Laparoscopic colectomy for T4 colon cancer conferred an increased risk of peritoneal recurrence: A meta-analysis

Laparoscopic surgery is associated with increased risk of postoperative peritoneal metastases in T4 colon cancer: a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the postoperative safety, long-term survival, and postoperative peritoneal metastases (PPM) rate associated with laparoscopic surgery (LS) for T4 colon cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After propensity score matching, there were 68 patients in each of the LS and Open surgery groups. The primary outcomes were the 3-year OS, DFS, and PPM rates.

RESULTS

After matching, 68 patients in each of the groups. The LS group had a higher cumulative 3-year peritoneal metastasis rate (19.8% vs. 6.7%, P = .036), while the 3-year OS (82.3% vs. 83.8%, P = .750) and 2-year DFS (69.0% vs. 75.7%, P = .310) showed no significant difference, compared to the open surgery group. The LS group had a significantly longer operation time (201 ± 85.7 min vs. 164 ± 65.9 min, P = .008) but less postoperative complications (P = .036). Additionally, patients in the LS group removed gastric tube more quickly (1.91 ± 1.18 days vs. 2.69 ± 2.41 days, P = .048). The multivariate analysis revealed that LS (HR = 3.496, 95% CI = 1.108-11.030, P = .033), underweight (HR = 11.650, 95% CI = 2.155-62.990, P = .004), and lymphovascular invasion (HR = 3.123, 95% CI = 1.010-9.664, P = .048) were all predictive factors of PPM. For the pN + subgroup, the 3-year cumulative PPM rate was 29.6% in the LS group, significantly higher than 15.3% in the open group (P = .029), but there was no significant difference after PSM (P = .100).

CONCLUSION

LS offers faster postoperative recovery and comparable long-term survival outcomes. Therefore, it should remain a viable option for locally advanced T4 colon cancer. However, it is crucial to fully recognize the potential risk of increased PPM associated with LS, especially in patients with preoperative suspicion of positive lymph nodes. Further multicenter prospective studies are necessary to validate the potential risks of LS and gain insight into treatment efficacy in different patient populations. In addition, future studies should assess prognosis based on the grade and extent of peritoneal dissemination to provide a more nuanced understanding.

Do Laparoscopic Approaches Ensure Oncological Safety and Prognosis for Serosa-Exposed Colon Cancer? A Comparative Study against the Open Approach

The adoption of laparoscopic surgery in the management of serosa-exposed colorectal cancer has raised concerns. This study aimed to investigate whether laparoscopic surgery is associated with an increased risk of postoperative recurrence in patients undergoing resection for serosa-exposed colon cancer. A retrospective analysis was conducted on a cohort of 315 patients who underwent curative resection for pathologically confirmed T4a colon cancer without distant metastases at the Asan Medical Center between 2006 and 2015. Patients were categorized according to the surgical approach method: laparoscopic surgery (MIS group) versus open surgery (Open group). Multivariate analysis was employed to identify risk factors associated with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). The MIS group included 148 patients and the Open group had 167 patients. Of the total cohort, 106 patients (33.7%) experienced recurrence during the follow-up period. Rates, patterns, and time to recurrence were not different between groups. The MIS group (55.8%) showed more peritoneal metastasis compared to the Open group (44.4%) among recurrence sites, but it was not significant (p = 0.85). There was no significant difference in the five-year OS (73.5% vs. 78.4% p = 0.374) or DFS (62.0% vs. 64.6%; p = 0.61) between the Open and MIS groups. Age and the pathologic N stage were independently associated with OS, and the pathologic N stage was the only associated risk factor for DFS. The laparoscopic approach for serosa-exposed colon cancer did not compromise the DFS and OS. This study provides evidence that laparoscopic surgery does not compromise oncologic outcomes of patients with T4a colon cancer although peritoneal seeding is the most common type of disease failure of serosa-exposed colon cancer.

Laparoscopic vs. open colectomy for T4 colon cancer: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of prospective observational studies

Background

To evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy (LC) vs. open colectomy (OC) in patients with T4 colon cancer.

Methods

Three authors independently searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov for articles before June 3, 2022 to compare the clinical outcomes of T4 colon cancer patients undergoing LC or OC.

Results

This meta-analysis included 7 articles with 1,635 cases. Compared with OC, LC had lesser blood loss, lesser perioperative transfusion, lesser complications, lesser wound infection, and shorter length of hospital stay. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of 5-year overall survival (5y OS), and 5-year disease-free survival (5y DFS), R0 resection rate, positive resection margin, lymph nodes harvested ≥12, and recurrence. Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) results suggested that the potential advantages of LC on perioperative transfusion and the comparable oncological outcomes in terms of 5y OS, 5y DFS, lymph nodes harvested ≥12, and R0 resection rate was reliable and no need of further study.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgery is safe and feasible in T4 colon cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. TSA results suggested that future studies were not required to evaluate the 5y OS, 5y DFS, R0 resection rate, positive resection margin status, lymph nodes harvested ≥12 and perioperative transfusion differences between LC and OC.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022297792.