Laparoscopic colorectal resection in the obese patient

Does robotic assisted surgery mitigate obesity related systemic inflammatory response and clinical outcomes in left sided colorectal cancer resections?

Obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) is rapidly increasing worldwide with 26% of the UK population being obese and 38% being overweight. Obesity is intimately related to several life-limiting conditions including colorectal cancer (CRC). Obese patients have a higher degree of perioperative systemic inflammatory response (SIR) and an increased risk of perioperative complications. The aim of this current study was to investigate whether robotic-assisted surgery mitigates the effects of obesity in left sided CRC resections on the SIR and clinical outcomes. All patients undergoing left-sided colorectal cancer resections from May 2021 to May 2023 were, prospectively, entered into a database with patient characteristics and perioperative short-term outcomes recorded. CRP was considered a surrogate for SIR. The relationship between obesity and complications were examined using Chi Square for linear association, Kruskal-Wallis for continuous data and multivariate binary logistic regression model. 221 patients who underwent RAS for left-sided CRC were analysed. Obesity was associated with more comorbidity (ASA, p < 0.01) and SSI (p < 0.05) but not with age, sex, procedure or pathology. POD3 CRP < 150 mg/l was also associated with obesity (p < 0.01). In turn, greater comorbidity was associated with age (p < 0.001), site of resection (p < 0.05), SSI (p < 0.05), postoperative blood transfusion (p < 0.01) and LOS (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, only greater ASA (p < 0.05) and surgical procedure (p < 0.01) were associated with the development of an SSI independently. Greater comorbidity but not obesity was independently associated with postoperative SIR and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing RAS. These results support the use of RAS for left sided CRC resections, particularly in the obese.

Relaparoscopy in the management of post-operative complications after minimally invasive gastrectomy for gastric cancer

Laparoscopy has already been validated for treatment of early gastric cancer. Despite that, no data have been published about the possibility of a minimally invasive approach to surgical complications after primary laparoscopic surgery. In this multicentre study, we describe our experience in the management of complications following laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer. A chart review has been performed over data from 781 patients who underwent elective gastrectomy for gastric cancer between January 1996 and July 2020 in two high referral department of gastric surgery. A fully descriptive analysis was performed, considering all the demographic characteristics of patients, the type of primary procedure and the type of complication which required reoperation. Moreover, a logistic regression was designed to investigate if either the patients or the primary surgery characteristics could affect conversion rate during relaparoscopy. Fifty-one patients underwent reintervention after elective laparoscopic gastric surgery. Among patients who received a laparoscopic reintervention, 11 patients (34.3%) required a conversion to open surgery. Recovery outcomes were significantly better in patients who completed the reoperation through laparoscopy. Relaparoscopy is safe and effective for management of complications following laparoscopic gastric surgery and represent a useful tool both for re-exploration and treatment, in expert and skilled hands.

Effect of obesity on post-operative outcomes following colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) resection is currently being undertaken in an increasing number of obese patients. Existing studies have yet to reach a consensus as to whether obesity affects post-operative outcomes following CRC surgery.

AIM

To evaluate the post-operative outcomes of obese patients following CRC resection, as well as to determine the post-operative outcomes of obese patients in the subgroup undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Six-hundred and fifteen CRC patients who underwent surgery at the Prince Charles Hospital between January 2010 and December 2020 were categorized into two groups based on body mass index (BMI): Obese [BMI ≥ 30, n = 182 (29.6%)] and non-obese [BMI < 30, n = 433 (70.4%)]. Demographics, comorbidities, surgical features, and post-operative outcomes were compared between both groups. Post-operative outcomes were also compared between both groups in the subgroup of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery [n = 472: BMI ≥ 30, n = 136 (28.8%); BMI < 30, n = 336 (71.2%)].

RESULTS

Obese patients had a higher burden of cardiac (73.1% vs 56.8%; P < 0.001) and respiratory comorbidities (37.4% vs 26.8%; P = 0.01). Obese patients were also more likely to undergo conversion to an open procedure (12.8% vs 5.1%; P = 0.002), but did not experience more post-operative complications (51.6% vs 44.1%; P = 0.06) or high-grade complications (19.2% vs 14.1%; P = 0.11). In the laparoscopic subgroup, however, obesity was associated with a higher prevalence of post-operative complications (47.8% vs 39.3%; P = 0.05) but not high-grade complications (17.6% vs 11.0%; P = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

Surgical resection of CRC in obese individuals is safe. A higher prevalence of post-operative complications in obese patients appears to only be in the context of laparoscopic surgery.

Video-Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery in Obese Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Study

Simple Summary

Extended evidence on minimally invasive surgery in colorectal cancer (CRC) settings is needed, especially as applied to obese patients. We aimed to explore and compare postoperative outcomes between open and video-laparoscopic (VL) surgery in two groups of obese patients undergoing surgical resection for CRC. VL surgery was found to reduce postoperative recovery time and the severity of complications. This Italian experience provides a further contribution to the short-term prognostic quality of minimally invasive VL surgery in obese patients.

Abstract

Background: Minimally invasive surgery in obese patients is still challenging, so exploring one more item in this research field ranks among the main goals of this research. We aimed to compare short-term postoperative outcomes of open and video-laparoscopic (VL) approaches in CRC obese patients undergoing colorectal resection. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of a surgical database including 138 patients diagnosed with CRC, undergoing VL (n = 87, 63%) and open (n = 51, 37%) colorectal surgery. As a first step, propensity score matching was performed to balance the comparison between the two intervention groups (VL and open) in order to avoid selection bias. The matched sample (N = 98) was used to run further regression models in order to analyze the observed VL surgery advantages in terms of postoperative outcome, focusing on hospitalization and severity of postoperative complications, according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. Results: The study sample was predominantly male (N = 86, 62.3%), and VL was more frequent than open surgery (63% versus 37%). The two subgroup results obtained before and after the propensity score matching showed comparable findings for age, gender, BMI, and tumor staging. The specimen length and postoperative time before discharge were longer in open surgery (OS) patients; the number of harvested lymph nodes was higher than in VL patients as well (p < 0.01). Linear regression models applied separately on the outcomes of interest showed that VL-treated patients had a shorter hospital stay by almost two days and about one point less Clavien–Dindo severity than OS patients on average, given the same exposure to confounding variables. Tumor staging was not found to have a significant role in influencing the short-term outcomes investigated. Conclusion: Comparing open and VL surgery, improved postoperative outcomes were observed for VL surgery in obese patients after surgical resection for CRC. Both postoperative recovery time and Clavien–Dindo severity were better with VL surgery.

Robotic-Assisted and Laparoscopic Sigmoid Resection

Background and Objectives:

Published comparisons of minimally invasive approaches to colon surgery are limited. The objective of the current study is to compare the effectiveness of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sigmoid resection.

Methods:

A multicenter retrospective comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes from consecutive robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sigmoid resections performed between 2010 and 2015 by six general and colorectal surgeons, who are experienced in both robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgical techniques and who had >50 annual case volumes for each approach. Baseline characteristics and surgical risk factors between the two groups were balanced using a propensity score methodology with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Mean standardized differences were reported, and in all instances, a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

Three hundred thirty-six cases (robotic-assisted, n = 211; laparoscopic, n = 125) met eligibility criteria and were included in the study. Following weighting, patient demographics and baseline characteristics were comparable between the robotic-assisted (n = 344) and laparoscopic (n = 349) groups. The laparoscopic group was associated with shorter operating room and surgical times. The robotic-assisted group had lower estimated blood loss and shorter time to first flatus compared to the laparoscopic group. Rates of complications post discharge to 30 d tended to be lower for the RA group: 5.1% vs 8.6% [p = 0.0657]. The RA group also had lower rates of readmissions and reoperations: 4% vs 8% [p = 0.029] and 0.5% vs 5.1% [p = 0.0003], respectively.

Conclusions:

Robotic-assisted sigmoid colon resection is clinically effective and provides a minimally invasive alternative to the laparoscopic approach with improved intraoperative and postoperative outcomes for colorectal patients.

Obesity and Cancer Treatment Outcomes: Interpreting the Complex Evidence

A wealth of epidemiological evidence, combined with plausible biological mechanisms, present a convincing argument for a causal relationship between excess adiposity, commonly approximated as body mass index (BMI, kg/m²), and incident cancer risk. Beyond this relationship, there are a number of challenges posed in the context of interpreting whether being overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m²) or obese (BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m²) adversely influences disease progression, cancer mortality and survival. Elevated BMI (≥ 25.0 kg/m²) may influence treatment selection of, for example, the approach to surgery; the choice of chemotherapy dosing; the inclusion of patients into randomised clinical trials. Furthermore, the technical challenges posed by an elevated BMI may adversely affect surgical outcomes, for example, morbidity (increasing the risk of surgical site infections), reduced lymph node harvest (and subsequent risk of under-staging and under-treatment) and increased risk of margin positivity. Suboptimal chemotherapy dosing, associated with capping chemotherapy in obese patients as an attempt to avoid excess toxicity, might be a driver of poor prognostic outcomes. By contrast, the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition may be enhanced in patients who are obese, although in turn, this observation might be due to reverse causality. So, a central research question is whether being overweight or obese adversely affects outcomes either directly through effects of cancer biology or whether adverse outcomes are mediated through indirect pathways. A further dimension to this complex relationship is the obesity paradox, a phenomenon where being overweight or obese is associated with improved survival where the reverse is expected. In this overview, we describe a framework for evaluating methodological problems such as selection bias, confounding and reverse causality, which may contribute to spurious interpretations. Future studies will need to focus on prospective studies with well-considered methodology in order to improve the interpretation of causality.

Laparoscopic Mesorectal Excision in Obesity: Novel Insights and Technical Strategies

INTRODUCTION

Obesity is a burgeoning problem worldwide. Although beneficial in obese patients, conventional laparoscopic mesorectal excision for rectal cancer is technically challenging, with a higher conversion rate to open compared with nonobese patients. We describe novel strategies to circumvent these difficulties.

TECHNIQUE

The key steps are 1) lateral-to-medial colonic mobilization and left-sided mesorectal excision with the surgeon on the patient's right; 2) switching to the patient's left for right-sided mesorectal excision; 3) further rectal retraction with cotton tape and preperitoneal fat sling; and 4) caudal-to-cephalad mobilization of colon after distal transection, which facilitates extrapelvic mesenteric dissection and vessel ligation.

RESULTS

These techniques optimize gravity to negate the lack of exposure due to visceral obesity. Triangulation is improved by changing the surgeon's position during mesorectal dissection. This allows accurate identification of anatomical planes and avoids excessive pneumoperitoneum pressures and Trendelenburg tilt.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting these strategies can facilitate laparoscopic mesorectal excision in the obese patient and may reduce conversion to open.

Peri-operative management of overweight and obese children and adolescents

Obesity has become endemic, even in children. Systemic complications associated with obesity include metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular disease, and respiratory compromise. These comorbidities require adequate investigation, targeted optimisation, and, if surgery is required, specific management during the peri-operative period. Specific peri-operative strategies should be used for paediatric patients who are overweight or obese to prevent postoperative complications, and optimising the respiratory function during surgery is particularly crucial. This Review aims to provide up-to-date information on peri-operative management for physicians who are caring for children and adolescents (usually younger than 18 years) who are overweight or obese undergoing surgery, including bariatric surgery. We have particularly focussed on the physiological consequences of obesity-namely, obstructive sleep apnoea, respiratory compromise, and pharmacological considerations.

Robotic vs laparoscopic rectal surgery in high-risk patients

AIM

Laparoscopic rectal surgery is associated with a steep learning curve and high conversion rate despite progress in equipment design and consistent practice. The robotic system has shown an advantage over the laparoscopic approach due to stable three-dimensional views, improved dexterity and better ergonomics. These factors make the robotic approach more favourable for rectal surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic rectal cancer surgery in high-risk patients.

METHOD

A prospectively collected dataset for high-risk patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery between May 2013 and November 2015 was analysed. Patients with any of the following characteristics were defined as high risk: a body mass index ≥30, male gender, preoperative chemoradiotherapy, tumour <8 cm from the anal verge and previous abdominal surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 184 high-risk patients were identified: 99 in the robotic group and 85 in the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery was associated with a significantly higher sphincter preservation rate (86% vs 74%, P = 0.045), shorter operative time (240 vs 270 min, P = 0.013) and hospital stay (7 vs 9 days, P = 0.001), less blood loss (10 vs 100 ml, P < 0.001) and a smaller conversion rate to open surgery (0% vs 5%, P = 0.043) compared with the laparoscopic technique. Reoperation, anastomotic leak rate, 30-day mortality and oncological outcomes were comparable between the two techniques.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery in high-risk patients is associated with higher sphincter preservation, reduced blood loss, smaller conversion rates, and shorter operating time and hospital stay. However, further studies are required to evaluate this notion.

Enteral Access Procedures: An 18-Year Analysis of Changing Patterns of Utilization in the Medicare Population

PURPOSE

To evaluate national trends in enteral access and maintenance procedures for Medicare beneficiaries with regard to utilization rates, specialty group roles, and sites of service.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using Medicare Physician Supplier Procedure Summary Master Files for the period 1994-2012, claims for gastrostomy and gastrojejunostomy access and maintenance procedures were identified. Longitudinal utilization rates were calculated using annual enrollment data. Procedure volumes by site of service and medical specialty were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between 1994 and 2012, de novo enteral access procedure utilization decreased from 61.6 to 42.3 per 10,000 Medicare Part B beneficiaries (-31%). Gastroenterologists and surgeons performed > 80% of procedures (unchanged over study period) with 97% in the hospital setting. Over time, relative use of an endoscopic approach (62% in 1994; 82% in 2012) increased as percutaneous (21% to 12%) and open surgical (17% to 5%) procedures declined. Existing enteral access maintenance services increased 29% (from 20.1 to 25.9 per 10,000 beneficiaries). Radiologists (from 13% to 31%) surpassed gastroenterologists (from 36% to 21%) as dominant providers of maintenance procedures. Emergency physicians (from 8% to 23%) and nonphysician providers (from 0% to 6%) have seen rapid growth as maintenance services providers as these services have transitioned increasingly to the emergency department setting (from 18% to 32%).

CONCLUSIONS

Among Medicare beneficiaries, de novo enteral access procedures have declined in the last 2 decades as existing access maintenance services have increased. The latter are increasingly performed by radiologists, emergency physicians, and nonphysician providers.

Laparoscopy decreases complications for obese patients undergoing elective rectal surgery

INTRODUCTION

While there are many reported advantages to laparoscopic surgery compared to open surgery, the impact of a laparoscopic approach on postoperative morbidity in obese patients undergoing rectal surgery has not been studied. Our goal was to determine whether obese patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal surgery experienced the same benefits as non-obese patients.

METHODS

We identified patients undergoing rectal resections using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Participant Use Data File. We performed multivariable analyses to determine the independent association between laparoscopy and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 26,437 patients underwent rectal resection. The mean age was 58.5 years, 32.6 % were obese, and 47.2 % had cancer. Laparoscopic procedures were slightly less common in obese patients compared to non-obese patients (36.0 vs. 38.2 %, p = 0.0006). In unadjusted analyses, complications were lower with the laparoscopic approach in both obese (18.9 vs. 32.4 %, p < 0.0001) and non-obese (15.6 vs. 25.3 %, p < 0.0001) patients. In a multivariable analysis controlling for potential confounders, the risk of postoperative complications increased as the degree of obesity worsened. The likelihood of experiencing a postoperative complication increased by 25, 45, and 75 % for obese class I, obese class II, and obese class III patients, respectively. A laparoscopic approach was associated with a 40 % decreased odds of a postoperative complication for all patients (OR 0.60, 95 % CI 0.56-0.64).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic rectal surgery is associated with fewer complications when compared to open rectal surgery in both obese and non-obese patients. Obesity was an independent risk factor for postoperative complications. In appropriately selected patients, rectal surgery outcomes may be improved with a minimally invasive approach.

Obesity Does Not Impact Perioperative or Postoperative Outcomes in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

While the prevalence of obesity in IBD patients is rapidly increasing, it is unclear if obesity impacts surgical outcomes in this population. We aim to investigate the effects of BMI on perioperative and postoperative outcomes in IBD patients by stratifying patients into BMI groups and comparing outcomes between these groups.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study where IBD patients who underwent intestinal surgeries between the years of 2000 to 2014 were identified. The patients were divided into groups based on BMI: underweight (BMI <18.5), normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9), overweight (BMI 25-29.9), and obese (BMI ≥30). Preoperative patient demographics, operative variables, and postoperative complications were collected and compared between BMI groups.

RESULTS

A total of 391 surgeries were reviewed (34 underweight, 187 normal weight, 105 overweight, and 65 obese) from 325 patients. No differences were observed in preoperative patient demographics, type of IBD, preoperative steroid or biologic mediator use, or mean laboratory values. No differences were observed in percent operative procedures with anastomosis, surgeries converted to open, estimated blood loss, intraoperative complications, and median operative time. Thirty-day postoperative complication rates including total complications, wound infection, or anastomotic leak were similar between groups. There was a statistically significant increased postoperative bleeding risk (p = 0.029) in underweight patients. The relative percent for increased postoperative bleeding risk between BMI groups was as follows: 2.9% in underweight, zero in normal weight, 2.9% in overweight, and zero in obese.

CONCLUSION

Obesity does not appear to impact intraoperative variables nor does obesity appear to worsen postoperative complication rates in IBD patients.

Short and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients

AIM

To investigate the impact of laparoscopic colectomy on short and long-term outcomes in obese patients with colorectal diseases.

METHODS

A total of 98 obese (body mass index > 30 kg/m(2)) patients who underwent laparoscopic (LPS) right or left colectomy over a 10 year period were identified from a prospective institutionally approved database and manually matched to obese patients who underwent open colectomy. Controls were selected to match for body mass index, site of primary disease, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and year of surgery (± 3 year). The parameters analyzed included age, gender, comorbid conditions, American Society of Anaesthesiologists class, diagnosis, procedure, and duration of operation, operative blood loss, and amount of homologous blood transfused. Conversion rate, intra and postoperative complications as were as reoperation rate, 30 d and long-term morbidity rate were also analyzed. For continuous variables, the Student's t test was used for normally distributed data the Mann-Whitney U test for non-normally distributed data. The Pearson's χ(2) tests, or the Fisher exact test as appropriate, were used for proportions.

RESULTS

Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 13 of 98 patients (13.3%). In the LPS group, operative time was 29 min longer and blood loss was 78 mL lower when compared to open colectomy (P = 0.03, P = 0.0001, respectively). Overall morbidity, anastomotic leak and readmission rate did not significantly differ between the two groups. A trend toward a reduction of wound complications was observed in the LPS when compared to open group (P = 0.09). In the LPS group, an earlier recovery of bowel function (P = 0.001) and a shorter length of stay (P = 0.03) were observed. After a median follow-up of 62 (range 12-132) mo 23 patients in the LPS group and 38 in the open group experienced long-term complications (LPS vs open, P = 0.03). Incisional hernia resulted to be the most frequent long-term complication with a significantly higher occurrence in the open group when compared to the laparoscopic one (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients is safe, does not jeopardize postoperative complications and resulted in lower incidence of long-term complications when compared with open cases.