotic group compared to the laparoscopic group, (32.5 vs. 28.4, P < 0.001), while radicality, plane of dissection, and pathological disease stages showed no differences. There were no statistical differences in morbidity and mortality. Intracorporeal anastomosis (23.7% vs. 4.5%, P < 0.001) was more commonly performed with a robotic approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic approach was associated with a significant higher lymph node yield and with similar postoperative morbidity compared to a laparoscopic approach for right colectomy.