Do elderly patients have the most to gain from laparoscopic surgery?

Optimizing Total Laparoscopic Hysterectomy for the Geriatric Population: A Practical Case Study and Comprehensive Literature Review

Elderly patients represent a large cohort of patients requiring gynaecological surgery for benign and malignant indications. In recent years, several conventional gynaecological procedures have shifted towards minimally invasive alternatives such as laparoscopy, hysteroscopy, and robotic surgery. A recent Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) analysis compared the outcomes of 25,000 women undergoing laparotomy versus laparoscopic approach to hysterectomy and found that laparoscopy is associated with a shorter duration of hospitalization (three days versus five days), less postoperative complications (76%), less requirement for blood transfusion, reduced operational costs, faster recovery, and an overall safer surgical experience. Although geriatric patients are affected by age-related comorbidities, physiologic changes, and altered pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of administered drugs, these patients benefit most from minimally invasive surgery. In this paper, we present a comprehensive account of the interdisciplinary perioperative approaches employed to accomplish a total laparoscopic hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, and pelvic lymph node dissection in an 82-year-old patient who was diagnosed with grade I endometrial adenocarcinoma and multiple age-related medical comorbidities.

Comparison of short-term outcomes and survival between minimally invasive colectomy and open colectomy in patients 80 years of age and older

We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of patients 80 years of age and older with colon cancer who underwent robotic colectomy versus laparoscopic colectomy. Data for patients treated at a comprehensive cancer center between January 2006 and November 2018 were collected retrospectively. Outcomes from minimally invasive laparoscopic or robotic colectomy were compared. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method with significance evaluated by the log-rank test. The laparoscopic (n = 104) and the robotic (n = 75) colectomy groups did not differ across baseline characteristics. Patients who underwent a robotic colectomy had a shorter median length of hospital stay (5 versus 6 days; p < 0.001) and underwent fewer conversions to open surgery (3% versus 17%; p = 0.002) compared to the laparoscopic cohort. The groups did not differ in postoperative complication rates, overall survival or disease-free survival. Elderly patients undergoing robotic colectomy for colon cancer have a shorter hospital stay and lower rates of conversion without compromise to oncologic outcomes.

Benefits of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults compared with younger adults: a retrospective study

Randomized research demonstrated that robotic surgery was oncologically safe and beneficial in the short term. We investigated whether older adults benefit from robotics more than younger adults do in terms of short-term outcomes. We identified all older (≥ 70 years old) and younger (≤ 70) adults with rectal cancer treated with resection between 2019 and 2022 from an institutional database. We assessed the short-term post-operative 90-day outcomes, which included the first bowel movement, length of hospital duration, sepsis, and harvested lymph node on an age-based differentiation. The key outcomes were complications and grades III-IV on the Clavien-Dindo scale. We identified 298 individuals treated with oncologic resection of rectal cancer: 108 (36.6%) were older adults, while 190 (63.4%) were younger adults. Older adults treated with robotic surgery include 45 (41.6%), whereas 63 (58.3%) older adults were treated with laparoscopic surgery, and 85 (44.7%) younger adults were treated with robotic surgery, while 105 (55.2%) younger adults were treated with laparoscopic surgery. The Clavien-Dindo grading system exposes a substantial P < 0.05 in younger group, whereas grade III-IV patients are seen more frequently in laparoscopic surgery than robotic surgery. Younger and older persons both benefited differently from robotic surgery when compared to laparoscopic surgery in terms of major post-operative complications.

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in an elderly population with high comorbidity: a single centre experience

PURPOSE

The use of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients with high comorbidity is a controversial subject. This retrospective analysis aims to compare two different age groups with respect to short and long term clinical and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

All laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer performed between February 2011 and October 2017 with curative or palliative intention were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 128 completed resections, the rate of major complications, length of hospital stays, 30-day mortality, 2-year recurrence rate, and the survival after palliative surgery were comparable between group A (< 75 years; n = 76) and B (≥ 75 years; n = 52). Patients in group B showed an extraordinarily high proportion of ASA III stage (73.1% vs. A: 35.5%; p < 0.01) and, in this context, an increased rate of minor postoperative complications (17.3% vs. A: 6.6%; p < 0.05) and lower overall 2 and 5-year survival rates. Within the first 2 years, they died sooner in the event of recurrence (57.1% vs. A: 18.2%; p < 0.05), and their survival after rectal resection, especially for low rectal carcinoma, was significantly reduced (58.8% vs. A: 96.7%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer can be strongly advocated for elderly patients even in the face of high comorbidity. Whether very old patients with low rectal carcinoma also benefit from minimally invasive surgery or should undergo alternative therapies would need to be clarified primarily by examining the quality of life.

What Should We Recommend for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Adults Aged 75 and Older?

The current recommendation to stop colorectal cancer screening for older adults is based on a lack of evidence due to systematic exclusion of this population from trials. Older adults are a heterogenous population with many available strategies for patient-centered assessment and decision-making. Evolutions in management strategies for colorectal cancer have made safe and effective options available to older adults, and the rationale to screen for treatable disease more reasonably, especially given the aging Canadian population. In this commentary, we review the current screening guidelines and the evidence upon which they were built, the unique considerations for screening older adults, new treatment options, the risks and benefits of increased screening and potential considerations for the new guidelines.

Safety and outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the extremely elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Gallstones are a common cause of morbidity in the elderly. Operative treatment is often avoided due to concerns about poor outcomes but the evidence for this is unclear. We aim to consolidate available evidence assessing laparoscopic cholecystectomy outcomes in the extreme elderly (>80s) compared to younger patients. Methods: Studies comparing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in >80s with younger patients were considered. Total complications, mortality, conversion, bile duct injury, and length of stay were compared between the two groups. Results: Twelve studies including 366,522 patients were included. They were of moderate overall quality. The elderly group had more complicated gallbladder disease and also had more co-morbidities and a higher ASA grade. The risk of morbidity was lower in the younger group (RR 0.58 (95% CI 0.58-0.59)) with a slightly lower risk of conversion (RR 0.96 (0.94-0.98)) Length of stay was significantly longer for the elderly patients. Differences in mortality and bile duct injury were non-significant in all but one study. Conclusion: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and effective in the extreme elderly. Higher complication rates are predominantly related to increased co-morbidities and more complex gallbladder disease. Patients should be carefully selected, and cholecystectomy performed at an earlier stage to minimize these problems.

Benefits of minimally-invasive surgery for sigmoid and rectal cancer in older adults compared with younger adults: Do older adults have the most to gain?

INTRODUCTION

Randomized trials demonstrated oncologic safety and short-term benefits of laparoscopy. We investigated if the benefit of laparoscopy on short-term outcomes is greater for older adults compared with younger adults.

METHODS

We identified all older (≥70 years old) and younger (<70) adults with primary sigmoid and rectal cancer treated with resection between 2002 and 2018 from an institutional database. We compared 30-day postoperative outcomes using multivariable logistic regression with an interaction term between age group and surgical approach. Primary outcomes were death, major (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) and minor (Clavien-Dindo I-II) complications, and wound complications.

RESULTS

We included 792 patients, 293 (37%) older and 499 (63%) younger. Use of laparoscopy was similar between age groups: 120/293 (41%) older, 204/499 (41%) younger (p = .98). All patients had 30-day follow-up. Compared with open resection, minimally-invasive resection was associated with a greater reduction in deaths in older adults than in younger adults (absolute difference in older adults 7.0% less versus 2.1% less in younger adults; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] older 3.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-7.33; aOR younger 0.31, 95% CI 0.05-1.24; interaction p = .01). Similarly, minimally-invasive resection was associated with a greater reduction in major complications in older adults than in younger adults (absolute difference in older adults 6.4% less versus 2.4% less in younger adults; aOR older 1.91, 95% CI 1.07-3.41; aOR younger 0.70, 95% CI 0.34-1.38; interaction p = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally-invasive compared with open surgery demonstrated a differential benefit on postoperative death and major complications between younger and older adults.

Propensity score-matching analysis comparing laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in elderly patients

There is little evidence on the safety and benefits of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) in elderly patients; therefore, we evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of this procedure by comparing perioperative and oncological outcomes between LPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) in elderly patients. We retrospectively reviewed the data of 1,693 patients who underwent PD to manage periampullary tumours at a single institution between January 2014 and June 2017. Of these patients, 326 were elderly patients aged ≥70 years, with 56 patients allocated to the LPD group and 270 to the OPD group. One-to-one propensity score matching (56:56) was used to match the baseline characteristics of patients who underwent LPD and OPD. LPD was associated with significantly fewer clinically significant postoperative pancreatic fistulas (7.1% vs. 21.4%), fewer analgesic injections (10 vs. 15.6 times; p = 0.022), and longer operative time (321.8 vs. 268.5 minutes; p = 0.001) than OPD in elderly patients. There were no significant differences in 3-year overall and disease-free survival rates between the LPD and OPD groups. LPD had acceptable perioperative and oncological outcomes compared with OPD in elderly patients. LPD is a reliable treatment option for elderly patients with periampullary tumours.

Use of laparoscopic colectomy increasing in trauma: comparison of laparoscopic vs. open colectomy

Laparoscopy accounts for > 70% of general surgical cases. Given the increased use of laparoscopy in emergent colorectal disease, we hypothesized that there would be an increased use of laparoscopic colectomy (LC) in trauma patients. In addition, we hypothesized increased length of stay (LOS) and mortality in trauma patients undergoing open colectomy (OC) vs. LC. This was a retrospective analysis using the National Trauma Data Bank (2008-2015). We included adult patients undergoing LC or OC. A multivariable logistic regression model was used for determining risk of LOS and mortality. We identified 19,788 (96.8%) patients undergoing OC and 644 (3.2%) who underwent LC. There was a 21-fold increased number of patients that underwent LC over the study period (p < 0.05), with approximately 119 per 10,000 trauma patients undergoing LC. The most common operation was a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (27.5%). LC patients had a lower median injury severity score (ISS) (16 vs. 17, p < 0.001). There was no difference in LOS (p = 0.14) or mortality (p = 0.44) between the two groups. This remained true in patients with isolated colorectal injury. The use of LC has increased 21-fold from 2008 to 2015, with laparoscopic right hemicolectomy being the most common procedure performed. There was no difference in LOS, in-hospital complications, or mortality between the two groups. We suggest that LC should be considered in stable adult trauma patients undergoing colectomy. However, future prospective research is needed to help determine which trauma patients may benefit from LC.

Minimally invasive versus open surgery in the Medicare population: a comparison of post-operative and economic outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite strong evidence demonstrating the clinical and economic benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), utilization of MIS in the Medicare population is highly variable and tends to be lower than in the general population. We sought to compare the post-operative and economic outcomes of MIS versus open surgery for seven common surgical procedures in the Medicare population.

METHODS

Using the 2014 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review Inpatient Limited Data Set, patients undergoing bariatric, cholecystectomy, colectomy, hysterectomy, inguinal hernia, thoracic, and ventral hernia procedures were identified using DRG and ICD-9 codes. Adjusting for patient demographics and comorbidities, the odds of complication and all-cause 30-day re-admission were compared among patients undergoing MIS versus open surgery stratified by operation type. A generalized linear model was used to calculate the estimated difference in length of stay (LOS), Medicare claim cost, and Medicare reimbursement.

RESULTS

Among 233,984 patients, 102,729 patients underwent an open procedure versus 131,255 who underwent an MIS procedure. The incidence of complication after MIS was lower for 5 out of the 7 procedures examined (OR 0.36-0.69). Re-admission was lower for MIS for 6 out of 7 procedures (OR 0.43-0.87). MIS was associated with shorter LOS for 6 procedures (point estimate range 0.35-2.47 days shorter). Medicare claim costs for MIS were lower for 4 (range $3010.23-$4832.74 less per procedure) and Medicare reimbursements were lower for 3 (range $841.10-$939.69 less per procedure).

CONCLUSIONS

MIS benefited Medicare patients undergoing a range of surgical procedures. MIS was associated with fewer complications and re-admissions as well as shorter LOS and lower Medicare costs and reimbursements versus open surgery. MIS may represent a better quality and cost proposition in the Medicare population.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients aged 60 years and over - our experience

Aim. To analyze the efficiency of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the population aged 60 years and over admitted with acute cholecystitis, the clinical features and associated pathology presented by these patients and the impact of these factors on the choice of surgical technique. Materials and method. A retrospective study was carried out between February 2010 and February 2015, on patients aged 60 years and over, operated in emergency for acute cholecystitis in our clinic. All data were extracted from the registered medical documents and operatory protocols. Results. A total of 497 surgeries were performed for acute cholecystitis, of which 149 were patients aged 60 years and over (30%). Open surgery is much better represented in the population aged over 60 years (61.75% vs. 29.98%). One major cause is the associated pathology that increases the anesthetic risk and hampers a laparoscopic procedure. The conversion rate in the study group presented a higher percentage, but not more exaggerated than in the general population (6.71% vs. 4.63 %).Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery had a faster recovery and required lower doses and shorter term pain medication, in contrast to conventional surgery (1,8 days vs. 5.7 days). Bile leak has been of reduced quantity, short-term and stopped spontaneously. Only one case needed reintervention, in which aberrant bile ducts that were clipped were found in the gallbladder bed, was operated by laparoscopy. Wound infections and swelling were also encountered more frequently in patients that underwent classic surgery (3.24%). Conclusions. Performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, when possible, has produced very good results, reducing the average length of stay of patients and even decreasing the number of postoperative complications, thus allowing a faster reintegration of patients into society. The main concern was related to the associated pathology that increased the anesthetic risk.