Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: long-term oncologic results

Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted and total laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Colon cancer is a significant health issue in China, with high incidence and mortality rates. Surgical resection remains the primary treatment, with the introduction of complete mesocolic excision in 2009 improving precision and outcomes. Laparoscopic techniques, including laparoscopic-assisted right hemicolectomy (LARH) and total laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (TLRH), have further advanced colon cancer treatment by reducing trauma, blood loss, and recovery time. While TLRH offers additional benefits such as faster recovery and fewer complications, its adoption has been limited by longer operative times and technical challenges.

AIM

To compare the short-term outcomes of TLRH and LARH for the treatment of right -sided colon cancer and explore the advantages and feasibility of TLRH.

METHODS

Clinical data from 109 right-sided colon cancer patients admitted between January 2019 and May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into an observation group (TLRH, n = 50) and a control group (LARH, n = 59). Study variables were operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative hospital stays, length of surgical specimen, number of lymph nodes dissected, and postoperative inflammatory factor levels of the two groups of patients. The postoperative complications were analyzed and compared, and survival, recurrence, and remote metastasis rates of the two groups were compared during a 2-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

The TLRH group showed the advantages of reduced intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospital stays, and quicker recovery. Lymph node dissection outcomes were comparable, and postoperative inflammatory markers were lower in the TLRH group. Complication rates were similar. Short-term follow-up (2 years) revealed no significant differences in recurrence, metastasis, or survival rates.

CONCLUSION

Compared to LARH, TLRH offers significant advantages in terms of reducing surgical trauma, lowering postoperative inflammatory factor levels, and mitigating the impact on intestinal function. This approach contributes to a shorter hospital stay and promotes postoperative recovery in patients. The study suggests that TLRH may offer favorable outcomes for colorectal cancer patients.

Defunctioning Ileostomy After Low Anterior Resection of Rectum: Morbidity Related to Fashioning and Closure

Background and Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess any predisposing factors to the morbidity of fashioning and reversal of diverting ileostomy in a prospective cohort of patients who have undergone TME and low colo-rectal or colo-anal anastomosis for rectal cancer. Materials and Methods: Consecutive patients with rectal cancer undergoing low anterior resection and a defunctioning loop ileostomy in three surgical units from 2016 to 2020 were included in the study and retrospectively analyzed. Results: One hundred eighty-two patients from three centres were included. Ileostomy-related mortality was 0.5%, attributed to renal failure.. Ileostomy-related morbidity was 46%. Postoperative ileus was seen in 37.4%, and dehydration in 18.8% of the patients. The readmission rate for ileostomy-related reasons was 15.4%. Stoma care was problematic in 15.7% or poor in 7% of the cases. Advanced age, male gender and obesity were independent risk factors for ileostomy-related morbidity. Ileostomy was reversed in 165 patients. The morbidity in 165 patients was 16%. Ileus was seen in 10.3%, anastomotic leak in 4.8% and wound infection in 12.7% of the cases. One patient died because of an anastomotic leak. No predisposing factors that affect the outcomes of ileostomy closure were identified. Conclusions: Diverting ileostomy-related morbidity is high. Life threatening dehydration and renal failure from ileus is more commonly seen in elderly, male and obese patients and should be anticipated. Ileostomy closure-related morbidity is low.

The Inflammatory Response and Long-Term Outcomes Between Open and Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy:A Propensity-Matched Single-Institution Study

Background: In recent years, although laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) has experienced rapid development both domestically and internationally, however, there are still varying opinions toward LPD. Methods: From January 2020 to July 2022, the data were collected. We compared the inflammatory response at various postoperative time points and evaluated long-term outcomes between the two groups. Results: In the early stage, the LPD group exhibited lower values of white blood cells, C-reactive protein, neutrophils, and platelets after surgery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) (P all<0.05). However, no statistically significant differences were observed in terms of procalcitonin, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio. Before propensity score matching, no statistical significance was observed between two groups, whether in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) (P = .406) or overall survival (OS) (P = .851). However, to further control for confounding factors, propensity score matching was used. The analysis revealed that DFS still showed no significant difference (P = .928), but, in the term of OS, a statistical significance was observed between the two groups. Conclusion: LPD demonstrates a comparable long-term outcomes to OPD and even slightly superior OS. Moreover, the LPD group exhibits a lower inflammatory response during early postoperative period.

Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has been endorsed by clinical guidelines for colon cancer, but not for rectal cancer on account of unapproved oncologic equivalence with open surgery.

AIMS

We started this largest-to-date meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy in the treatment of rectal cancer compared with open surgery.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Both randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic proctectomy and open surgery between January 1990 and March 2020 were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase Databases (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020211718). The data of intraoperative, pathological, postoperative and survival outcomes were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs and 93 NRCTs including 216,615 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with 48,888 patients received laparoscopic surgery and 167,727 patients underwent open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery group showed faster recovery, less complications and decreased mortality within 30 days. The positive rate of circumferential margin (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.85, p < 0.0001) and distal margin (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.85 p < 0.0001) was significantly reduced in the laparoscopic surgery group, but the completeness of total mesorectal excision showed no significant difference. The 3-year and 5-year local recurrence, disease-free survival and overall survival were all improved in the laparoscopic surgery group, while the distal recurrence did not differ significantly between the two approaches.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer with respect to oncological outcomes and long-term survival. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery provides short-term advantages, including faster recovery and less complications.

Comparisons of postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery using inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis: an evidence from Iran

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer has created a significant burden worldwide, including in Iran. Open and laparoscopic surgery are important treatment methods for this disease. The aim of this study is to compare postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery in Iran, with a particular emphasis on controlling confounding factors.

METHODS

To control confounding factors in between-group comparisons of observational studies, a method based on propensity scores was used. The current study was conducted on 916 patients with colorectal cancer in the city of Shiraz between the years 2011 to 2022. The required data regarding treatment outcomes, type of surgery, demographic characteristics, and clinical factors related to cancer was extracted from the Colorectal Cancer Research Center of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. To control confounding factors, we used the Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting (IPTW) as one of the analytical approaches based on Propensity Score analysis. After IPTW analysis, univariate logistic regression was used for treatment effect estimation. Stata 17 was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

After controlling for 24 clinical and demographic covariates, negative post-operative outcomes were significantly lower in laparoscopic than open surgery. There were significant differences between the two groups of surgery in the percentages of death due to cancer (P < 0.01), recurrence (P < 0.01), and metastasis (P < 0.05). The treatment effect univariate logistic regression analysis indicated that laparoscopic surgery reduced the risk of negative postoperative outcomes including death due to cancer (OR = 0.411, P < 0.01), recurrence (OR = 0.343, P < 0.01) and metastasis (OR = 0.611, P < 0.05) compared to open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of postoperative outcomes including cancer-related mortality, recurrence, and metastasis, the laparoscopic surgery outperformed open surgery. Therefore, further development of laparoscopic surgery can lead to better health outcomes for the population and optimize the utilization of healthcare resources.

Long-term survival and functional outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for clinical stage I ultra-low rectal cancers located within 5 cm of the anal verge: A prospective phase II trial (Ultimate trial)

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the long-term oncological outcomes and postoperative anal, urinary, and sexual functions after laparoscopic surgery for clinical stage I very low rectal carcinoma located near the anal canal.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Laparoscopic surgery is widely applied for rectal cancer; however, concerns remain, with some studies showing poorer outcomes compared to open surgery.

METHODS

This single-arm, phase II trial included patients registered preoperatively from 47 institutions in Japan. The planned sample size was 300. The primary endpoint was the 3-year local recurrence rate. Anal, urinary, and sexual functions were evaluated using a prospective questionnaire.

RESULTS

Three-hundred patients were registered between January 2014 and March 2017. Anus-preserving surgery was performed in 278 (93%), including 172 who underwent intersphincteric resection (58%) and 106 (36%) who underwent low anterior resection. The 3-year cumulative local recurrence rate was 6.3%. At 3 years postoperatively, 87% of patients used their own anus, and the median incontinence score improved from 12 at 3 months to 8 at 3 years. Only 5% of patients had severe incontinence (incontinence score of 16 points). Postoperative urinary function evaluation showed that International Prostate Symptom Score and Overactive Bladder Symptom Score decreased 1 week after surgery, but recovered to preoperative level 1 month after surgery. International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Sort Form remained almost stable after surgery. Sexual function evaluation using the International Index of Erectile Function-5 and International Index of Erectile Function-15 revealed that the patients had deteriorated 3 months after surgery but had recovered only slightly by 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery achieves feasible long-term oncological outcomes and a high rate of anus preservation with moderate anal function, and an acceptable incontinence score. While urinary function recovered rapidly, sexual function showed poor recovery.

Carbon black-containing self-healing adhesive hydrogels for endoscopic tattooing

Endoscopic tattooing with India ink is a popular method for identifying colonic lesions during minimally invasive surgery because it is highly challenging to localize lesions during laparoscopy. However, there is a perceived unmet need for the injection of India ink and carbon particle suspension due to various complications and inconstant durability during the perioperative period. In this study, carbon black-containing self-healing adhesive alginate/polyvinyl alcohol composite hydrogels were synthesized as endoscopic tattooing inks. Alginate (Alg) conjugated with phenylboronic acid (PBA) groups in the backbone was crosslinked with polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) because of the dynamic bonds between the phenylboronic acid in alginate and the cis-diol groups of PVA. The carbon black-incorporated Alg-PBA/PVA hydrogels exhibited self-healing and re-shapable properties, indicating that improved intraoperative localization could be achieved. In addition, the adhesive tattooing hydrogels were stably immobilized on the target regions in the intraperitoneal spaces. These carbon black-containing self-healing adhesive hydrogels are expected to be useful in various surgical procedures, including endoscopic tattooing.

Laparoscopic and robotic multivisceral resection in colorectal cancer: A case series and systematic review

PURPOSE

Multivisceral resection (MVR) with open approach is the standard surgical treatment for locally advanced colorectal cancer. However, the medical literature concerning the practice of minimally invasive MVR in order to reduce postoperative complications and hospital stay has been growing exponentially over the last years. The present study aimed to examine our experience and to provide a systematic review about the results and complications of minimally invasive MVR.

METHODS

Data of patients that underwent minimally invasive MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The literature was searched for studies concerning minimally invasive MVR for colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 39 laparoscopic MVR were performed in our department. Complications occurred in 14 patients (35.9%) with major complications in five patients (18.82%) according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Conversion was required in one case (2.56%) with subsequent mortality (2.56%). Pathologic adjacent organs or structures invasion was observed in 30 patients (76.9%) and positive resection margin occurred in two cases (5.2%). Twenty-two studies including 1055 patients were identified after literature search. In these studies, laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery were performed in 90.15% and 9.85% of the patients, respectively. R0 resection was established in 95% of cases, conversion rate varied between 0% and 41.7%, and postoperative mortality ranged between 0% and 7.7% in the included articles.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive approach may be a safe option for patients requiring MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer, with equivalent oncological results and could result in better early postoperative outcomes to open approach. However, further studies on this topic are needed to confirm the results of the current study.

Oncological outcomes following minimally invasive surgery for pathological N2M0 colorectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Whether minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is safe and effective for patients with N2M0 colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. This study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes between MIS and open surgery (Open) groups for patients with pathological (p)N2M0 CRC, and evaluate the oncological outcomes of MIS for pN2M0 CRC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 125 consecutive patients with pN2M0 CRC who underwent curative surgery between 2010 and 2017, using propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 59.4 months. After PSM, we enrolled 68 patients (n = 34 in each group). The conversion rate was 9.6% for the entire patient cohort and 5.9% for the matched cohort. In colon cancer (CC), short-term outcomes were similar between groups. On the other hand, in rectal cancer (RC), estimated blood loss, rate of anastomosis leakage, and length of postsurgical stay were lower in the MIS group than the Open group. R0 resection was achieved in all patients with MIS. No surgical mortality was encountered in any group. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of 3-year local recurrence rate, overall survival, cancer-specific survival, or recurrence-free survival among the entire patient cohort or the matched cohort, regardless of the primary tumor site (CC or RC). Surgical approach (MIS vs Open) had no significant influence on survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS is a safe and effective option for patients with pN2M0 CRC, with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes comparable to the open approach. MIS can be considered for patients with pN2M0 CRC.

Impact of prior abdominal surgery on short-term outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether laparoscopic surgery after prior abdominal surgery (PAS) is safe and feasible for colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. The present study aimed to evaluate the impact of PAS on short-term outcomes following laparoscopic CRC surgery.

METHODS

We performed retrospective analysis used propensity score-matched analysis to reduce the possibility of selection bias. Participants comprised 1284 consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic CRC surgery between 2010 and 2020. Patients were divided into two groups according to PAS. Patients with PAS were then matched to patients without these conditions. Short-term outcomes were evaluated between groups in the overall cohort and matched cohort, and risk factors for conversion to laparotomy and severe postoperative complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, we enrolled 762 patients (n = 381 in each group). Before matching, significant group-dependent differences were observed in sex, age, primary tumor site, pathological (p) T stage, and type of procedure. No significant difference was found between groups in terms of rate of conversion to laparotomy, estimated blood loss, rate of extended resection, length of postoperative stay, and postoperative complications. After matching, estimated operative time was significantly longer in the PAS group (p = 0.01). Significant differences were found between groups in terms of reason for conversion to laparotomy. Multivariate analyses identified significant risk factors for conversion to laparotomy as pT stage ≥ 3 (odds ratio [OR] 2.36; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-5.26) and body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m² (OR 3.56; 95% CI 1.07-11.7). Multivariate analyses identified rectum in the primary tumor site as the only significant risk factor for severe postoperative complications (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.08-5.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic CRC surgery after PAS showed acceptable short-term outcomes compared to Non-PAS. The laparoscopic approach appears safe and feasible for CRC regardless of whether the patient has a history of PAS.

Analysis of bowel function, urogenital function, and long-term follow-up outcomes associated with robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgical approaches to total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The present study comparatively analyzed short-term clinical effectiveness and long-term follow-up endpoints associated with robotic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (RAS) and laparoscopic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (LAS) when used to treat low rectal cancer.

METHOD

Within such a single-center retrospective cohort analysis, low rectal cancer patients that underwent RAS (n=200) or LAS (n=486) between January 2015 and beginning of July 2018 were enrolled.

RESULTS

The mean operative durations in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 249±64 min and 203±47 min, respectively (P<0.001). Temporary ileostomy rates in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 64.5% and 51.6% (P = 0.002). In addition, major variations across such cohorts regarding catheter removal timing, time to liquid intake, time to first leaving bed, and length of hospitalization (all P<0.001). This distal resection margin distance within the RAS cohort was diminished in comparison to LAS cohort (P=0.004). For patients within the LAS cohort, the time required to recover from reduced urinary/female sexual function was > 6 months post-surgery (P<0.0001), whereas within the RAS cohort this interval was 3 months (P<0.0001). At 6 months post-surgery, male sexual function within RAS cohort was improved in comparison to LAS cohort (P<0.001). At 6 months post-surgery, Wexner scores revealed similar results (P<0.001). No major variations within overall or disease-free survival were identified across these cohorts at 3 or 5 years post-surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic sphincter-preserving surgery is a safe and effective surgical technique in low rectal patients in terms of postoperative oncological safety and long-term endpoints. And the RAS strategy provides certain additional benefits with respect to short-term urogenital/anorectal functional recovery in treated patients compared to LAS.

Impact of antithrombotic agents on short-term outcomes following minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether minimally invasive colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery under the suitable management of perioperative antithrombotic therapy (ATT) is safe and feasible in patients treated with chronic ATT. The present study aimed to assess the impact of ATT on short-term outcomes following minimally invasive CRC surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 1495 consecutive patients who underwent elective minimally invasive CRC surgery between 2011 and 2021, using propensity score-matched analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 230 patients had chronically received ATT. After propensity score matching, we enrolled 412 patients (n = 206 in each group). Before matching, significant group-dependent differences were observed in terms of sex (p < 0.01), age (p < 0.01), American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status (p < 0.01), body mass index (p < 0.01), and pathological N classification (p = 0.03). The frequencies of overall postoperative complications, bleeding events, and thromboembolic events were significantly higher in the ATT group than in the Non-ATT group (p < 0.01). After matching, no significant differences were found between the groups in terms of clinical or surgical characteristics, or in terms of the frequency of overall postoperative complications, bleeding events, thromboembolic events, length of postoperative stay, or any other postoperative complication. Multivariate analysis identified no significant risk factors for postoperative bleeding events or severe postoperative complications associated with ATT.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with chronic ATT showed acceptable short-term outcomes for minimally invasive CRC surgery compared with those not receiving ATT. Minimally invasive CRC surgery appears safe and feasible under the suitable management of perioperative ATT regardless of whether the patient has a history of ATT.

Magnetic resonance imaging pelvimetry predicts the technical difficulty of rectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The relationships between the pelvimetry and technical difficulties in performing rectal surgery for mid-low rectal cancer remain unclear.

METHODS

Two hundred and twenty-one cases of mid-low rectal cancer patients who underwent sphincter-preserved total mesorectum excision (TME) were analyzed. The data of the pelvimetry and the relative position between trocar site and tumor were measured with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

RESULTS

Univariate analysis showed that the interspinous diameter, the sacrococcygeal distance, and the angle of sacral promontory inclination were significantly associated with the technical difficulty during laparoscopic surgery, but only the interspinous diameter remained an independent risk factor in multivariate analysis. The simulated trocar angle θ was an independent risk factor affecting the operation time during laparoscopic surgery, simulated trocar angle η was significantly related to intraoperative blood loss in both laparoscopic surgery and transanal TME (taTME) surgery groups.

CONCLUSION

Interspinous diameter can predict difficulty in laparoscopic surgery and may provide useful information for preoperative planning and consideration of approach.

Anatomical study of the inferior mesenteric vein using three-dimensional computed tomography angiography in laparoscopy-assisted surgery for left-sided colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To investigate the drainage patterns of the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) and measure the distance from the root of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) to the IMV using preoperative three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) angiography in patients undergoing surgery for left-sided colorectal cancer.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we analyzed data collected prospectively on 167 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic left-sided colorectal cancer surgery between July, 2014 and August, 2019. The drainage pattern of the IMV and the distance from the root of the IMA to the IMV were evaluated using 3D-CT angiography. We also assessed intraoperative adverse events and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

The IMV drained into the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) in 44 patients, into the confluence point of the SMV and splenic vein (SV) in 38 patients, into the SV in 83 patients, and into the middle colic vein in the remaining three patients. The median length from the root of the IMA to the IMV was 22.1 mm (1.3-84.9). IMV injury occurred in only one patient during surgery, but resulted in colonic ischemia.

CONCLUSION

3D-CT angiography is useful for the preoperative assessment of vascular anatomical variations of the IMV and IMA for safe intraoperative navigation and prevention of complications during laparoscopy-assisted left-sided colorectal surgery.

No beneficial effect on survival but a decrease in postoperative complications in patients with rectal cancer undergoing robotic surgery: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Robotic surgery has been taken as a new modality to surpass the technical limitations of conventional surgery. Here we aim to compare the oncologic outcomes of patients with rectal cancer receiving robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

Data from patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between March 2011 and December 2018 were obtained for outcome assessment at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. All patients were separated into two groups: a robot group (patients receiving robotic surgery, n = 314) and a laparoscopy group (patients receiving laparoscopic surgery, n = 220). The primary endpoint was survival outcomes. The secondary endpoints were the general conditions of the operation, postoperative complications and pathological characteristics.

Results

The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at years 1, 3 and 5 were 96.6%, 88.7%, and 87.7% vs. 96.7%, 88.1%, and 78.4%, and 98.6%, 80.2-, and 73.5% vs. 96.2-, 87.2-, and 81.1% in the robot and laparoscopy groups, respectively (P > 0.05). In the multivariable-adjusted analysis, robotic surgery was not an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS (P = 0.925 and 0.451, respectively). With respect to the general conditions of the operation, patients in the robot group had significantly shorter operation times (163.5 ± 40.9 vs. 190.5 ± 51.9 min), shorter times to 1^st gas passing [2(1) vs. 3(1)d] and shorter hospital stay days [7(2) vs. 8(3)d] compared to those in the laparoscopy group (P < 0.01, respectively). After the operation, the incidence of short- and long-term complications in the robot group was significantly lower than that in the laparoscopy group (15.9% vs. 32.3%; P < 0.001), especially for urinary retention (1.9% vs. 7.3%; 0.6% vs. 4.1%, P < 0.05, respectively). With regard to pathological characteristics, TNM stages II and III were more frequently observed in the robot group than in the laparoscopy group (94.3% vs. 83.2%, P < 0.001). No significant difference were observed in lymph nodes retrieved, lymphovascular invasion and circumferential resection margin involvement between the two groups (P > 0.05, respectively).

Conclusions

This monocentre retrospective comparative cohort study revealed short-term advantages of robot-assisted rectal cancer resection but similar survival compared to conventional laparoscopy.

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies

PURPOSE

To compare single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and multiport laparoscopic surgery (MLS) for colorectal cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies comparing SILS and MLS for colorectal cancer were enrolled. Outcomes of interests included intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies (6 RCTs and 10 PSM studies) published between 2012 and 2020 with a total of 2425 patients were enrolled. Compared with MLS, SILS was associated with less postoperative pain at postoperative day (POD) 1 (P = 0.02, MWD = -0.73, 95%CI: -1.37, -0.09) and POD2 (P < 0.001, MWD= -1.10, 95%CI: -1.45, -0.74) and shorter length of total incision length (P < 0.001, MWD = -3.31, 95%CI: -3.95, -2.67). No differences were observed in terms of operative time, blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative complications, incision hernia, and pathological or survival outcomes between SILS and MLS. Subgroup analysis for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid colon cancer showed that the SILS group was only associated with less postoperative pain and shorter total incision length. The surgical and pathological outcomes were comparable between SILS and MLS.

CONCLUSIONS

SILS is a beneficial alternative to MLS in select colorectal cancer patients, especially for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid cancer, with better cosmetic effects and less postoperative pain. Simultaneously, SILS does not compromise intraoperative and postoperative complications, surgical quality, or long-term outcomes.

Minimally invasive versus open intersphincteric resection of low rectal cancer regardless of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: long-term oncologic outcomes

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is a surgical technique intended to avoid abdominoperineal resection (APR) in patients diagnosed with low-lying rectal cancer. However, the oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive ISR are still controversial. We analyzed the long-term oncologic outcomes of open and minimally invasive ISR. A total of 313 rectal cancer patients who underwent ISR between 2000 and 2014 were analyzed, including 147 in the open surgery group and 166 in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) group. This study also analyzed 113 patients who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for advanced lower rectal cancer. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to correct for differences between the two groups. 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate was the primary end point. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MIS group (9.6 vs. 11.8 days, p < 0.001). Differences in overall postoperative morbidity rates between the groups were not significant; however, the rate of surgical site infection was significantly lower in the MIS group (1.2 vs. 10.9%, p < 0.001). The 5-year DFS associated with all stages combined in the matched patients were not significantly different: 75.2% in the open group vs. 64.2% in the MIS group (p = 0.214). Similar results were found in matched patients treated with nCRT, with 72.0% in the open group and 61.3% in the MIS group (p = 0.078) showing DFS. Both minimally-invasive and open ISR for rectal cancer yielded similar 5-year oncologic outcomes. MIS showed statistically significant advantages in some postoperative outcomes such as reduced surgical site infection and shorter hospital stay, and similar long-term outcomes compared with open ISR. This study also suggests that MIS after nCRT for advanced rectal cancer represents a surgical option with similar oncological results.

Similarities and differences between study designs in short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open low anterior resection for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, case-matched, and cohort studies

AIM

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) are the gold standard in surgical research, and case-matched studies, such as studies with propensity score matching, are expected to serve as an alternative to RCT. Both study designs have been used to investigate the potential superiority of laparoscopic surgery to open surgery for rectal cancer, but it remains unclear whether there are any differences in the findings obtained using these study designs. We aimed to examine similarities and differences between findings from different study designs regarding laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analyses. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane. RCT, case-matched studies, and cohort studies comparing laparoscopic low anterior resection and open low anterior resection for rectal cancer were included. In total, 8 short-term outcomes and 3 long-term outcomes were assessed. Meta-analysis was conducted stratified by study design using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were included in this review. Findings did not differ between RCT and case-matched studies for most outcomes. However, the estimated treatment effect was largest in cohort studies, intermediate in case-matched studies, and smallest in RCT for overall postoperative complications and 3-year local recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Findings from case-matched studies were similar to those from RCT in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. However, findings from case-matched studies were sometimes intermediate between those of RCT and unadjusted cohort studies, and case-matched studies and cohort studies have a potential to overestimate the treatment effect compared with RCT.

The impact of laparoscopic surgery in colorectal cancer resection with respect to the development of liver metastasis in the long-term

Introduction Colorectal cancer (CRC) shows high incidence and mortality worldwide, particularly in Western and developed countries. The objective of this study is to evaluate the oncologic results during a minimum follow-up of 2 years of curable CRC patients submitted to laparoscopic resection in our environment, regarding to the development of hepatic metastases.

Methods Medical records of 189 colon and rectal patients with potentially curable adenocarcinoma who have been submitted to laparoscopic resection have been reviewed through a retrospective cohort between January 2005 and March 2012 at a single institution regarded as reference to this type of treatment. Pearson's χ 2 and Long-rank tests have been used for statistical analysis and data was analyzed by statistic package STATA version 11.0.

Results The eligible population for the study was 146 patients, 91 women (62%), with a mean age of 61 ± 13 years. Minimum follow-up was 24 months, having an mean follow-up of 60 ± 27 months and an mean follow-up of global disease recurrence of 27 ± 11 months. Hepatic metastases occurred in 7.5% of the population, most from stage III, and the mean recurrence period was 25 ± 16 months.

Conclusions Laparoscopic resection for potentially curable CRC in this cohort did not change the long-term incidence of hepatic metastases, considering that our results are comparable to large randomized clinical trial results. Laparoscopic resection was effective and safe for analyzed patients, regarding long-term oncologic results.

Oncological strategy following R1 sphincter-saving resection in low rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy

AIM

Sphincter-saving resection (SSR) for low rectal cancer remains challenging due to the high risk of positive resection margin (R1). Long-term outcomes and the dedicated oncological strategy are not well established in this situation. The aim of this study was to define the more appropriate strategy according to the patterns of recurrence.

METHODS

Between 1994 and 2014, patients treated by SSR for low rectal cancer with preoperative chemoradiotherapy were included. Three types of recurrences were defined: local (LR), distant (DR) and mixed (MR). Recurrences and survival after R0 and R1 resection were analysed by Kaplan-Meier and compared with the log-rang test.

RESULTS

Among 394 patients receiving SSR, 42 (10.6%) had R1 resection. Independent factors of R1 resection were EMVI (OR2.24,95%IC1.10-4.53,p = 0.025) and no tumor downstaging (OR8.41,95%IC2.50-8.32,p = 0.001). Both 5-year disease free and overall survival, and 5-year distant and local recurrence, were significantly worse after R1 resection. The overall recurrence after R1 resection was 57% (24/42), 7% had LR, 36% DR and 14% MR. Time to DR was shorter than time to LR (11.1 vs. 34.3) months. In all cases of MR, DR occurred before LR (12.1 vs. 34.3) months, meaning that after R1 resection, the first concern was DR.

CONCLUSION

R1 resection after SSR for low rectal cancer reflects a more aggressive and systemic disease. Prognosis depends on DR in about 90% of cases, suggesting that pelvic control should not be the priority in the oncological strategy after R1. Adjuvant systemic chemotherapy ought to be preferred to salvage abdominoperineal resection.

Comparison of pathologic outcomes of robotic and open resections for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

The application of robotic surgery for rectal cancer is increasing steadily. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare pathologic outcomes among patients with rectal cancer who underwent open rectal surgery (ORS) versus robotic rectal surgery (RRS).

Methods

We systematically searched the literature of EMBASE, PubMed, the Cochrane Library of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized controlled trials (nRCTs) comparing ORS with RRS.

Results

Fourteen nRCTs, including 2711 patients met the predetermined inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Circumferential resection margin (CRM) positivity (OR: 0.58, 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.16, P = 0.13), number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD: −0.31, 95% CI, −2.16 to 1.53, P = 0.74), complete total mesorectal excision (TME) rates (OR: 0.93, 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.78, P = 0.83) and the length of distal resection margins (DRM) (WMD: −0.01, 95% CI, −0.26 to 0.25, P = 0.96) did not differ significantly between the RRS and ORS groups.

Conclusion

Based on the current evidence, robotic resection for rectal cancer provided equivalent pathological outcomes to ORS in terms of CRM positivity, number of harvested lymph nodes and complete TME rates and DRM.

Are oncological long-term outcomes equal after laproscopic completed and converted laparoscopic converted rectal resection for cancer?

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival after laproscopic completed and laparoscopic converted rectal resection for cancer.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent curative laparoscopic rectal surgery for cancer at our institution between January 2001 and December 2016 were included in a single-center retrospective study. Patients were divided into two groups: the converted (CONV) group and the totally laparoscopic (LAP) group. The primary outcomes were long-term oncologic outcomes including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), as well as local and distant recurrence (LR, DR). The secondary outcomes included postoperative mortality and morbidity as defined as death or any complication occurring within 90 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

Of 214 consecutive patients included, 57 were converted to open surgery (CONV group), leading to a 26.6% conversion rate. Mean length of follow-up was 68 ± 42 months in the LAP group and 70 ± 41 months in the CONV group. Five-year OS was significantly shorter in the CONV group compared to the LAP group (p = 0.0016). On multivariate analysis, rectal tumor location (middle and low) and conversion to open surgery were predictors of both OS and DFS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that conversion to open surgery after laparoscopic rectal resection appears to significantly reduce OS without having a significant impact on DFS and recurrence rates.

The multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer

Rectal cancer treatment has evolved during the past 40 years with the use of a standardized surgical technique for tumour resection: total mesorectal excision. A dramatic reduction in local recurrence rates and improved survival outcomes have been achieved as consequences of a better understanding of the surgical oncology of rectal cancer, and the advent of adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments to compliment surgery have paved the way for a multidisciplinary approach to disease management. Further improvements in imaging techniques and the ability to identify prognostic factors such as tumour regression, extramural venous invasion and threatened margins have introduced the concept of decision-making based on preoperative staging information. Modern treatment strategies are underpinned by accurate high-resolution imaging guiding both neoadjuvant therapy and precision surgery, followed by meticulous pathological scrutiny identifying the important prognostic factors for adjuvant chemotherapy. Included in these strategies are organ-sparing approaches and watch-and-wait strategies in selected patients. These pathways rely on the close working of interlinked disciplines within a multidisciplinary team. Such multidisciplinary forums are becoming standard in the treatment of rectal cancer across the UK, Europe and, more recently, the USA. This Review examines the essential components of modern-day management of rectal cancer through a multidisciplinary team approach, providing information that is essential for any practising colorectal surgeon to guide the best patient care.

Long-term survival outcomes following laparoscopic surgery for clinical stage 0/I rectal carcinoma

AIM

To clarify and evaluate the long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for clinical stage 0/I rectal carcinoma patients.

METHODS

This single-arm phase II trial involved accredited surgeons from 43 Japanese institutions. Patients were registered preoperatively. The planned sample size was 490. The primary endpoint was overall survival, and long-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 495 patients were registered between February 2008 and August 2010. Eight patients (1.6%) required conversion to open surgery. Sphincter-preserving procedures were performed in 477 (97%) patients. Positive radial resection margin was found in two (0.4%) patients. Of 490 patients, 22, 314, 38, 115, and one patient had final pathological stages (p-stage) 0, I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Pathologically, 31.4% (154/490) of the patients did not have p-stage 0/I. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates in p-stages 0, I, II, and III were 100%, 98%, 97%, and 94%, respectively. The 5-year OS of all patients at 96.6% (95% CI 94.6-97.9) was significantly better than the expected 5-year OS of 81.1% (P < .0001). The 5-year relapse-free survival in p-stages 0, I, II, and III were 100%, 93%, 81%, and 79%, respectively. The 5-year relapse-free survival of all patients was 90.1%. Fifty patients (10.2%) had recurrence; lung recurrence was found in 22 patients, local recurrence in 14, liver in seven, distant lymph node in nine, and bone in three.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for clinical stage 0/I rectal carcinoma has feasible long-term outcomes. (ClinicalTrials.gov No.NCT00635466.).

Comparing laparoscopic and open pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic head cancer: oncologic outcomes and inflammatory scores

BACKGROUND

Both the technical and oncological safety of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) remain controversial in treating pancreatic head cancer. We evaluated the oncologic benefit of LPD and compared the inflammatory score between LPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

METHODS

From January 2014 to March 2019, 61 patients with standard PD not combined with other organ resection were finally enrolled in this study. Among these patients, 27 underwent LPD and 34 underwent OPD (registered on 16 July 2019, and registration number is 2019-1411-001).

RESULTS

The estimated blood loss (EBL) for the LPD group was less than that of the OPD group (P = 0.003). The operation time was similar, as was the incidence of complications such as postoperative fistula, delayed gastric emptying. Overall survival was not different between LPD and OPD (44.62 vs. 45.29 months, P = 0.223). However, a significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) was seen in the LPD group (34.19 vs. 23.27 months, P = 0.027). No statistically significant differences were found in terms of the postoperative change in inflammatory scores and differentiated white blood cell counts.

CONCLUSIONS

LPD is not only safe and feasible in pancreatic head cancer patients but is associated with a reduced amount of EBL, favorable DFS.

Does conversion during laparoscopic rectal oncological surgery increases postoperative complications and anastomotic leakage rates? A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate, regarding previous published studies, postoperative outcomes between patients undergoing rectal cancer resection performed by totally laparoscopic approach (LAP) compared to those who underwent peroperative conversion (CONV).

METHODS

Studies comparing LAP versus CONV for rectal cancer published until December 2017 were selected and submitted to a systematic review and meta-analysis. Articles were searched in Medline and Cochrane Trials Register Database. Meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager 5.0.

RESULTS

Twelve prospective and retrospective studies with a total of 4503 patients who underwent fully laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer and a total of 612 patients who underwent conversion were included. Meta-analysis did not show any significant difference on overall mortality between both approaches (OR=0.47, 95%CI=0.18-1.22, P=0.12). However, Meta-analysis showed that anastomotic leakage rate, wound abscess rate and postoperative morbidity rate were significantly decreased with totally laparoscopic approach (OR=0.37, 95%CI =0.24-0.58, P<0.0001; OR=0.29, 95%CI=0.19-0.45, P<0.00001; OR=0.56, 95%CI=0.46-0.67, P<0.00001 respectively).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that conversion increases anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity and wound abscess rates without increasing mortality rate for patients who underwent rectal resection for cancer.

OPEN, LAPAROSCOPIC AND TRANSANAL TOTAL MESORECTAL EXCISION: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW AND NETWORK META ANALYSIS

AIM: to compare the effectiveness of different methods of total mesorectumectomy (TME).

MATERIALS AND METHODS: the systematic review performed in accordance with PRISMA practice and recommendations.

RESULTS: Forty-one papers were included in the analysis. Fourteen studies were for transanal total mesorectumectomy (TA TME) (n=480) compared with laparoscopic (LA TME), 26 – for LA TME vs open (n=6820), 1 – for open vs TA TME. There was no significant difference between open TME, LA TME and TA TME in grade 3 quality of mesorectumectomy by Quirke. The positive circular resection margin (CRM) is less often in TA TME group, then LA TME (OR=2.58, CI 1.34-4.97, p=0.005). There was significantly lower positive CRM rate in LA TME then open TME (OR=0.73, CI 0.63-0.85, p<0.0001). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications rates between LA TME and TA TME (p=0.72). Network meta-analysis showed less postoperative complications followed LA TME than open TME (OR=0.75, CI 0.65-0.84).

CONCLUSION: TA TME is comparable with laparoscopic and open TME in short term results. Rates of positive CRM, the quality of Grade 1 mesorectal excision, the conversion rate, the postoperative urinary dysfunction, may have better results in TA TME.

Predicting the level of difficulty of the double-stapling technique in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision

BACKGROUND

The transection of rectum and fashioning of anastomosis is a crucial step in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) and the double-stapling technique (DST) is often employed. This study aimed to evaluate the factors that were associated with difficult DST.

METHOD

Cases of laparoscopic TME were retrospectively reviewed. The clinico-anatomical parameters were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. In addition, pelvic dimensions were taken by reviewing the magnetic resonance imaging scan. The number of stapler cartridges used for intracorporeal transection of rectum was used as a surrogate for the level of difficulty of DST and its relationship with various parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were a total of 121 consecutive cases analyzed. The mean number of stapler cartridges used was 2.1 ± 0.7. Pelvic inlet (p = 0.002) and tumor height (p = 0.015) were predictors of the number of cartridges used, R² = 0.366. A model was developed to predict the likelihood of transecting the rectum with two or less stapler cartridges, which included the following parameters: gender, pelvic inlet, interspinous distance, intertuberous distance, and tumor height. The predicted probability also correlated with overall operation time (p = 0.009) and anastomotic leakage (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

The difficulty of DST was associated with patient's clinico-anatomical factors. Surgeons can consider other feasible alternatives, like transanal anastomosis, when a technically challenging DST is anticipated.

Comparison of Oncologic Outcomes in Laparoscopic versus Open Surgery for Non-Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Personal Experience in a Single Institution

The oncologic merits of the laparoscopic technique for colorectal cancer surgery remain debatable. Eligible patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer who were scheduled for an elective resection by one surgeon in a medical institution were randomized to either laparoscopic or open surgery. During this period, a total of 188 patients received laparoscopic surgery and the other 163 patients received the open approach. The primary endpoint was cancer-free five-year survival after operative treatment, and the secondary endpoint was the tumor recurrence incidence. Besides, surgical complications were also compared. There was no statistically significant difference between open and laparoscopic groups regarding the average number of lymph nodes dissected, ileus, anastomosis leakage, overall mortality rate, cancer recurrence rate, or cancer-free five-year survival. Even though performing a laparoscopic approach used a significantly longer operation time, this technique was more effective for colorectal cancer treatment in terms of shorter hospital stay and less blood loss. Meanwhile, fewer patients receiving the laparoscopic approach developed postoperative urinary tract infection, wound infection, or pneumonia, which reached statistical significance. For non-metastatic colorectal cancer patients, laparoscopic surgery resulted in better short-term outcomes, whether in several surgical complications and intra-operative blood loss. Though there was no significant statistical difference in terms of cancer-free five-year survival and tumor recurrence, it is strongly recommended that patients undergo laparoscopic surgery if not contraindicated.

Open versus minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: a single-center cohort study on 237 consecutive patients

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is gaining popularity in rectal tumor treatment. However, contrasting data are available regarding its safety and efficacy. Our aim is to compare the open and MIS approaches for rectal cancer treatment. Two-hundred-thirty-seven patients were included: 113 open and 124 MIS rectal resections. After the propensity score matching analysis (PS), the cases were matched into 42 open and 42 MIS. Short- and long-term outcomes, and pathological findings were analyzed before and after PS. A further comparison of the same outcomes and costs was conducted between the laparoscopic and the robotic approaches. As a whole, a sphincter-preserving procedure was more frequently performed in the MIS group (110 vs 75 cases; p < 0.0001). The estimated blood loss during MIS was significantly lower than during open surgery [127 (± 92) vs 242 (± 122) mL; p < 0.0001], with clear advantages for the robotic approach over laparoscopy [113 (± 87) vs 147 (± 93) mL; p 0.01]. Complication rate was comparable between the two groups. A higher rate of CRM positivity was evidenced after open surgery (12.4% vs 1.7%; p 0.004). A higher number of lymph nodes was harvested in the MIS group [12.5 (± 6.4) vs 11 (± 5.6); p 0.04]. After PS, no difference in terms of perioperative outcomes was noted, with the only exception of a higher blood loss in the open approach [242 (± 122) vs 127 (± 92) mL; p < 0.0001]. For the matched cases, no difference in 5-year overall and disease-free survival was evidenced (p 0.50 and 0.88, respectively). Mean costs were higher for robotics as compared to laparoscopy [9812 (±1974)€ vs 9045 (± 1893)€; p 0.02]. MIS could be considered as a treatment option for rectal cancer. The PS study evidenced clear advantages in terms of estimated blood loss over the open surgery. Costs still remain the main limit for robotics.

Effect of cancer characteristics and oncological outcomes associated with laparoscopic colorectal resection converted to open surgery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection is an oncologically safe procedure equivalent to open resection,the effects of conversion of a laparoscopic approach to an open approach remain unclear.This study evaluated the cancer characteristic and oncological outcomes associated with conversion of laparoscopic colorectal resection to open surgery.

METHOD

We conducted searches on PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We included the literature published until 2018 that examined the impact of laparoscopic conversion to open colorectal resection. Only randomized control trials and prospective studies were included. Each study was reviewed and the data were extracted. Fixed-effects methods were used to combine data, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate the outcomes.

RESULTS

Twelve studies with 5427 patients were included. Of these, 4672 patients underwent complete laparoscopic resection with no conversion (LAP group), whereas 755 underwent conversion to an open resection (CONV group). The meta-analysis showedsignificant differences between the LAP group and converted (CONV) group with respect to neoadjuvant therapy (P = .002), location of the rectal cancer (P = .01), and recurrence (P = .01). However, no difference in local recurrence (P = .17) was noted between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Conversion of laparoscopic to open colorectal cancer resection is influenced by tumor characteristics. Conversion of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is associated with a worse oncological outcome.

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials only exploring the role of single incision laparoscopic surgery versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for colorectal resections

Background

The objective of this article is to evaluate the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) versus conventional multi-incision laparoscopic surgery (MILS) for colorectal resections.

Methods

The data retrieved from the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the surgical outcomes in patients undergoing SILS versus MILS for colorectal resections was analysed using the principles of meta-analysis. The combined outcome of dichotomous data was represented as risk ratio (RR) and continuous data was shown as standardized mean difference (SMD).

Results

Five RCTs on 525 patients reported the colorectal resections by SILS versus MILS technique. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the operation time (SMD, 0.20; 95% CI, -0.11 to 0.52; z=1.28; P=0.20), length of in-patient stay (SMD, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.51 to 0.14; z=1.10; P=0.27) and lymph node harvesting (SMD, 0.09; 95% CI, -0.14 to 0.33; z=0.76; P=0.45) were comparable between both techniques. Furthermore, post-operative complications (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.65-1.54; z=0.02; P=0.99), post-operative mortality, surgical site infection rate (RR, 3.00; 95% CI, 0.13-70.92; z=0.68; P=0.50), anastomotic leak rate (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.11-1.63; z=1.24; P=0.21), conversion rate (P=0.13) and re-operation rate (P=0.43) were also statistically similar following SILS and MILS.

Conclusions

SILS failed to demonstrate any superiority over MILS for colorectal resections in all post-operative surgical outcomes.

Rectal Dissection Simulator for da Vinci Surgery: Details of Simulator Manufacturing With Evidence of Construct, Face, and Content Validity

BACKGROUND

Apprenticeship in training new surgical skills is problematic, because it involves human subjects. To date there are limited inanimate trainers for rectal surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to present manufacturing details accompanied by evidence of construct, face, and content validity for a robotic rectal dissection simulation.

DESIGN

Residents versus experts were recruited and tested on performing simulated total mesorectal excision. Time for each dissection was recorded. Effectiveness of retraction to achieve adequate exposure was scored on a dichotomous yes-or-no scale. Number of critical errors was counted. Dissection quality was tested using a visual 7-point Likert scale. The times and scores were then compared to assess construct validity. Two scorer results were used to show interobserver agreement. A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire was administered to each participant inquiring about basic demographics, surgical experience, and opinion of the simulator. Survey data relevant to the determination of face validity (realism and ease of use) and content validity (appropriateness and usefulness) were then analyzed.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single teaching institution.

SUBJECTS

Residents and trained surgeons were included.

INTERVENTION

The study intervention included total mesorectal excision on an inanimate model.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Metrics confirming or refuting that the model can distinguish between novices and experts were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 19 residents and 9 experts were recruited. The residents versus experts comparison featured average completion times of 31.3 versus 10.3 minutes, percentage achieving adequate exposure of 5.3% versus 88.9%, number of errors of 31.9 versus 3.9, and dissection quality scores of 1.8 versus 5.2. Interobserver correlations of R = 0.977 or better confirmed interobserver agreement. Overall average scores were 4.2 of 5.0 for face validation and 4.5 of 5.0 for content validation.

LIMITATIONS

The use of a da Vinci microblade instead of hook electrocautery was a study limitation.

CONCLUSIONS

The pelvic model showed evidence of construct validity, because all of the measured performance indicators accurately differentiated the 2 groups studied. Furthermore, study participants provided evidence for the simulator's face and content validity. These results justify proceeding to the next stage of validation, which consists of evaluating predictive and concurrent validity. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A551.

Single-Docking Full Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Experience

Purpose. Robotic surgery has gradually gained importance in the treatment of rectal cancer. However, recent studies have not shown any advantages when compared with laparoscopy. The objective of this study is to report a single surgeon’s experience in robotic rectal surgery focusing on short-term and long-term outcomes. Methods. Sixty consecutive robotic rectal resections for adenocarcinoma, over a 4-year period, were retrospectively reviewed. Patients’ characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. Oncological outcomes and surgical resection quality as well as overall and disease-free survival were also assessed. Results. Thirty patients out of 60 (50%) underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Anterior rectal resection was performed in 52 cases (86.7%), and abdominoperineal resection was done in 8 cases (13.3%). Mean operative time was 283 (±68.6) minutes. The conversion rate was 5% (3 patients). Postoperative complications occurred in 10 cases (16.7%), and reoperation was required in 1 case (1.7%). Mean hospital stay was 9 days, while 30-day mortality was 1.7% (1 patients). The histopathological analysis reported a negative circumferential radial margin and distal margins in 100% of cases with a complete or near complete total mesorectal excision in 98.3% of patients. Mean follow-up was 32.8 months with a recurrence rate of 3.4% (2 patients). Overall survival and disease-free survival were 94% and 87%, respectively. Conclusions. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer proves to be safe and feasible when performed by highly skilled surgeons. It offers acceptable perioperative outcomes with a conversion rate notably lower than with the laparoscopic approach. Adequate pathological results and long-term oncological outcomes were also obtained.

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via mesofascial separation for left-sided colon cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) via mesofascial separation for left-sided colon cancer.

METHODS

We evaluated prospectively collected data on 65 consecutive patients with stage I-III left-sided colon cancer, who underwent laparoscopic CME between October 2011 and September 2016. After the exclusion of 5 patients who had T4b or other active tumors, 60 patients were the subjects of this analysis. The completeness of CME, preservation of the hypogastric nerve, operative data, pathological findings, complications, and length of hospital stay were assessed.

RESULTS

CME completeness was graded as the mesocolic and intramesocolic plane in 54 and 6 patients, respectively. The hypogastric nerve was preserved in all patients. A total of 17, 12, 28, and 3 patients had T1, T2, T3, and T4a tumors, respectively. The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved was 16.2, and lymph node metastasis was identified in 22 patients. The mean operative time and intraoperative blood loss were 283 min and 38 ml, respectively. One patient had an intraoperative complication and six patients had postoperative complications. The hospital stay was 12 days.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic CME via mesofascial separation is a safe and feasible procedure for left-sided colon cancer.

Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer

AIM

To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery at our department from January 2009 to December 2013 were enrolled in this retrospective study. The primary end points were 3-year local recurrence and overall and disease-free survival (DFS) rates. Secondary end points were intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic group had longer operative time (165.0 versus 140.0, P < .001), less blood loss (20.0 versus 40.0, P < .001), shorter length of incision (5.0 versus 18.0, P < .001), and more lymph node harvested (11.0 versus 9.0, P = .002). However, time to first flatus (P = .941), postoperative hospital stay (P = .095), postoperative complications (P = .155), and 30-day mortality (P = .683) was similar between two groups. With the median follow-up period of 65 months, the 3-year local recurrence rate was 4.3% in laparoscopic group and 7.5% in open group (P = .077); the 3-year overall and DFS rates were similar in two groups (85.9% versus 88.8%, P = .229 and 76.9% versus 79.2%, P = .448, respectively); and the overall and DFS curves were comparable between two groups (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.858, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.709-1.037, P = .112 and HR = 1.076, 95% CI 0.834-1.389, P = .275, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is safe and has equivalent long-term oncologic outcomes for low rectal cancer when compared to open surgery. Furthermore, large-scale, prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm the present findings.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Current Status and Future Perspectives

Although laparoscopic resection for colon cancer has been proven safe and feasible when compared with open resection, currently no clear evidence is available regarding minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. This type of surgery may benefit patients by allowing fast recovery of normal dietary intake and bowel function, reduced postoperative pain, and shorter hospitalization. Therefore, minimally invasive surgeries such as laparoscopic or robot surgery have become the predominant treatment option for colon cancer. Specifically, the proportion of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in Korea increased from 42.6 to 64.7% until 2013. However, laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is more difficult and technically demanding. In addition, the procedure requires a prolonged learning curve to achieve equivalent outcomes relative to open surgery. It is very challenging to approach the deep and narrow pelvis using laparoscopic instruments. However, robotic surgery provides better vision with a high definition three-dimensional view, exceptional ergonomics, Endowrist technology, enhanced dexterity of movement, and a lack of physiologic tremor, facilitated by the use of an assistant in the narrow and deep pelvis. Recently, an increasing number of reports have compared the outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for colon cancer. Such reports have prompted a discussion of the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery, including robotic surgery, for rectal cancer. The aim of this review is to summarize current data regarding the clinical outcomes, including oncologic outcomes, of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer.

Rationale and limitations of transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal tumors

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME), belonging to natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, has been a hot topic in minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer in recent years. For low rectal tumors, taTME can offer more advantages than open or laparoscopic surgery, especially for obese patients and male patients with narrow pelvis. This technique may be possible to reduce positive circumferential resection margin rate and locoregional recurrence. However, surgeons may encounter some difficulties including being unfamiliar with the operation pathway, limited pelvic operation space, and being uneasy to ligate mesenteric vessels. Since taTME has not been applied for a very long time, there have been no sufficient number of cases available. Therefore, more cases and long-term follow-up are needed to improve this surgical technique.

Assessing the economic advantage of laparoscopic vs. open approaches for colorectal cancer by a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSES

This study investigated the surgical outcomes and potential economic advantage of open vs. laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer using a propensity score matching analysis.

METHODS

We examined the surgical and economic outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic (N = 127) and open surgery (N = 253) for colorectal cancer and then compared these outcomes in two groups (N = 103 each) using a propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

Compared to open surgery, the laparoscopic approach was associated with a significantly lower overall morbidity rate (14 vs. 40%; P < 0.001) and shorter mean (± standard deviation) postoperative hospital stay (12.6 ± 8.3 vs. 16.8 ± 9.9 days, respectively; P = 0.001). Despite generating higher mean surgical costs (Japanese yen) (985,000 ± 215,000 vs. 812,000 ± 222,000 yen; P < 0.001), utilizing a laparoscopic approach significantly reduced the non-surgical costs (773,000 ± 440,000 vs. 1075,000 ± 508,000 yen; P < 0.001). The mean total cost of laparoscopic-assisted surgery (1758,000 ± 576,000 yen) was decreased by approximately 130,000 yen compared with open surgery (1886,000 ± 619,000 yen), although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.125).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is advantageous in reducing morbidity and facilitating an early discharge and does not increase hospital costs. These findings are consistent with the general consensus supporting the benefits of laparoscopic surgery as a minimally invasive approach.

The comprehensive therapeutic effects of rectal surgery are better in laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Laparoscopic-assisted radical resection of rectal cancer was reported as advantageous compared to laparotomy resection. However, this finding remains controversial, especially given the two recent randomized controlled trials published on The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

Objective

To perform a meta-analysis that compares the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal cancer.

Data source

To identify clinical trials comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal cancer published by August 2016, we searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Springer Link and Clinicaltrials.gov databases by combining various key words. Data were extracted from every identified study to perform a meta-analysis using the Review Manager 5.3 software.

Results

A total of 43 articles from 38 studies with a total of 13408 patients were included. Although laparoscopic radical rectectomy increased operation time (MD = 37.23, 95% CI: 28.88 to 45.57, P < 0.0001), it can significantly decrease the blood loss (MD = –143.13, 95% CI: –183.48 to –102.78, P < 0.0001), time to first bowel movement (MD = –0.97, 95% CI: –1.35 to –0.59, P < 0.0001), length of hospital stay (MD = –2.40, 95% CI: –3.10 to –1.70, P < 0.0001), postoperative complications (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.86, P < 0.0001), mortality (OR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.57, P < 0.0001) and the CRM positive rate (OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.75, P < 0.0001). No significant difference were noted between the groups regarding intraoperative complications, TME completeness and harvesting of lymph nodes. Regarding the long-term survival data, the laparoscopic group was not inferior to laparotomy. Some pooled data, such as 3-year DFS, 5-year OS and 5-year local recurrence were even superior for the laparoscopic group.

Conclusions

Given the definite benefits in short-term outcomes and trending benefits in long-term outcomes that were observed, we recommend laparoscopic surgery be used for rectal cancer resection.

Factors Influencing Difficulty of Laparoscopic Abdominoperineal Resection for Ultra-Low Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Our current study was conducted to identify patients' anatomic, pathologic, and clinical factors to predict difficulty of performing laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for ultra-low rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Records of 117 consecutive patients with rectal cancer 2 to 5 cm from the anal verge were retrospectively reviewed. Using univariate and multivariate linear or logistic regression models, standardized operative time and blood loss, as well as postoperative morbidity were utilized as endpoints to screen patients' multiple variables to predict operative difficulty.

RESULTS

Multivariate linear regression analysis showed body mass index (BMI) (estimate=0.07, P=0.0056), interspinous distance (estimate=-0.02, P=0.0011), tumor distance from anal verge (estimate=-0.17, P=0.0355), prior abdominal surgery (estimate=0.51, P=0.0180), preoperative chemoradiotherapy (estimate=0.67, P=0.0146), and concurrent diseases (hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus) (estimate=0.49, P=0.0122) are predictors for standardized operative time. Age (estimate=0.02, P=0.0208) and concurrent diseases (estimate=0.43, P=0.0476) were factors related to standardized blood loss. BMI (estimate=0.15, P=0.0472) was the only predictor for postoperative morbidity based on logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Age, BMI, interspinous distance, tumor distance from anal verge, prior abdominal surgery, preoperative chemoradiotherapy, and concurrent diseases influence the difficulty of performing laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for ultra-low rectal cancer. Standardized operative time allows researchers to amass samples by pooling data from all published studies, thus building reliable models to predict operative difficulty for clinical use.

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via combined medial and cranial approaches for transverse colon cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via combined medial and cranial approaches with three-dimensional visualization around the gastrocolic trunk and middle colic vessels for transverse colon cancer.

METHODS

We evaluated prospectively collected data of 30 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision between January 2010 and December 2015, 6 of whom we excluded, leaving 24 for the analysis. We assessed the completeness of excision, operative data, pathological findings, length of large bowel resected, complications, length of hospital stay, and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Complete mesocolic excision completeness was graded as the mesocolic and intramesocolic planes in 21 and 3 patients, respectively. Eleven, two, eight, and three patients had T1, T2, T3, and T4a tumors, respectively; none had lymph node metastases. A mean of 18.3 lymph nodes was retrieved, and a mean of 5.4 lymph nodes was retrieved around the origin of the MCV. The mean large bowel length was 21.9 cm, operative time 274 min, intraoperative blood loss 41 mL, and length of hospital stay 15 days. There were no intraoperative and two postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Our procedure for laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via combined medial and cranial approaches is safe and feasible for transverse colon cancer.

Comparative study of short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open rectal cancer resection during and after the learning curve period

Laparoscopic-assisted rectal resection (LAR) has been widely used to treat rectal cancer. However, it has a steep learning curve. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of the learning curve on the outcomes of LAR. All consecutive patients with rectal cancer undergoing LAR or open resection (OR) between 2010 and 2015 were included in this retrospective analysis. The learning curve was determined, and patients were divided into 2 phases: the learning curve and the expert period. The short-term perioperative data in the 2 phases and the long-term survival in the learning phase were compared between the LAR and OR groups. A total of 491 patients were included in this study. Inflection of the learning curve based on the operation time of LAR was at the 40th case. A total of 233 patients underwent surgery (112 LAR and 121 OR) during the learning period. In this period, LAR had a longer operation time, less blood loss, and a higher total cost (all P < .05). The 3-year overall survival rates between the LAR and OR groups were similar (69.74% vs 75%; P = .32). A total of 258 patients underwent surgery (169 LAR and 89 OR) during the expert period. Significant differences in total cost, estimated blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and recovery of bladder and bowel functions were identified in this period (all P < .05). LAR during the learning period has fewer benefits in terms of postoperative recovery than OR. However, the long-term outcomes are equivalent.

Long-term outcomes and propensity score matching analysis: rectal cancer resection for patients with elevated preoperative risk

BACKGROUND

It is still controversial about the treatment strategy for rectal cancer patients with elevated operative risk and elder rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

This study presented a retrospective single center experience in rectal cancer proctectomy for high operative risk patients. High operative risk patient was defined as Cr-POSSUM > 5% combined with associated risk factors. 220 in 1477 consecutive patients met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

132 patients were selected (66:66) after propensity score matching. The total complication rate between conventional open rectal resection (71 %) and laparoscopic surgery (41%) was significantly different (p = 0.0005). There is a significantly positive correlation between open surgery and advanced Dindo Classification (p = 0.02). Cr-POSSUM is positively correlated with Dindo Classification (p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in survival rate among stage I∼II, different age groups or different Cr-POSSUM score sub-groups. However, stage III-IV tumor patients in laparoscopic group experienced improved overall survival rate. (p < 0.0001). For patients with preoperative pulmonary or renal disease, patients in laparoscopic group also had better long term prognosis (p = 0.03, p = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate the potential advantages of laparoscopic rectal cancer resection for high operative risk patients, especially for the patients with preoperative respiratory or renal disease and stage III cancer.