Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Laparoscopic Anterior Resections for Cancer with Natural Orifice Versus Conventional Specimen Extraction: A Case-Control Study

Development and prospects of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery for colorectal cancer: a review article

The natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) procedure is an innovative approach to treating colorectal cancer that offers several advantages. First, the NOSES technique is minimally invasive, reducing the incidence of postoperative complications such as wound infection and fat liquefaction. Second, it provides excellent pain relief and improves cosmetic outcomes by requiring fewer abdominal incisions, thereby increasing patient satisfaction. Additionally, NOSES provides all of the advantages of minimally invasive surgery and enables patients to recover quickly, helping patients return to their normal lives faster. This approach aligns with the concept of patient-centered care and significantly improves patient quality of life. The positive results noted at both short- and long-term postoperative follow-up indicate that NOSES is a valuable option in cancer care. Despite its many benefits, NOSES has also been challenged by bacteriology, oncology, and ethics. This paper presents a review of recent research progress regarding NOSES in the treatment of colorectal cancer. In this article, we examined the advantages and disadvantages of NOSES in clinical practice and discussed potential issues and solutions.

Evaluation of the efficacy of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancers: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Aim

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has gained significant importance in treating cancers. The current study is a meta‐analysis that aimed to assess the short‐term efficacy and long‐term prognostic impact of NOSES and conventional laparoscopic (CL) surgery in the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC).

Method

Published reports in several medical databases up to February 2024 were searched and information pertinent to outcomes of NOSES and CL in retrospective and randomized studies to treat CRC was collected. Pooled weighted/standardized mean difference (WMD/SMD), odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a fixed‐effects model or random‐effects model, and meta‐analysis was subsequently performed using Stata.

Results

Thirty‐one studies with a total of 4637 patients were included in this meta‐analysis. When compared with CL, NOSES had significant advantages in several indicators, such as wound infection [OR = 0.22 (95% CI 0.13–0.38); Z = 5.56, p = 0], incisional hernia [OR = 0.24 (95% CI 0.11–0.54); Z = 3.44, p = 0.001], blood loss [WMD = −10.17 (95% CI −14.75 to −5.60); Z = 4.36, p = 0], incision length [WMD = −4.94 (95% CI −5.27 to −4.60); Z = 29.10, p = 0.00], postoperative pain [WMD = −1.43 (95% CI −1.69 to −1.18); Z = 11.02, p = 0.00], use of additional analgesics [OR = 0.57 (95% CI 0.39–0.82); Z = 3.06, p = 0.002], hospital stay [WMD = –1.25 (95% CI −1.58 to –0.93); Z = 7.65, p = 0.00], gastrointestinal recovery [WMD = −13.42 (95% CI −17.77 to −9.07); Z = 6.05, p = 0.00], first flatus [WMD = −0.50 (95% CI −0.68 to −0.32); Z = 5.34, p = 0.00] and cosmetic result [WMD = 2.11 (95% CI 0.92–3.30); Z = 3.47, p = 0.001]. However, NOSES required a significantly longer duration of surgery [WMD = 14.13 (95% CI 6.70–21.56); Z = 3.73, p = 0.00]. There were no significant differences in postoperative anastomotic leakage, intra‐abdominal infection, lymph node harvest, proximal and distal margins, 5‐year disease‐free and 5‐year overall survival and pelvic floor function.

Conclusion

NOSES is considered an efficient surgical method of treatment for CRC that allows patients to have long‐term favourable oncological outcomes while recovering faster with minimal pain. However, these findings still require confirmation through studies on large population cohorts.

Short-term outcomes of Transrectal Natural Orifice Specimen extraction compared with conventional minimally invasive surgery for selected patients with colorectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis and literature review

PURPOSE

Conventional minimally invasive surgery requires mini-laparotomy to extract the pathological specimen. However, by using a natural orifice as the delivery route, natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) surgery avoids the need for a large incision. This study analyzed the short-term outcome of NOSE compared with conventional mini-laparotomy (CL) for colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1,189 patients who underwent surgery for primary colorectal cancer between the cecum and upper rectum. Propensity score analyses were applied to the NOSE and CL groups in a 1:1 matched cohort.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, each group included 201 patients. The NOSE group and CL group did not differ significantly in terms of baseline characteristics. Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were comparable. Compared with the CL group, the NOSE group experienced a shorter time to first flatus (1.6 ± 0.8 vs. 2.0 ± 1.2 days, p < 0.001), first stool (2.7 ± 1.5 vs. 4.1 ± 1.9, p < 0.001), liquid diet (2.3 ± 1.3 vs. 3.6 ± 1.8 days, p < 0.001), soft diet (3.9 ± 2.0 vs. 5.2 ± 1.9 days, p < 0.001) and a shorter hospital stay (5.1 ± 3.5 vs. 7.4 ± 4.8 days, p < 0.001). The NOSE group exhibited lower mean pain intensity and lower highest pain intensity on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3.

CONCLUSION

NOSE has several advantages over conventional mini-laparotomy following minimally invasive surgery for colon cancer. These advantages include reduced time to oral intake, shorter hospital stays, and less postoperative pain. NOSE can be adopted and applied to highly selective patients without additional risk of short-term complications.

Comparative long-term outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is currently widely used in left-sided colorectal cancer. Some clinical comparative studies have been conducted, providing evidence of its safety and oncological benefits. However, these studies are typically characterized by small sample sizes and short postoperative follow-up periods. Consequently, in this research, the authors adopt the propensity score matching method to undertake a large-scale retrospective comparative study on NOSES colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer, with the goal of further augmenting the body of evidence-based medical support for NOSES.

METHODS

This retrospective study involved patients who underwent NOSES colectomy and conventional laparoscopic (CL) colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer between January 2014 and April 2021. In the NOSES group, specimens were extracted through the anus with the help of a Cai tube (homemade invention: ZL201410168748.2). The patients were matched at a ratio of 1:1 according to age, sex, BMI, tumor diameter, tumor location (descending and splenic flexure colon/ sigmoid colon/ middle and upper rectum), tumor height from anal verge, ASA grade, previous abdominal surgery, clinical pathologic stage, preoperative CEA. After matching, 132 patients in the NOSES group and 132 patients in the CL group were eligible for analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with CL group, NOSES group was associated with decreased postoperative maximum pain score (2.6±0.7 vs. 4.7±1.7, P=0.000), less additional analgesia required (6.8 vs. 34.8%, P=0.000), faster time to passage of flatus (2.3±0.6 days vs. 3.3±0.7 days, P=0.000), less wound infection (0.0 vs. 6.1%, P=0.007), and longer operative time (212.5±45.8 min vs. 178.0±43.4 min, P=0.000). No significant differences were observed in estimated blood loss, time to resume regular diet, postoperative hospital stay, conversion to open surgery or conventional minilaparotomy, total morbidity, readmission, mortality, pathologic outcomes, and Wexner incontinence score between groups. After a median follow-up of 63.0 months, the 5-year overall survival rates were 88.3 versus 85.0% (P=0.487), disease-free survival rates were 82.9 versus 83.6% (P=0.824), and the local recurrence rates were 4.4 versus 4.0% (P=0.667) in the NOSES and CL groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that NOSES colectomy using a Cai tube for left-sided colorectal cancer is a safe and feasible option with better cosmetic results, less pain, faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, and comparable long-term clinical and oncologic outcomes to CL colectomy.

Development of a machine learning algorithm to predict complications of total laparoscopic anterior resection and natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Total laparoscopic anterior resection (tLAR) and natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has been widely adopted in the treatment of rectal cancer (RC). However, no study has been performed to predict the short-term outcomes of tLAR using machine learning algorithms to analyze a national cohort.

METHODS

Data from consecutive RC patients who underwent tLAR were collected from the China NOSES Database (CNDB). The random forest (RF), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), support vector machine (SVM), deep neural network (DNN), logistic regression (LR) and K-nearest neighbor (KNN) algorithms were used to develop risk models to predict short-term complications of tLAR. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), Gini coefficient, specificity and sensitivity were calculated to assess the performance of each risk model. The selected factors from the models were evaluated by relative importance.

RESULTS

A total of 4313 RC patients were identified, and 667 patients (15.5%) developed postoperative complications. The machine learning model of XGBoost showed more promising results in the prediction of complication than other models (AUROC 0.90, P < 0.001). The performance was similar when internal and external validation was used. In the XGBoost model, the top four influential factors were the distance from the lower edge of the tumor to the anus, age at diagnosis, surgical time and comorbidities. In risk stratification analysis, the rate of postoperative complications in the high-risk group was significantly higher than in the medium- and low-risk groups (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The machine learning model shows potential benefits in predicting the risk of complications in RC patients after tLAR. This novel approach can provide reliable individual information for surgical treatment recommendations.

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer, specimen extraction: transanal or transabdominal?

BACKGROUND

Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) and transabdominal specimen extraction (TASE) in colorectal surgery remains controversial. Herein, we aimed to perform a retrospective analysis on surgical outcomes of NOSE and TASE at three hospitals in east of Iran.

METHOD

Consecutive locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery using either NOSE or TASE from 2011 to 2017 were recruited. These patients were followed-up till 2020. Data, including postoperative complications, long-term overall and recurrence-free survival were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

239 eligible patients were included in this study. 169 (70.71%) patients underwent NOSE, and 70 (29.29%) patients underwent TASE. Although this study has achieved similar outcomes in terms of overall and recurrence-free survival, metastasis, circumferential margin involvement as well as complications of intra-operative bleeding, obstruction, anastomosis-fail, rectovaginal-fistula in women and pelvic collection/abscess in both groups, we observed higher rates of locoregional recurrence, incontinency, stenosis and the close distal margins involvement in NOSE group and also obstructed defecation syndrome in TASE cases.

CONCLUSION

According to our findings, NOSE laparoscopic surgery showed significantly higher incontinency, impotency, stenosis and involvement of the close distal margins rates. Nevertheless, considering the similarity of long-term overall and recurrence-free survival, metastasis, circumferential margin involvement, NOSE procedure is still could be considered as a second choice for lower rectal adenocarcinoma patients.

Development of artificial blood loss and duration of excision score to evaluate surgical difficulty of total laparoscopic anterior resection in rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Total laparoscopic anterior resection (tLAR) has been gradually applied in the treatment of rectal cancer (RC). This study aims to develop a scoring system to predict the surgical difficulty of tLAR.

METHODS

RC patients treated with tLAR were collected. The blood loss and duration of excision (BLADE) scoring system was built to assess the surgical difficulty by using restricted cubic spline regression. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of the BLADE score on postoperative complications. The random forest (RF) algorithm was used to establish a preoperative predictive model for the BLADE score.

RESULTS

A total of 1,994 RC patients were randomly selected for the training set and the test set, and 325 RC patients were identified as the external validation set. The BLADE score, which was built based on the thresholds of blood loss (60 ml) and duration of surgical excision (165 min), was the most important risk factor for postoperative complications. The areas under the curve of the predictive RF model were 0.786 in the training set, 0.640 in the test set, and 0.665 in the external validation set.

CONCLUSION

This preoperative predictive model for the BLADE score presents clinical feasibility and reliability in identifying the candidates to receive tLAR and in making surgical plans for RC patients.

Which site is better for prophylactic ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery? By the specimen extraction site or new site: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is controversy about the outcomes of prophylactic ileostomy via the specimen extraction site (SES) after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery (LRCS). We, therefore, performed a meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of stoma through the SES versus new site (NS).

Methods

All relevant studies from 1997 to 2022 were searched in the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP databases. This meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software 5.3 for statistical analysis.

Results

7 studies with 1736 patients were included. The present meta-analysis noted that prophylactic ileostomy via SES was associated with a higher risk of overall stoma-related complications, especially parastomal hernia (OR, 2.39, 95% CI 1.43-4.00; p=0.0008). No statistical difference was found in terms of wound infection, ileus, stoma edema, stoma prolapse, stoma necrosis, stoma infection, stoma bleeding, stoma stenosis, skin inflammation around the stoma, stoma retraction and postoperative pain score on postoperative day 1 and 3 between SES group and NS group. However, prophylactic ileostomy via SES was associated with lesser blood loss (MD = -0.38, 95% CI: -0.62 - -0.13; p=0.003), shorter operation time(MD = -0.43, 95% CI: -0.54 - -0.32 min; p<0.00001), shorter post-operative hospital stay (MD = -0.26, 95% CI: -0.43 - -0.08; p=0.004), shorter time to first flatus(MD = -0.23, 95% CI: -0.39 - -0.08; p=0.003) and lower postoperative pain score on postoperative day 2.

Conclusion

Prophylactic ileostomy via SES after LRCS reduces new incision, decreases operative time, promotes postoperative recovery, and improves cosmetic outcomes, but may increase the incidence of parastomal hernias. The vast majority of parastomal hernias can be repaired by closing the ileostomy, therefore SES remain an option for temporary ileostomy after LRCS.

Extraction Site in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery

The widespread adoption of minimally invasive colorectal surgery has led to improved patient recovery and outcomes. Specimen extraction sites remain a major source of pain and potential postoperative morbidity. Careful selection of the extraction site incision may allow surgeons to decrease postoperative pain, infectious complications, or rates of hernia formation. Options include midline, paramedian, transverse, Pfannenstiel, and natural orifice sites. Patient, disease, and surgeon-related factors should all be considered when choosing a site. This article will review different options for specimen extraction sites.

The success rate of robotic natural orifice intracorporeal anastomosis and transrectal extraction (NICE procedure) in a large cohort of consecutive unselected patients

BACKGROUND

The Robotic NICE procedure is a total intracorporeal natural orifice approach in which specimen extraction and anastomosis is accomplished without an abdominal wall incision other than the port sites themselves. We aim to present the success rate of the NICE procedure in a large cohort of unselected consecutive patients presenting with colorectal disease using a stepwise and reproducible robotic approach.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who presented with benign or malignant disease requiring left-sided colorectal resection and anastomosis between May 2018 and June 2021 were evaluated. Data abstracted included demographic, clinical data, disease features, intervention data, and outcomes data. The main outcome was success rate of Intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA), transrectal extraction of specimen (TRSE), and conversion rate.

RESULTS

A total of 306 patients underwent NICE procedure. Diverticulitis was the main diagnosis (64%) followed by colorectal neoplasm (27%). Median operative time was 219 min, and the median estimated blood loss was 50 ml. ICA was achieved in all cases (100%). TRSE was successfully achieved in 95.4% of cases. In 14 patients (4.6%), an abdominal incision was required due to inability to extract a bulky specimen through the rectum. There overall postoperative complications rate was 12.4%. Eight patients (2.6%) experienced postoperative ileus. There were no superficial or deep surgical site infection (SSI). Eleven patients (3.6%) developed organ SSI space including 5 patients with intra-abdominal abscess and 4 patients with anastomotic leak. There was one mortality (0.3%) due to toxic megacolon from resistant Clostridium difficile. The 30-day reoperation rate was 2.9% (n = 9) including six patients presenting with organ space SSI and three patients with postoperative obstruction at the diverting loop ileostomy site.

CONCLUSION

The NICE procedure is associated with a very high success rate for both intracorporeal anastomosis and transrectal specimen extraction in a large cohort of unselected patients.

Peritoneal contamination and associated post-operative infectious complications after natural orifice specimen extraction for laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal contamination is a major concern during natural orifice specimen extraction after laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCR-NOSE), but few data are available. We explored the prevalence, risk factors, and association between clinical outcomes and infectious complications in patients with positive peritoneal drain fluid culture (PDFC) after LCR-NOSE.

METHOD

We retrospectively analyzed patient records in our prospectively maintained registry database who underwent LCR-NOSE between 2011and 2020. Peritoneal drain fluid was collected within 12 h post-operative and cultures for microorganisms were obtained. The relationships between PDFC, clinical variables, and infectious complications were examined by univariate and multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

Of 241 consecutive patients who underwent LCR-NOSE and drainage fluid culture, 59 (24.5%) had PDFC. Anterior resection (Odds ratio OR 2.40) was identified as an independent predictor for PDFC. Twenty-eight patients (11.6%) developed infectious complications. Multivariable analysis identified low anterior resection (OR 2.74), prolonged operative time (OR 3.20), and PDFC (OR 5.14) as independent risk factors. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most frequently found microorganism (OR 5.19) responsible for infectious complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Microorganisms are commonly present in the peritoneum after LCR-NOSE and play a critical role in the development of infectious complications and related morbidity. Specific caution is warranted in patients contaminated with specific types of microorganisms.

Surgical outcomes and sexual function after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery with transvaginal versus conventional specimen extraction: A retrospective propensity score matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction has been shown to reduce postoperative pain and wound complications, and provide better cosmetic outcome. However, whether transvaginal specimen extraction affects sexual function remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the short-term outcomes, sexual function, cosmetic outcomes and prognosis after colon cancer surgery with transvaginal specimen extraction.

METHOD

This study was a propensity score-matched comparative retrospective study, based on prospectively collected data in a single center. This study included 70 pairs of propensity score-matched female patients who underwent laparoscopic curative resection for stage I-III colon cancer with transvaginal specimen extraction and conventional specimen extraction between November 2015 and November 2020. Covariates used in the propensity score included age, tumor diameter, tumor differentiation, T stage and American Joint Committee on Cancer stage. Outcome measures included postoperative complication, postoperative sexual function, cosmetic result, disease-free survival and overall survival.

RESULTS

Patients in transvaginal group were administered with less additional analgesics (P = 0.008), and had fewer wound complications (P = 0.028). None of patient in the two groups underwent anastomotic leakage, incisional disruption or vaginal fistula. The baseline pre-operative Female Sexual Function Index scores in two groups were the same, and no difference was found in postoperative score between the two groups (P = 0.790). The cosmetic score was significantly better in transvaginal group than that of conventional laparoscopy group (P = 0.000). During the follow-up period, there were no differences in OS or DFS between the two groups (P = 0.658, P = 0.663).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with laparoscopic colon cancer radical resection with specimen extraction, transvaginal specimen extraction is oncologically safe, brings better short-term outcomes, improved cosmetic results and has limited adverse effect on female's sexual function. This procedure can be further carried out in more appropriate patients.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment of rectal cancer: a propensity-score matching study

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has been increasingly applied in radical surgery of abdominal and pelvic organs, but it is still in the exploratory stage. There is insufficient evidence to prove its efficacy.

METHODS

From January 2013 to June 2017, a total of 351 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer were eventually included in this study. Patients who underwent NOSES were assigned to the NOSES group, while patients undergoing conventional laparoscopic assisted resection were assigned as to the LAP group. Propensity score matching was used to align clinicopathological features between the two groups.

RESULTS

From the perioperative data and postoperative follow-up results of both groups, patients in the NOSES group had less intraoperative bleeding (47.0 ± 60.4 ml vs 87.1 ± 101.2 ml, P = 0.011), shorter postoperative gastrointestinal recovery (50.7 ± 27.3 h vs 58.6 ± 28.5 h, P = 0.040), less postoperative analgesic use (36.8% vs 52.8%, P = 0.019), lower postoperative pain scores (P < 0.001), lower rate of postoperative complications (5.7% vs 15.5%, P = 0.020), more satisfaction with body image (P = 0.001) and cosmesis (P < 0.001) postoperatively. The NOSES group had a higher quality of life. Moreover, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

NOSES could be a safe and reliable technique for radical resection of rectal cancer, with better short-term outcomes than conventional laparoscopy, while long-term survival is not significantly different from that of conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) is a technique that involves collecting a specimen for extraction through a natural opening avoiding a mini-laparotomy incision. The aim of this study was to compare NOSE and transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic (LAP) colorectal cancer surgery for postoperative outcomes and oncological safety.

METHOD

A systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases from inception till October 2020. Articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria (studies comparing LAP and NOSE colorectal surgeries reporting at least one of the outcomes) and analysed. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, pathological results (resection margins and lymph node collection), and oncological outcomes. Secondary outcomes included operating time, blood losses, use of analgesics, functional recovery, duration of hospital stay, and cosmetic results. Fixed and random-effect models were used to measure the pooled estimates.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies involving a total of 3432 participants were analysed (3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 16 retrospective non-randomized studies). Pooled results showed significantly reduced postoperative complications (OR 0.54; 95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 0.67; P < 0.00001). Pathological outcomes of NOSE were comparable to LAP with no significant difference noted in terms of resection margins (P > 0.05) and lymph node collection (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.47; 95 per cent c.i. -0.94 to 0; P = 0.05). Pooled analysis demonstrated comparable long-term outcomes in terms of cancer recurrence (OR 0.94; 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 1.39; P = 0.75), 5-year disease-free survival (HR 0.97; 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 1.29; P = 0.83), and overall survival (HR 0.93, 95 per cent c.i. 0.58 to -1.51; P = 0.78). Finally, the NOSE group had decreased use of additional analgesia after surgery and earlier resumption of oral intake when compared with LAP (respectively OR 0.28; 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.37; P < 0.00001 and WMD -0.35; 95 per cent c.i. -0.54 to -0.15; P = 0.0005).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that in comparison with LAP, NOSE decreases severe postoperative morbidity while improving postoperative recovery without compromising oncological safety, but it is limited by the small number of RCTs performed in this field.

The natural orifice specimen extraction surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of efficacy and long-term oncological outcomes

PURPOSE

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has gradually become established in treating colorectal cancer. This meta-analysis assesses NOSES in the treatment of colorectal cancer compared with conventional laparoscopy (CL) and determines the effect of long-term prognosis.

METHODS

Various medical databases were searched up to May 2021. We included retrospective and randomized trials on the treatment of colorectal cancer with NOSES. Pooled weighted/standardized mean differences (WMD/SMD), odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using either fixed- or random-effects models. STATA was conducted for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 16 studies comprising 2266 patients. Compared with CL, NOSES had more benefits in terms of overall postoperative complications (OR = 0.47, 95%CI [0.35,0.64]; Z = 4.91, P < 0.001), incision-related complications (OR = 0.15, 95%CI [0.07,0.31]; Z = 4.97, P < 0.001), time to first flatus (SMD = -0.58, 95%CI [-0.68,-0.48]; Z = 11.21, P < 0.001), hospital stay (WMD = -1.03, 95%CI [-1.55,-0.51]; Z = 3.86, P < 0.001), cosmetic scores (WMD = 1.37, 95%CI [0.59,2.14]; Z = 3.47, P = 0.001), the visual analogue scale on postoperative day 1（WMD = -1.46, 95%CI [-2.39,-0.52]; Z = 3.06, P = 0.002), additional analgesics usage (OR = 0.33, 95%CI [0.26, 0.43]; Z = 8.43, P < 0.001), whereas the operative time of NOSES was prolonged (WMD = 13.09, 95%CI [7.07,19.11]; Z = 4.26, P < 0.001). Postoperative anastomotic complications, intra-abdominal infection, pelvic floor function, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph node dissection, 3-year disease-free and overall survival in the NOSES group were comparable with those in the CL group.

CONCLUSIONS

NOSES is a safe and reliable surgical procedure for the treatment of colorectal cancer and provides good long-term oncological outcomes. Large-scale multicenter studies are required to confirm its clinical benefits.

Effect of Continuous Subcutaneous Injection of Insulin Analogues in Pregnant Women with Diabetes Mellitus Complicated with Ketoacidosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical effect of continuous subcutaneous injection of insulin analogues in pregnant women with diabetes mellitus complicated with ketoacidosis.

METHODS

A total of 92 pregnant patients with diabetes mellitus complicated with ketoacidosis from June 2014 to January 2021 were selected. All patients were randomly divided into an observation group and control group according to the method of random number. The control group received intravenous infusion of insulin, and the observation group received continuous subcutaneous infusion of quick-acting insulin analogues. The clinical effects of the two groups were observed.

RESULTS

The time needed to control blood glucose <13.8 mmol/L, the amount of insulin needed to control blood glucose <13.8 mmol/L, the time needed to correct DKA, and the amount of insulin needed to correct DKA in the observation group were significantly less than those in the control group (P < 0.05). Compared with the control group, the average occurrence times of hypoglycemia, the length of stay, the total amount of insulin in hospital, and the total amount of insulin used during pregnancy in the observation group were significantly less than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The values of SCr, CRP, BUN, arterial blood gas pH, and adiponectin in the two groups were significantly improved as compared with those before treatment, and the improvement in the observation group was significantly better than that in the control group (P < 0.05). After treatment, the fasting blood glucose, 2-hour postprandial blood glucose, carbon dioxide binding capacity, and glycosylated hemoglobin in the experimental group were significantly better than those in the routine group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Continuous subcutaneous injection of insulin analogues is effective in the treatment of diabetic patients with ketoacidosis, which can effectively improve blood glucose, carbon dioxide binding capacity, and glycosylated hemoglobin and accelerate the negative conversion of urinary ketone body. It is worth popularizing to reduce the occurrence of hypoglycemia and the dose of insulin and shorten the time of hospitalization.

Role of minimally invasive techniques in gastrointestinal surgery: Current status and future perspectives

In recent years, the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer has remained high. Currently, surgical resection is still the most effective method for treating gastrointestinal cancer. Traditionally, radical surgery depends on open surgery. However, traditional open surgery inflicts great trauma and is associated with a slow recovery. Minimally invasive surgery, which aims to reduce postoperative complications and accelerate postoperative recovery, has been rapidly developed in the last two decades; it is increasingly used in the field of gastrointestinal surgery and widely used in early-stage gastrointestinal cancer. Nevertheless, many operations for gastrointestinal cancer treatment are still performed by open surgery. One reason for this may be the challenges of minimally invasive technology, especially when operating in narrow spaces, such as within the pelvis or near the upper edge of the pancreas. Moreover, some of the current literature has questioned oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. Overall, the current evidence suggests that minimally invasive techniques are safe and feasible in gastrointestinal cancer surgery, but most of the studies published in this field are retrospective studies and case-matched studies. Large-scale randomized prospective studies are needed to further support the application of minimally invasive surgery. In this review, we summarize several common minimally invasive methods used to treat gastrointestinal cancer and discuss the advances in the minimally invasive treatment of gastrointestinal cancer in detail.

Natural orifice versus conventional mini-laparotomy for specimen extraction after reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: propensity score-matched comparative study

BACKGROUND

Although reduced port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS), defined as laparoscopic surgery performed with the minimum possible number of ports and/or small-sized ports, is less invasive than conventional laparoscopic surgery by reducing the number of surgical wounds, an extension of the incision is still needed for specimen extraction, which can undermine the merits of RPLS.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) in patients undergoing RPLS for colorectal cancer. The endpoints were perioperative outcome and oncologic safety at 3 years.

SETTING

Single-center experience (2013-2019).

PATIENTS

We retrospectively analyzed our prospectively collected patient records (American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage I-III sigmoid or upper rectal cancer (tumor diameter ≤ 5 cm) who underwent curative anterior resection via RPLS. We excluded patients who did not undergo intestinal anastomosis.

INTERVENTIONS

Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared between patients undergoing natural orifice (RPLS-NOSE) or conventional (mini-laparotomy) specimen extraction (RPLS-CSE). Patients were matched by propensity scores 1:1 for tumor diameter, AJCC stage, American Society of Anesthesiologists score and tumor location.

RESULTS

Of 119 eligible patients, 104 were matched (52 RPLS-NOSE; 52 RPLS-CSE) by propensity scores. Compared with RPLS-CSE, RPLS-NOSE was associated with longer operative time (223.9 vs. 188.7 min; p = 0.003), decreased use of analgesics (morphine dose 33.9 vs. 43.4 mg; p = 0.011) and duration of hospital stay (4.2 vs. 5.1 days; p = 0.001). No statistically significant difference was found in morbidity or wound-related complication rates between the two groups. After a median follow-up of 34.3 months, no local recurrence was observed in RPLS-NOSE. The 3-year disease-free survival did not differ statistically significantly between groups (90.9 vs. 90.5%; p = 0.610).

CONCLUSION

NOSE enhances the advantages of RPLS by avoiding the need for abdominal wall specimen extraction in patients with tumor diameter ≤ 5 cm. Surgical and oncologic safety are comparable to RPLS with CSE.

Retrospective Study of Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery in Resection of Sigmoid and Rectal Tumors

Background: With the development of surgical technology, surgeons are paying more and more attention to minimally invasive procedures such as injury reduction, pain reduction, and beautiful incisions to ensure the effectiveness of surgical treatment. This article discusses the safety, feasibility, and clinical outcomes of laparoscopic resection of sigmoid colon and rectal tumors via natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES). Materials and Methods: The clinical data of 39 patients who underwent complete laparoscopic resection of sigmoid colon tumor or rectal tumor at Chengde Medical College Hospital between 2018 and 2020, including general patient data (gender, age, body mass index [BMI], etc.), surgery-related data, general postoperative conditions, and postoperative pathological data, were retrospectively analyzed to explore the feasibility and safety of NOSES. Results: The specimens were all removed through the anorectal resection drag out type. The average age of 39 patients was 61.3 ± 10.2 years, the average BMI was 24.0 ± 3.1 kg/m², the average postoperative hospital stay was 11.2 ± 4.4 days, 12 patients with sigmoid colon tumors, including 11 malignant tumors and 1 schwannoma, 27 rectal tumors, including 1 rectal villous tubular adenoma, among the 37 patients with malignant tumors, ulcer type 32 cases of adenocarcinoma and 5 cases of mass adenocarcinoma, mean number of lymph nodes detected intraoperatively (11.9 ± 3.9), mean operative time (162.9 ± 43.0 minutes), mean operative bleeding (36.9 ± 13.0 mL), mean time of initial exhaust (4.3 ± 3.0) days, mean time of laparoscopic drainage tube removal (9.8 ± 1.4) days, mean time of postoperative feeding (4.4 ± 3.0) days, the average maximum tumor diameter (3.7 ± 1.4 cm), and the average distance of the tumor from the anal margin (14.1 ± 6.1 cm); after surgery, there were two cases of anastomotic fistula. Conclusion: Laparoscopic resection of sigmoid colon and rectal tumors via natural orifice specimen extraction has the advantages of less pain, reduced incisional complications, good safety, and accurate efficacy in clinical applications.