Cost analysis of single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: A propensity score-matching analysis

Harnessing Artificial Intelligence for the Detection and Management of Colorectal Cancer Treatment

Currently, eight million people in the United States suffer from cancer and it is a major global health concern. Early detection and interventions are urgently needed for all cancers, including colorectal cancer. Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer worldwide. Based on the diagnostic efforts to general awareness and lifestyle choices, it is understandable why colorectal cancer is so prevalent today. There is a notable lack of awareness concerning the impact of this cancer and its connection to lifestyle elements, as well as people sometimes mistaking symptoms for a different gastrointestinal condition. Artificial intelligence (AI) may assist in the early detection of all cancers, including colorectal cancer. The usage of AI has exponentially grown in healthcare through extensive research, and since clinical implementation, it has succeeded in improving patient lifestyles, modernizing diagnostic processes, and innovating current treatment strategies. Numerous challenges arise for patients with colorectal cancer and oncologists alike during treatment. For initial screening phases, conventional methods often result in misdiagnosis. Moreover, after detection, determining the course of which colorectal cancer can sometimes contribute to treatment delays. This article touches on recent advancements in AI and its clinical application while shedding light on why this disease is so common today.

Longitudinal analysis of long-term outcomes of colorectal cancer after laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery: The Shizuoka study

BACKGROUND

Long-term cancer prognosis after initial surgical procedures is an unlikely endpoint for clinical trials. Medical claim databases may aid in addressing this issue regardless of limited information on disease and patient background. However, the long-term prognosis (especially regarding long-term care needs) following surgical procedures remains unclear. This study aimed to assess whether long-term outcomes, such as the exacerbation of long-term care needs and mortality, differ with surgical methods.

METHODS

Using a longitudinal study with linkage between medical claim and long-term care database, patients with primary colorectal cancer who underwent initial colonoscopies were identified through anonymized data in Japan (Shizuoka Kokuho Database, 2012-2018). Odds ratios (ORs) for long-term outcomes (long-term care needs and all-cause mortality during a 6.5-year follow-up period) were analyzed using logistic regression to compare laparoscopy and endoscopic surgery to laparotomy.

RESULTS

Overall, 3,744 primary colorectal cancer cases (822 laparotomies, 705 laparoscopies, and 2,217 endoscopic surgeries) were included. Compared to the laparotomy group, the crude OR for exacerbation of long-term care needs in the laparoscopic surgery group was 0.376 (95% confidence interval, 0.227, 0.624), while the OR for all-cause mortality was 0.22 (0.329, 0.532).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to analyze long-term prognosis after surgery for patients with colorectal cancer to combine medical and long-term needs data. As the national health insurance claim database rarely includes information on cancer stage and comorbidities, better prognosis on endoscopic surgery may need careful interpretation. Therefore, laparoscopy has superior outcomes in terms of long-term care needs and mortality compared to those of laparotomy.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Studies find similar perioperative outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for colon cancer. However, few have reported long-term outcomes of SILS versus CLS. We aimed to compare long-term postoperative and oncologic outcomes as well as perioperative outcomes between SILS and CLS for colon cancer.

METHODS

A total of 641 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer from July 2009 to September 2014 were eligible for the study. Data from 300 of these patients were used for analysis after propensity score-matching (n = 150 per group). Variables associated with short- and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The SILS group had a shorter mean total incision length, less postoperative pain, and a similar mean rate of incisional hernia (2.7% versus 3.3%) compared with the CLS group. The 7-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 92.7% versus 94% (p = 0.673) and 85.3% versus 84.7% (p = 0.688) in the SILS and CLS groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with CLS, SILS for colon cancer appeared to be safe in terms of perioperative and long-term postoperative and oncologic outcomes. The results suggested that SILS is a reasonable treatment option for colon cancer for a selected group of patients.