The short-term outcomes of conventional and single-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2011;254:933-940. [PMID: 22107740 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e318237826b]

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.

Short-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery at a High-Volume Center in Peshawar, Pakistan

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer is a serious worldwide health issue, and laparoscopic surgery is becoming a common therapeutic choice because of its advantages, which include less pain after surgery, quicker recovery, and oncological results that are comparable to those of open surgery. Even though laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery has proven successful in developed countries, it is still not well-studied in places with low resources, like Pakistan.

OBJECTIVE

 The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and surgical efficacy of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery in 209 patients, focusing on operative details, histopathological findings, and postoperative complications. The secondary objective was to assess 90-day disease-free survival (DFS), mortality rates, and the need for reexploration or readmission.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective observational study was performed at the Surgical Oncology department, Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital, Peshawar, a high-volume center for colorectal surgery. Assessment of short-term surgical results of laparoscopic rectal cancer operation ensued from April 1, 2021, to March 31, 2024. The sample comprised 209 patients with rectal cancer who were treated by laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. A consecutive sampling technique was used to enroll eligible patients during the study duration.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 43.07 ± 22.1 years. The male-to-female ratio was 1.4:1, with males comprising 131 patients (62.7%) and females, 78 patients (37.3%). The regional distribution included 54 (25.8%) from Afghanistan, 11 (5.2%) from the federally administered tribal area (FATA), 141 (67.5%) from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK), and three (1.4%) from Punjab. Preoperative assessment classified 191 (91.4%) patients as American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA)-II, and 18 (8.6%) cases as ASA-III.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery demonstrates favorable short-term outcomes, including minimal morbidity, low conversion rates, and promising oncological results in a high-volume center in Peshawar, Pakistan. These findings support the feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer in resource-constrained settings.

Short-term outcomes of da Vinci SP versus Xi for rectal cancer surgery: a propensity score matching analysis of two tertiary center cohorts

BACKGROUND

This study compares the perioperative outcomes of robotic rectal cancer surgery between da Vinci single-port (SP) system, the most recent system allowing minimally invasive surgery with reduced ports, and the da Vinci Xi system.

METHODS

Patients who underwent robotic surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma from January 2016 to September 2023 at two tertiary referral centers were included. A retrospective analysis was conducted to compare key parameters between patient cohorts before and after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

A total of 378 patients (SP, 65 vs. Xi, 313) were analyzed. The SP group comprised a higher proportion of females (44.6% vs. 28.4%; p = 0.016) and a higher tumor location (8.25 cm vs. 6.71 cm from the anal verge; p < 0.001) than did the Xi group. SP surgery promoted a shorter total incision length (4.9 cm vs. 9.2 cm; p < 0.001), lower maximum pain scores (5 vs. 7; p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (6 vs. 7 days; p < 0.001) than did Xi surgery. Operation time (175 vs. 182 min; p = 0.829) and postoperative complications (9.2% vs. 12.1%; p = 0.650) did not significantly differ between the groups. Lower lying rectal tumors were more frequently treated using the Xi system than the SP system, promoting a higher diverting stoma rate (13.8% vs. 45.4%; p < 0.001) and a lower anastomosis level (4.6 cm vs. 3.3 cm; p < 0.001). After 1:1 matching, SP maintained its advantages over Xi in terms of incision length (p < 0.001), maximum pain scores (p = 0.001), and hospital stay (p < 0.001). Overall postoperative complication rates were similar between both groups (10.8% vs. 12.3%; p = 0.777).

CONCLUSIONS

The da Vinci SP system continues to offer minimal invasive benefits in rectal cancer surgery. However, the Xi system's instrument diversity provides a certain advantage, particularly in cases involving low-lying rectal tumors. Tailoring robotic approaches based on individual patient characteristics remains pivotal for optimizing outcomes of rectal cancer surgery.

Long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy for right-sided colon cancer utilising a craniocaudal approach

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) for right-sided colon cancer (CC) using a craniocaudal approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The data of patients who underwent SILC for right-sided CC at our hospital between January 2013 and December 2022 were retrospectively collected. Surgery was performed using a craniocaudal approach. Short- and long-term operative outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 269 patients (127 men, 142 women; median age 74 years) underwent SILC for right-sided CC. The cases included ileocaecal resection ( n = 138) and right hemicolectomy ( n = 131). The median operative time was 154 min, and the median operative blood loss was 0 ml. Twenty-seven cases (10.0%) required an additional laparoscopic trocar, and 9 (3.3%) were converted to open surgery. The Clavien-Dindo classification Grade III post-operative complications were detected in 7 (2.6%) cases. SILC was performed by 25 surgeons, including inexperienced surgeons, with a median age of 34 years. The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 96.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.3%-98.2%), and CSS per pathological disease stage was 100% for Stages 0-I and II and 86.2% (95% CI 71.3%-93.7%) for Stage III. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 90.6% (95% CI 85.7%-93.9%), and RFS per pathological disease stage was 100% for Stage 0-I, 91.7% (95% CI 80.5%-96.6%) for Stage II and 76.1% (95% CI 63.0%-85.1%) for Stage III.

CONCLUSIONS

SILC for right-sided CC can be safely performed with a craniocaudal approach, with reasonable short- and long-term outcomes.

Single-incision Laparoscopic Colonic Surgery: A Systemic Review, Meta-analysis, and Future Prospect

Although single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has gained some attention as a feasible alternative to conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) in colonic surgery, it became less prevalent than expected. Hence, we conducted this systematic review to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncological outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) with meta-analysis and discussion of the future prospect of SILS. The search was conducted from September to October 2023 using PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Articles on colorectal cancer comparing SILC with multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC) from all randomized controlled trials and comparative studies with 50 patients or more per arm were examined. The primary outcomes were the intra- and postoperative complication rates, and the secondary outcomes were the perioperative and oncological outcomes. The trends of the SILS number in Japan and the trends of the number of articles on SILS in PubMed were also reviewed. There were no significant differences in perioperative complication rates, operative factors, and oncological outcomes between SILC and MPLC, although heterogeneity was observed mainly in operative factors and the total length of the skin incision was significantly shorter in SILC. Therefore, SILC is technically and oncologically feasible and safe when performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. The case number of SILS was gradually increasing but the rate of SILS was decreasing in Japan. The number of articles on SILS was also decreasing. SILS has gained foothold to some extent but has plateaued. The emerging new robotic platform may reappraise the concept of SILS.

Short-Term Outcomes of First 100 Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgeries at a Newly Developed Surgical Setup at Peshawar

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has risen steadily, necessitating innovative strategies for diagnosis and treatment. Minimally invasive surgery, exemplified by laparoscopic techniques, has emerged as a transformative approach in colorectal surgical practices. Laparoscopy offers advantages such as improved aesthetic outcomes, reduced post-operative pain, early patient mobilization, and shorter hospital stays.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to present the short-term surgical outcomes of the first 100 elective laparoscopic CRC resections performed at a newly established tertiary care cancer center in Peshawar, Pakistan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were prospectively collected for CRC resections performed between April 2021 and February 2022. The study included patients above 18 years of age with biopsy-proven CRC. Surgical procedures were performed by two dedicated colorectal surgeons trained in minimally invasive surgery. Patient demographics, pre-operative factors, intraoperative parameters, and post-operative outcomes were systematically recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 100 cases included in the study, laparoscopic colorectal surgeries were successfully performed without any conversions to open surgery. The mean age of the study population was 52.5 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 2:1. The majority of cases were colon (48%) and anorectal cancers (52%). The mean lymph node yield was 18.29 (range 6-49). Only one patient required a re-look laparoscopy for a pelvic hematoma, and overall mortality was reported at 1%.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is a safe and effective treatment option for elective colorectal operations with minimal post-operative complications and favorable short-term outcomes.

Short-term and long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a propensity-matched cohort study with conventional laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1) has been demonstrated to be minimally invasive while possessing better cosmesis and less pain compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). However, SILS + 1 as an alternative to CLS for colorectal cancer is still controversial.

METHODS

A total of 1071 patients who underwent curative laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer between 2015 and 2018 were included. Of these patients, 258 SILS + 1 cases and 516 CLS cases were analyzed using propensity score matching. The baseline characteristics, surgical outcomes, pathologic findings and recovery course, morbidity and mortality within postoperative 30 days and 3-year disease-free and overall survival were compared.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were balanced between the groups. The mean operating time was significantly shorter in SILS + 1 group, with less estimated blood loss. Tumor size, tumor differentiation, number of harvested lymph nodes, resection margin and pathologic T, N, TNM stage was similar between the groups. There was no significant difference in overall perioperative complications. Uni- and multivariate analyses revealed that SILS + 1 was not a risk factor for complications. Postoperatively, SILS + 1 group showed faster recovery than CLS group in terms of ambulation, bowel function, oral intake and discharge. The 3-year disease-free survival rates of SILS + 1 and CLS groups were 90.1% and 87.3%(p = 0.59), respectively and the 3-year overall survival rates were 93.3% vs. 89.8%(p = 0.172).

DISCUSSION

Our study revealed that SILS + 1 is safe, feasible, oncologically efficient, and may be considered as a surgical option for selected patients with colorectal cancer.

Initial experience of single-incision plus one port total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The use of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (SILPD + 1) has been never reported, and its safety and efficacy remain unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of SILPD + 1 compared with those of conventional laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (CLPD).

METHOD

Fifty-seven cases of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) were performed between November 2021, and March 2022. Among them, 10 cases of LPD were performed using a single-incision plus one-port device. Based on the same inclusion and exclusion criteria, 47 cases of LPD performed using traditional 5-trocar were included as a control group. The patient's demographic characteristics, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Three men and seven women were included in the SILPD + 1 group. All baseline parameters of both groups were comparable, except for age. Patients were younger in the SILPD + 1 group (47.2 ± 18.3 years vs. 60.6 ± 11.7 years, P = 0.05) than that in the CLPD group. Compared with the CLPD group, median operation time (222.5 (208.8-245.0) vs. 305.0 (256.0-37.0) min, P < 0.001) was shorter, median postoperative VAS scores on days 1-3 were lower, and median cosmetic score (21.0 (19.0-23.5) vs. 17.0 (16.0-20.0), P = 0.026) was higher one month after the surgery in the SILPD + 1 group. The estimated blood loss, conversion rate, blood-transfusion rate, exhaust time, time of drainage tube removal, postoperative hospital stays, and perioperative complications were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In a high-volume LPD center, SILPD + 1 is safe and feasible for well-selected patients without increasing the operation time and complications. It even has the advantages of reduced postoperative pain and improved cosmetic results.

Carbon footprints in minimally invasive surgery: Good patient outcomes, but costly for the environment

Advancements in technology and surgical training programs have increased the adaptability of minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Gastrointestinal MIS is superior to its open counterparts regarding post-operative morbidity and mortality. MIS has become the first-line surgical intervention for some types of gastrointestinal surgery, such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendicectomy. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the main gas used for insufflation in MIS. CO2 contributes 9%-26% of the greenhouse effect, resulting in global warming. The rise in global CO2 concentration since 2000 is about 20 ppm per decade, up to 10 times faster than any sustained rise in CO2 during the past 800000 years. Since 1970, there has been a steady yet worrying increase in average global temperature by 1.7 °C per century. A recent systematic review of the carbon footprint in MIS showed a range of 6-814 kg of CO2 emission per surgery, with higher CO2 emission following robotic compared to laparoscopic surgery. However, with superior benefits of MIS over open surgery, this poses an ethical dilemma to surgeons. A recent survey in the United Kingdom of 130 surgeons showed that the majority (94%) were concerned with climate change but felt that the lack of leadership was a barrier to improving environmental sustainability. Given the deleterious environmental effects of MIS, this study aims to summarize the trends of MIS and its carbon footprint, awareness and attitudes towards this issue, and efforts and challenges to ensuring environmental sustainability.

Innovation in gastrointestinal surgery: the evolution of minimally invasive surgery-a narrative review

Background

Minimally invasive (MI) surgery has revolutionised surgery, becoming the standard of care in many countries around the globe. Observed benefits over traditional open surgery include reduced pain, shorter hospital stay, and decreased recovery time. Gastrointestinal surgery in particular was an early adaptor to both laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Within this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of minimally invasive gastrointestinal surgery and a critical outlook on the evidence surrounding its effectiveness and safety.

Methods

A literature review was conducted to identify relevant articles for the topic of this review. The literature search was performed using Medical Subject Heading terms on PubMed. The methodology for evidence synthesis was in line with the four steps for narrative reviews outlined in current literature. The key words used were minimally invasive, robotic, laparoscopic colorectal, colon, rectal surgery.

Conclusion

The introduction of minimally surgery has revolutionised patient care. Despite the evidence supporting this technique in gastrointestinal surgery, several controversies remain. Here we discuss some of them; the lack of high level evidence regarding the oncological outcomes of TaTME and lack of supporting evidence for robotic colorectalrectal surgery and upper GI surgery. These controversies open pathways for future research opportunities with RCTs focusing on comparing robotic to laparoscopic with different primary outcomes including ergonomics and surgeon comfort.

Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies

Background

Single-incision laparoscopy surgery (SILS) is a new laparoscopic technique that has emerged in the past decade. Whether it has advantages over conventionl laparoscopy surgery (CLS) is inconclusive. This article aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer through high-quality literature text mining and meta-analysis.

Methods

Relevant articles were searched on the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from January 2012 to November 2021. All data was from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in order to increase the confidence of the analytical results.The main outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Results

A total of 10 RCTs were included, involving 1609 patients. The quality of the included studies was generally high. No significant difference was found between SILS and CLS in the postoperative complications, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, readmission, reoperation, complication level I- II, complication level IIIa, complication level IIIb, prolonged Ileus, blood loss, infection, anastomotic leakage and operation time. The results showed that SILS group had a higher rate of intraoperative complications, but it had lower incision length and better cosmetic effects.

Conclusion

These results indicate that SILS did not have a comprehensive and obvious advantage over the CLS. On the contrary, SILS has higher intraoperative complications, which may be related to the more difficulty of SILS operation, but SILS still has better cosmetic effects, which is in line with the concept of surgical development. Therefore, the SILS needs to be selected in patients with higher cosmetic requirements and performed by more experienced surgeons.

Transversus abdominis plane block for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of transversus abdominis plane block (TAP) on pain management after laparoscopic colorectal surgery (CRS) remains unclear since the only relevant meta-analysis on this topic did not separate laparoscopic CRS from open CRS. The aim of the study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and safety of TAP with non-TAP in patients undergoing laparoscopic CRS.

METHODS

Four databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on this topic using relevant keywords. Two authors independently completed evidence selection, data extraction, and critical appraisal. Available data were pooled in the random-effects model, and point estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported for postoperative pain at rest and on coughing, opioid consumption, length of hospital stay, and adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 14 RCTs (n = 1216) contributed to the present synthesis. Pooled result showed that patients in the TAP group had lower pain at rest than those in the non-TAP group at postoperative 2-h (mean difference [MD] = -1.42; P < 0.05), 4-h (MD = -0.97; P < 0.05), 12-h (MD = -0.75; P < 0.05), and 24-h (MD = -0.61; P < 0.05). Patients in the TAP group also had lower postoperative pain on coughing than those in the non-TAP group on the first day (MD = -1.02; P < 0.05). Moreover, TAP had lesser postoperative opioid consumption than non-TAP (standardized mean difference, -0.26; P < 0.05; I-square = 20%), and there were non-significant differences in hospital stay and adverse event between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative TAP is a safe and feasible pain management for laparoscopic CRS, particularly it is recommended when patient-controlled analgesia is not delivered. Therefore, laparoscopic TAP block might be a favorable administered strategy.

Short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer: A multicenter propensity score-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colon cancer is a recent innovation in minimally invasive surgery that can improve short-term outcome. However, several biases exist in current favorable comparisons of SILS with conventional laparoscopic (CL) surgery. Moreover, the oncological outcomes in SILS remain unclear. The aim of this study was to identify outcomes following SILS and CL for right colectomy using a propensity score-matched analysis.

METHODS

A total of 553 patients underwent curative resection for right colon cancer (58 SILS and 495 CL). After propensity score matching, 58 patients in each group were matched.

RESULTS

Before matching, median age was younger (p = 0.037) and clinical stage was lower (p < 0.001) in the SILS group. After matching, operation time was shorter (172 versus 193 min, p = 0.007) and blood loss was less (12 versus 20 mL, p = 0.037) in the SILS group. Most of the SILS cases were performed (43.1%) or supervised (51.7%) by an expert surgeon. Median follow-up duration was 30 and 37 mo in the SILS and CL groups, respectively. Three-year relapse-free survival was 92.5% and 92.4% (p = 0.781); and overall survival was 100% versus 98.1% (p = 0.177).

CONCLUSIONS

Under the control of expert surgeons, SILS appeared to be a safe and feasible approach and had similar oncological outcomes compared with CL in a propensity score-matched cohort of patients with right-sided colon cancer.

Single-Port Robot-Assisted Abdominoperineal Resection: A Case Review of the Fi rst Four Experiences

Recently, abdominoperineal resection (APR) using a robot has been demonstrated in other studies. However, there has been no report on APR for rectal cancer using the single-port robot (SPR) platform. In response to this research gap, we described the clinical experience of APR using a SPR. From April 2019 to March 2020, APR using a SPR platform was performed in a total of 4 patients. Three patients had a transumbilical approach, and 1 patient had a transstoma site approach. The average operation time was 307 minutes, and the patient docking time to the SPR platform was 133.5 minutes. There were no complications during the operation, and no laparoscopy or open conversion. No reoperation occurred within 30 days. Mild postoperative complications occurred in 2 patients. We found that APR has safety and feasibility in surgery using an SPR platform. There was no intraoperative event and severe postoperative complications.

Long-term Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Single-incision Versus Multi-port Laparoscopic Colectomy for Colon Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes that were the secondary endpoints of a RCT of multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MPC) versus SILC in colon cancer surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The actual long-term outcomes, such as the 5-year RFS, OS, and recurrence patterns after surgery, have not been evaluated by a RCT.

METHODS

Patients with histologically proven colon carcinoma located in the cecum, ascending, sigmoid or rectosigmoid colon clinically diagnosed as stage 0-III were eligible for this study. Patients were preoperatively randomized and underwent complete mesocolic excision. The 5-year RFS, OS, and recurrence patterns were analyzed (UMIN-CTR 000007220).

RESULTS

Between March 1, 2012, and March 31, 2015, a total of 200 patients were randomly assigned to either the MPC arm (n = 100) or SILC arm (n = 100). The median follow-up for all patients was 61.0 months. An intention-to-treat analysis showed that the 5-year RFS was 91.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 85.1%-96.9%] in the MPC arm and 88.0% (95% CI 82.1%-93.9%) in the SILC arm (hazard ratio: 1.37; 95% CI 0.58-3.24; P = 0.479). The 5-year OS was 95.0% (95% CI 91.1%-98.9%) in the MPC arm and 93.0% (87.1%-98.9%) in the SILC arm (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI 0.44-4.39; P = 0.568). There were no significant differences in the recurrence patterns between the 2 arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though the results of the 5-year OS and RFS in this trial were exploratory and underpowered, there were no statistically significant differences between the SILC and MPC arms. SILC may be an acceptable treatment option for select patients with colon cancer.

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.

Long-term outcomes of single-incision versus multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer: results of a propensity score-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) for colon cancer (CC), as practiced in real-world settings, especially in relation to disease stage, have not been established. We examined, retrospectively, both short- and long-term outcomes of SILC versus those of multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC) performed for CC in a propensity-score-matched cohort.

METHODS

The study involved 263 patient pairs matched 1:1 from among 691 patients who, between January 2008 and May 2014, underwent either SILC or MPLC for a primary solitary CC at our hospital. Short-term and long-term operative outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Operation time was the only surgical outcome that varied significantly between the two groups (p = 0.0004). Overall 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) in the SILC group was 93.7 (95% CI 89.6-96.2)%, and CSS per pathological stage (I, II and III) was 98.5 (90.0-99.8)%, 96.0 (88.2-98.7)%, and 88.3 (79.6-93.6)%, respectively, whereas overall 5-year CSS in the MPLC group was 93.3 (89.4-95.9)%, and CSS per pathological stage was 100%, 95.4 (88.3-98.3)%, and 84.1 (74.1-90.8)% (p = 0.5278, 0.2679, 0.7666, and 0.9073), respectively. Overall 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) in the SILC group was 94.0 (90.2-96.4)%, and 3-year DFS per pathological stage was 98.6 (90.4-99.8)%, 90.1 (81.4-95.0)%, and 79.0 (69.4-86.2)%, respectively, whereas overall 3-year DFS in the MPLC group was 93.2 (89.4-95.7)%, and 3-year DFS per pathological disease stage was 100%, 94.5 (87.4-97.7)% and 75.5 (64.7-83.8)% (p = 0.2829, 0.7401, 0.4335 and 0.8518), respectively. Thus, oncological outcomes did not differ significantly between groups. Incisional hernia occurred in 21 (8.0%) SILC group patients and 17 (6.5%) MPLC group patients, without a significant between-group difference (p = 0.6139).

CONCLUSION

Our data indicate that perioperative and oncological outcomes of SILC performed for CC are comparable to those of MPLC performed for CC.

Single-port laparoscopically harvested omental flap for immediate breast reconstruction

PURPOSE

Immediate breast reconstruction using laparoscopically harvested omental flap is a safe and feasible technique, providing natural contour and softness to reconstructed breasts with reduced donor-site morbidity and deformity. We report our experience using single-port laparoscopically harvested omental flap (SLOF) for immediate breast reconstruction.

METHODS

Between February 2015 and December 2018, 129 patients with malignant neoplasm of the breast underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) or breast-conserving surgery (BCS) followed by immediate SLOF reconstruction at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. We assessed their clinicopathological data, complications, and cosmetic and oncologic outcomes. Cosmetic outcomes were evaluated by three-panel assessment and the BCCT.core software program.

RESULTS

One hundred and six (82.2%) underwent NSM and 23 (17.8%) underwent BCS. Mean operation time was 205 (range, 134-316) minutes. Most patients had early-stage disease; 15 (11.6%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Two had malignant phyllodes tumors. Cosmetic outcomes were excellent or good in 96.9% by three-panel assessment and 99.2% by the BCCT.core program with a nearly invisible donor-site scar in the umbilicus. Harvest-associated complications occurred in five (3.9%) patients, including two umbilical wound infections, one intra-abdominal infection, one umbilical hernia, and one pedicle injury. Fat necrosis (13.2%) and epigastric bulging (21.7%) were common mastectomy- or reconstruction-associated complications, but most were mild and some resolved spontaneously. Over a median 38-month follow-up, there were three local, two regional, and three systemic recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

SLOF reconstruction is a feasible and safe option for immediate breast reconstruction after NSM or extensive BCS with minimal donor-site morbidity and great cosmetic outcomes.

Single-port laparoscopic Deloyers procedure for tension-free anastomosis after extended left colectomy or subtotal colectomy: A 6-patient case series

Right colon-to-rectal anastomosis is performed in relatively rare conditions, including after subtotal colectomy or extended left hemicolectomy. One technique of tension-free anastomosis is the Deloyers procedure that includes cranio-caudal rotation of the right colon. As with other colon surgeries, the laparoscopic approach has been adapted for the Deloyers procedure. Nevertheless, due to its rare indications and technical specificity, only a small case series have been reported. Here, we report our experience with single-port laparoscopic (SPL) Deloyers procedures.Between June 2013 and March 2018, 6 patients underwent SPL Deloyers procedures. Three patients underwent SPL subtotal colectomy with ascending colon-to-rectal anastomosis for sigmoid colon cancer with chronic ischemic colitis, sigmoid colon cancer with left colon ischemia, and synchronous transverse and sigmoid colon cancer, respectively. The other 3 patients underwent SPL Hartmann reversal using the Deloyers procedure technique for 2 transverse colon end colostomies and 1 ascending colon end colostomy state, which were the result of a previous extended left hemicolectomy and subtotal colectomy, respectively. A commercially available single port was used with conventional straight and rigid laparoscopic instruments. The surgical procedures were similar to those performed during conventional laparoscopic surgery. For the anastomosis, the mobilized remaining ascending colon was rotated 180° counter-clockwise around the axis of the ileocolic pedicle. Tension-free colorectal anastomosis was then performed between the well-vascularized ascending colon and the rectal stump.The SPL Deloyers procedure was successful in all patients. No additional incisions for trocars or conversions to open surgery were necessary. The operative time and postoperative length of stay were 210 to 470 min and 8 to 21 days, respectively. No intraoperative complications were noted. There were 3 minor postoperative complications without anastomotic leakage. All patients had 2 to 3 bowel movements per day, and 1 patient regularly took loperamide at 6 months after surgery.The SPL Deloyers procedure was feasible and allowed patients to achieve good bowel movements. This operation may be considered an additional surgical option for experienced SPL surgeons in selected patients.

Hernia incidence following a randomized clinical trial of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic colectomy

BACKGROUND

The short-term results of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) showed the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness when performed by skilled laparoscopic surgeons. However, the long-term complications, such as SILC-associated incisional hernia, have not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of incisional hernia after SILC compared with multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MPC) for colon cancer.

METHODS

From March 2012, to March 2015, a total of 200 patients were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomized to the MPC arm and SILC arm. A total of 200 patients (MPC arm; 100 patients, SILC arm; 100 patients) were therefore analyzed. In all cases the specimen was extracted through the umbilical port, which was extended according to the size of the specimen. A diagnosis of incisional hernia was made either based on a physical examination or computed tomography.

RESULTS

The baseline factors were well balanced between the arms. The median follow-up period was 42.4 (range 9.4-70.0) months. Twenty-one patients were diagnosed with incisional hernia, giving an incidence rate of 12.1% in the MPC arm and 9.0% in the SILC arm at 36 months (P = 0.451). In the multivariate analysis, the body mass index (≥ 25 kg/m²) (hazard ratio [HR] 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-8.92; P = 0.044), umbilical incision (≥ 5.0 cm) (HR 3.22; 95% CI 1.16-8.93; P = 0.025), and history of umbilical hernia (HR 3.16; 95% CI 1.02-9.77; P = 0.045) were shown to be correlated with incisional hernia.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant difference in the incidence of incisional hernia after SILC arm versus MPC arm with a long-term follow-up. However, this result may be biased because all specimens were harvested through the umbilical port. The study was registered with the Japanese Clinical Trials Registry as UMIN000007220.

Comparison of Cosmetic Effect and Pain Reduction Outcomes of Modified Mini-Laparoscopy Versus Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery for Adrenalectomy

Objective: This study was to introduce the modified mini-laparoscopic adrenalectomy and investigate the advantage of operative time, cosmetic effect, and pain reduction by comparing the modified mini-laparoscopic adrenalectomy and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS). Methods and Patients: Between May 2015 and Jun 2018, 76 consecutive patients with adrenal tumor underwent laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Of which, 36 cases were in the mini-laparoscopic surgery group (the M group) and 40 cases in the LESS group. Medical records of the consecutive patients were analyzed. The operative time, blood loss, the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating (SCAR) Scale scores were recorded. Results: The mean operative time in the M group was significantly less than that of in the LESS group (54.75 ± 9.37 min vs. 106.48 ± 19.71 min, P < .01). Mean estimated blood loss did not differ between the 2 groups (12.22 ± 5.29 mL vs. 10.80 ± 6.66 mL, P > .05). The mean VAS scores in the M group were significantly lower than those of the LESS group on postoperative days (POD) 1 and 3. The SCAR scale scores at POD 60 were similar in the M group and the LESS group (0.86 ± 0.64 vs. 0.95 ± 0.71, P > .05). Conclusions: Modified mini-laparoscopic adrenalectomy is safe and convenient. It offered less operative time, significant cosmetic benefit, and reduced incisional pain.

Single-incision Laparoscopy Versus Multiport Laparoscopy for Colonic Surgery: A Multicenter, Double-blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcome of single-port laparoscopy (SPL) and multiport laparoscopy (MPL) laparoscopy for colonic surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Benefits of SPL over MPL are yet to be demonstrated in large randomized trials.

METHODS

In this prospective, double-blinded, superiority trial, patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic resection for benign or malignant disease were randomly assigned to SPL or MPL (NCT01959087). Primary outcome was length of theoretical hospital stay (LHS).

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-eight patients were randomized and 125 analyzed: 62 SPL and 63 MPL, including 91 right (SPL: n = 44, 71%; MPL: n = 47, 75%) and 34 left (SPL: n = 18, 29%; MPL: n = 16, 25%) colectomies, performed for Crohn disease (n = 53, 42%), cancer (n = 36, 29%), diverticulitis (n = 21, 17%), or benign neoplasia (n = 15, 12%). Additional port insertion was required in 5 (8%) SPL patients and conversion to laparotomy occurred in 7 patients (SPL: n = 3, 5%; MPL: n = 4, 7%; P = 1.000). Total length of skin incision was significantly shorter in the SPL group [SPL: 56 ± 41 (range, 30-300) mm; MPL: 87 ± 40 (50-250) mm; P < 0.001]. Procedure duration, intraoperative complication rate, postoperative 30-day morbidity, postoperative pain, and time to first bowel movement were similar between the groups, leading to similar theoretical LHS (SPL: 6 ± 3 days; MPL: 6 ± 2; P = 0.298). At 6 months, quality of life was similar between groups, but patients from the SPL group were significantly more satisfied with their scar aspect than patients from the MPL group (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

SPL colectomy does not confer any additional benefit other than cosmetic result, as compared to MPL.

Impact of single-incision laparoscopic surgery on postoperative analgesia requirements after total colectomy for ulcerative colitis: a propensity-matched comparison with multiport laparoscopy

AIM

To compare the requirements for postoperative analgesia in patients with ulcerative colitis after single-incision versus multiport laparoscopic total colectomy.

METHOD

All patients undergoing single-incision or multiport laparoscopic total colectomy as a first stage in the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis between 2010 and 2016 at the University Hospital of Leuven were included. The cumulative dose of postoperative patient-controlled analgesia was used as the primary end-point. A Z-transformation was performed combining values for patient-controlled epidural analgesia and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia, resulting in one hybrid outcome variable. The two groups were matched using propensity scores. Subgroup analysis was performed to analyse the impact of extraction site on postoperative pain.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients underwent total colectomy for ulcerative colitis (median age 35 years). Thirty patients underwent single-incision laparoscopy, while 51 patients had a multiport approach. The mean normalized patient-controlled analgesia dose was significantly lower in patients undergoing single-incision laparoscopy (-0.33 vs 0.46, P < 0.001). This difference was no longer significant in subgroup analysis for patients with stoma site specimen extraction (P = 0.131). The odds of receiving tramadol postoperatively was 3.66 times lower after single-incision laparoscopy (P = 0.008). The overall morbidity rate was 32.1% (26/81). The mean Comprehensive Complication Index in single-incision and multiport laparoscopy group was 18.33 and 21.39, respectively (P = 0.506). Hospital stay was significantly shorter after single-incision laparoscopic surgery (6.3 days vs 7.6 days, P = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

Single-incision total colectomy was associated with lower postoperative analgesia requirements and shorter hospital stay, with comparable morbidity. However, the specimen extraction site played a significant role in postoperative pain control.

Outcome Comparison of Single-port Versus Multiport Versus Under Direct View Completion Proctectomy With Ileal-Pouch Anal Anastomosis for Patients With Ulcerative Colitis

PURPOSE

Whether the reported theoretical benefits of single-port laparoscopic (SPL) approach can be converted to superior clinical outcomes is still unknown for ulcerative colitis (UC) patients undergoing second-stage proctectomy. This study aimed to compare the short-term postoperative and long-term pouch-related functional outcomes of SPL, multiport laparoscopic (MPL), and direct view (DV) completion proctectomy with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (CP/IPAA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent either SPL, MPL, or under DV CP/IPAA for UC between August 2009 and August 2014 were identified from an institutional review board-approved, prospectively maintained institutional database and reviewed. Demographics, patient characteristics, short-term and long-term complications, and morbidity were compared between the 3 groups. Multivariate logistic or Cox regression analysis was conducted for covariate adjustments.

RESULTS

Groups (SPL: n=36; MPL: n=67; DV: n=97) were comparable in terms of preoperative characteristics and demographics except for age. The SPL group was associated with reduced estimated blood loss, reduced length of stay compared with the MPL and DV groups, and shorter operating time compared with the MPL group (P<0.001). Similar short-term postoperative and long-term pouch-related functional outcomes were noted without significant differences in quality of life scores among the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SPL CP/IPAA for UC can be safely performed with superior short-term outcomes such as reduced intraoperative blood loss and length of hospital stay compared with MPL and under direct view approaches, and shorter operating time compared with MPL.

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery changed the management of numerous surgical conditions. It was associated with many advantages over open surgery, such as decreased postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay and excellent cosmesis. Since two decades single-incision endoscopic surgery (SIES) was introduced to the surgical community. SIES could possibly result in even better postoperative outcomes than multi-port laparoscopic surgery, especially concerning cosmetic outcomes and pain. However, the single-incision surgical procedure is associated with quite some challenges.

METHODS

An expert panel of surgeons has been selected and invited to participate in the preparation of the material for a consensus meeting on the topic SIES, which was held during the EAES congress in Frankfurt, June 16, 2017. The material presented during the consensus meeting was based on evidence identified through a systematic search of literature according to a pre-specified protocol. Three main topics with respect to SIES have been identified by the panel: (1) General, (2) Organ specific, (3) New development. Within each of these topics, subcategories have been defined. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Recommendations were made according to the GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

In general, there is a lack of high level evidence and a lack of long-term follow-up in the field of single-incision endoscopic surgery. In selected patients, the single-incision approach seems to be safe and effective in terms of perioperative morbidity. Satisfaction with cosmesis has been established to be the main advantage of the single-incision approach. Less pain after single-incision approach compared to conventional laparoscopy seems to be considered an advantage, although it has not been consistently demonstrated across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the increased direct costs (devices, instruments and operating time) of the SIES procedure and the prolonged learning curve, wider acceptance of the procedure should be supported only after demonstration of clear benefits.

Clinical Outcome of Single-port Surgery in Patients With Pathologic T4 Colon Cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of single-port surgery (SPS), compared with those of multiport surgery (MPS) in patients with pathologic T4 colon cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 188 patients with proven pathologic T4 colon cancer who underwent laparoscopic surgery from January 2008 to December 2014 were enrolled in this study. These patients were divided into the SPS group (n=94) and the MPS group (n=94). The clinical outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

The median operative time was significantly shorter in the SPS group than in the MPS group (P=0.045). Postoperative complications did not differ between the groups. The length of postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SPS group than in the MPS group (P<0.001). Oncological resection rates were similar between groups. The 3-year relapse-free survival rates, the 3-year local recurrence-free survival rates, and the 5-year overall survival rates were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SPS is safe and feasible in patients with pathologic T4 colon cancer.

Clinical and oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for right colon cancer is going to be considered as a new option. The potential benefits, clinical, and oncologic outcomes are still controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate clinical and oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for right colon cancer using propensity score matching analysis.

METHODS

From December 2013 to June 2017, 174 patients underwent laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy through a single-incision (n = 32) or a conventional (n = 142) approach. The data were prospectively collected and the patients were matched at a radio of 1:1 according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), previous abdominal surgeries, comorbidities, ASA score (≤ 2/> 2), and pathologic stage.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in estimated blood loss, time to diet, postoperative pain score, length of hospital stay between the SILS and CLS groups. However, the SILS group showed longer operation time (175 (40) vs 145 (52.5), p = 0.011) and shorter incision length (4 (1.4) vs 7 (1.9), p < 0.001). There were 2 (6.3%) postoperative complications in the SILS group and 5 (15.6%) in the CLS group (p = 0.426). The pathologic outcomes were similar between two groups. The median follow-up period was 26.5 months in the SILS group and 34.9 months in the CLS group (p = 0.002). There were 3 recurrences (9.4%) in the SILS group and 3 (9.4%) in the CLS group. The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 92.4 and 93.8% (p = 0.984), and overall survival rates were 92.3 and 93.0% (p = 0.884) in the SILS and the CLS groups, respectively. No incisional hernia was observed during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Though single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer showed longer operation time in this study, it appears to be a safe and feasible option with comparable clinical and oncologic outcomes to conventional laparoscopic surgery.

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.

Safety and feasibility of single-port laparoscopic multivisceral resection for locally advanced left colon cancer

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of single-port laparoscopic multivisceral resection (S-MVR) for locally advanced left colon cancer. S-MVR is a challenging technique and to the best of our knowledge this is the first report of S-MVR for left colon cancer invading or adhering to neighboring organs. A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent laparoscopic multivisceral resection for locally advanced left colon cancer invading or adhering to neighboring organs from January 2008 to December 2014. Short-term and long-term outcomes were analyzed between groups of patients who underwent S-MVR and multi-port laparoscopic multivisceral resection (M-MVR) retrospectively. A total of 14 patients underwent S-MVR and 15 patients underwent M-MVR. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of operative factors and postoperative complications. The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the S-MVR group compared with the M-MVR group (P=0.048). Three-year overall survival was 61.9% in the S-MVR group (n=14). In patients with stage II (P=0.600) and III (P=0714) disease the three-year overall and disease-free survival was 81.8 and 58.3% in the S-MVR group and 80.0 and 70% in the M-MVR groups over a median follow-up of 34 months. In conclusion, S-MVR for locally advanced left colon cancer is safe and feasible in selected patients.

Multidimensional analyses of the learning curve for single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Single-incision plus one port surgery (SILS + 1) provides the advantages of being minimally invasive and easier to perform than pure single-incision laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the learning curve (LC) for SILS + 1 for sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer.

METHOD

From November 2012 to May 2014, a series of 85 consecutive patients underwent selective SLIS + 1 for sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer performed by a single surgeon at Nanfang Hospital. The LC for SILS + 1 was evaluated using cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) and risk-adjusted CUSUM methods. Data for all the perioperative variables and pathologic results among the phases were compared.

RESULTS

The LC had three phases: phase 1 (cases 1-13) was the initial learning period; phase 2 (cases 14-44) was the learning plateau period; and phase 3 (cases 45-85) was the competent period. The differences in total operating time among the three phases were significant. The number of harvested lymph nodes increased along with increases in the surgeon's experience.

CONCLUSIONS

For experienced CLS surgeons, the learning process reached the plateau period after the 13th case, and technical competence was achieved after the 44th case.

Multicenter, randomized single-port versus multiport laparoscopic surgery (SIMPLE) trial in colon cancer: an interim analysis

BACKGROUND

Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) was recently introduced as an innovative minimally invasive surgery method. Retrospective studies have revealed the safety and feasibility of SPLS for colon cancer treatment. However, no prospective randomized trials have been performed. The multicenter, randomized SIMPLE (single-port versus multiport laparoscopic surgery) trial aimed to investigate short-term perioperative outcomes of SPLS for colon cancer treatment, compared with multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS).

METHODS

Between August 2011 and April 2014, a total of 194 patients with colon cancer were recruited from seven hospitals in Korea. Patients were randomly allocated into the SPLS group (n = 99) or MPLS group (n = 95). The primary endpoint was postoperative complications. Operative, postoperative, and pathologic outcomes were analyzed after 50% of the patient study population had been recruited.

RESULTS

The patients' demographic characteristics, operative times, estimated blood volume losses, numbers of harvested lymph nodes, and lengths of both resection margins were not significantly different between groups. In the SPLS group, the rates of conversion to MPLS and open surgery were 12.9 and 2.2%, respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 10.8% of the SPLS, and 12.5% of the MPLS patients (p = 0.714). Times to functional recovery, pain scores, and amounts of analgesia were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

The results of this interim analysis suggested that SPLS is technically safe and appropriate when used for radical resection of colon cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01480128).

Comparative analysis of outcomes after multiport and single-port laparoscopic colectomy in emergency situations: Is single-port laparoscopic colectomy safe and feasible?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Although consensus has been reached on the superiority of laparoscopy for a majority of conditions underlying acute abdominal pain, the safety and feasibility of single-port laparoscopic colectomy (SPLC) in emergency situations have not been determined.

METHODS

A prospective electronic database of all emergency patients who underwent either multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC) or SPLC between April 2006 and December 2014 was used to compare the surgical outcomes of these operative methods.

RESULTS

During the study period, 31 MPLCs and 76 SPLCs were performed. These two operative methods resulted in similar operating times, transfusion amounts, lengths of stay, postoperative complications, attainment of lymph nodes, and proximal and distal cut margins. However, the SPLC group had a shorter time to first flatus (2.8±1.9 days vs. 3.8±1.5 days, p=0.005), earlier reinitiation of free oral fluids (3.2±2.1 days vs. 4.4±1.8 days, p=0.002), and lesser requirement of narcotic analgesics (2.5±3.9 times vs. 4.7±4.8 times, p=0.017).

CONCLUSION

SPLC could be a safe and effective alternative to MPLC, even in emergency situations when performed by surgeons who have overcome the learning curve associated with single-port laparoscopic techniques. The tendency toward earlier returns to bowel function and decreased incidence of postoperative analgesic use would be potential benefits of SPLC in emergency situations.

Comparison of single-port and conventional laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection

Background:

Within the last two decades, surgical treatment of colorectal cancer has changed dramatically from large abdominal incisions to minimal access surgery. In the recent years, single port (SP) surgery has spawned from conventional laparoscopic surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare conventional with SP laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (LAPR) for rectal cancer.

Patients and Methods:

This was a single-center non-randomised retrospective comparative study of prospectively collected data on 53 patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer; 41 with conventional laparoscopy and 12 with SP surgery.

Results:

Patients’ characteristics were in general comparable, but patients in the conventional laparoscopy-group had a significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists-score. The operative time was slightly shorter in the conventional laparoscopy-group, but no differences were found in oncological margins of the resected specimen, in length of stay or readmission rate.

Conclusions:

SP LAPR appeared to be safe and feasible in selected patients. Adequate oncologic resections can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality. Larger randomised controlled trials with longer follow-up are needed to determine the beneficial role of this new procedure.

Short-Term Outcomes of Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Diseases: Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Prospective Evidence

BACKGROUND

Conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) has been established as an alternative to open surgery for colorectal diseases (CRDs); simultaneously, single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is gaining popularity.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the short-term efficacy and safety of SILS with CLS for CRDs.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant randomized and prospective studies. Reference lists of relevant articles and reviews, conference proceedings, and ongoing trial databases were also screened. Outcome measures included surgical parameters, postsurgical recovery, pain, and adverse events. Meta-analysis was conducted where appropriate, comparing items using weighted mean differences (WMDs) and risk ratios (RRs) according to data type.

RESULTS

A total of nine prospective (three randomized and six non-randomized) researches published from 2011 to 2015 were identified. The overall pooled results showed compared to CLS, SILS was associated with fewer blood transfusions, shorter incision length, and slighter postoperative pain, but more extra ports. All the other parameters were comparable. Randomized evidence supported SILS was associated with less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay, but longer operative time. For only colectomy cases, SILS was associated with more conversions to open surgery. SILS was associated with longer surgical time for Easterners, but not for Westerners. The detected differences were clinically insignificant.

CONCLUSIONS

The results based on randomized and prospective evidence provide convincing support for the clinical similarity that SILS is basically as applicable, effective, and safe as CLS when dealing with colorectal lesions, but not for superiority.

Single-incision Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer

The implementation of national cancer screening has increased the detection rates of early gastric cancer (EGC) in Korea. Since the successful introduction of laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer in the early 1990s, this technique has demonstrated improved short-term outcomes without compromising long-term oncologic results. It is associated with reduced pain, shorter hospitalization, reduced morbidity rates, better cosmetic outcomes, and equivalent mortality rates as those for open surgery. Laparoscopic gastrectomy improves patients' quality of life (QOL) and provides favorable prognosis. Single-incision laparoscopic gastrectomy (SILG) is one extremely minimally invasive method, theoretically offering improved cosmetic results, less postoperative pain, and earlier recovery after surgery than conventional multiport laparoscopic gastrectomy. In this context, SILG is thought to be an optimal method to promote and maximize patients' QOL in the acute postoperative phase. However, the technical difficulties of this procedure have limited its use. Since the first report describing single-incision distal gastrectomy in 2011, only 16 studies to date have evaluated SILG. Most of these studies have focused on the technical feasibility and safety of SILG because its long-term outcomes have not been reported. This article reviews the advantages and limitations of SILG.

Impact of obesity on the short-term outcomes of single-port laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer in the Asian population: A retrospective cohort study

Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is being increasingly performed for treating colorectal cancer. Here, we aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of SPLS for colorectal cancer in obese patients through a comparison of their short-term outcomes with those of nonobese patients.A total of 323 patients who underwent SPLS for colorectal cancer at our center between March 2009 and August 2014 were enrolled. The outcomes were analyzed according to the body mass index (BMI) category: nonobese (BMI < 25), obese I (BMI: 25.0-29.9), and obese II (BMI ≥ 30).Of the 323 patients, 233 (72.1%), 80 (24.8%), and 10 (3.1%), were assigned to the nonobese, obese I, and obese II groups, respectively. The clinicopathologic patient characteristics, such as age, gender, tumor location, and previous laparotomy, were similar among the 3 groups. The mean operative time (nonobese vs obese I vs and obese II groups: 269.2 vs 270.4 vs 342.8 minutes, respectively) and estimated surgical blood loss (277.7 vs 260.5 vs 387.0 mL, respectively) were greater in the obese II group than in the nonobese and obese I groups, although the difference was not significant (P = .247 and P = .205, respectively). However, the time to passage of flatus significantly differed among the groups (P = .040); in particular, this value was significantly longer in the obese II group than in the obese I group (P = .031). None of the other parameters, including conversion to open or conventional laparoscopic surgery and intra- and postoperative morbidity, significantly differed among the 3 groups.SPLS for colorectal cancer can be safely performed in obese Asian patients with equivalent short-term outcomes as compared with that in nonobese patients. Hence, SPLS can be safely recommended for colorectal cancer in obese patients if the surgeon is experienced. Nevertheless, the technique used warrants further investigation, and a large-scale prospective study is required.

Assessment of treatment options for rectosigmoid cancer: single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, and conventional laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

The advantages of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) for rectosigmoid cancer treatment have been disputed. This study evaluated the outcomes of RPLS compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for rectosigmoid cancer.

METHODS

Data from 211 patients who underwent a selective sigmoidectomy or anterior resection from August 2011 to June 2014 at a single institution were collected and analyzed via propensity score matching. Operative outcomes, inflammatory responses, pain intensity, oncologic outcomes, quality of life, and cosmetic results were compared between groups.

RESULTS

After matching, 96 patients (48 CLS and 48 RPLS) were evaluated. Sixteen RPLS cases underwent single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), and 32 underwent single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1). Baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the RPLS and the CLS groups. Morbidity, pathologic outcomes, and 3-year disease-free survival and overall survival rates were also comparable between the 2 groups. Compared with the CLS group, the RPLS group had a shorter total incision length (p < 0.001); shorter time to liquid diet (p = 0.027), ambulation (p = 0.026), and discharge (p < 0.001); and lower visual analogue scale scores during mobilization at postoperative days 3-5 (p < 0.05). The total operation times, C-reactive protein levels at 24 h and 96 h, and interleukin-6 levels at 24 h postoperatively were significantly lower in the SILS + 1 group than those in the CLS and SILS groups (p < 0.05). Compared with the CLS group, the RPLS group showed better social functioning at 6 months postoperatively (p = 0.011). The SILS and SILS + 1 groups showed similar cosmetic results, and both groups showed better results than the CLS group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

RPLS for rectosigmoid cancer is feasible, with short-term safety and long-term oncological safety comparable to that of CLS. Better cosmesis and accelerated recovery can be expected. SILS + 1 is a better choice than CLS or SILS for rectosigmoid cancer because it minimizes invasiveness and reduces technical difficulties.

Comparison of Early Results and Complications between Multi-and Single-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Randomized Clinical Study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become more acceptable for obese patients. Single-port sleeve gastrectomy (SPSG) is more popular since each abdominal incision carries the risk of bleeding, hernia, and internal organ injury as well as exponentially affecting cosmesis. This cross-sectional study aimed at comparing multi-port sleeve gastrectomy (MPSG) and SPSG in terms of their early results and complications.

METHODS

Out of129 obese patients candidated for LSG, 102 patients were assigned to 2 groups of SPSG and MPSG. Complications and demographic data such as body mass index (BMI), age, gender, operation time, and hospital stay were measured. All surgeries were carried out between2013 and 2015 in Shiraz, Iran. Data analysis was performed using SPSS, version 16 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). The continuous and categorical variables were compared using the Student t-test and the Chi-square test or the Fisher exact test, respectively.

RESULTS

The patients' data from both groups were similar in terms of age, intraoperative and postoperative bleeding volume, and length of hospital stay. Mean BMI was 42.8±0.7 in the SPSG group and 45.3±1.2 in the MPSG group. Duration of surgery was significantly lower in the SPSG group (P<0.001). Only 1 patient from the SPSG group and 5 patients from the MPSG group had bleeding as an early complication.

CONCLUSION

The differences in each complication between the groups were not statistically significant. SPSG seems to be safe and is the same as MPSG in terms of major postoperative complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

IRCT201512229936N12 The abstract was presented in the 4^th International Congress of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Iran, as a poster and published in Iran J Med Sci Journal as a supplement (May 2015; Vol. 40, No. 3).

Laparoscopy for Rectal Cancer

It is evident that the use of laparoscopy in the management of rectal cancer has gained popularity in the last few years. It is still, however, not widely accepted as the standard of care. Multiple randomized trials have shown that short-term outcomes and perioperative morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic proctectomy are equivalent to open surgery. However, data regarding long-term oncologic outcomes are still scarce, with only a few randomized trials reporting similar outcomes in both laparoscopic and open group. A more recent trial failed to replicate those results in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. In this article, we will look at the most recent evidence regarding the use of laparoscopy for patients with rectal cancer. We will also briefly discuss the different approaches and new minimally invasive techniques used in this field, and we will talk about the challenges facing the widespread adoption of laparoscopic surgery in the management of rectal cancer.

Patient Body Image and Satisfaction with Surgical Wound Appearance After Reduced Port Surgery for Colorectal Diseases

BACKGROUND

The use of reduced port surgery (RPS) is increasing in the field of colorectal surgery. It is considered to offer advantages over conventional multiport surgery (MPS) in terms of decreased invasiveness and superior cosmesis. However, to date there has been no study that evaluates patient satisfaction after undergoing RPS for colorectal diseases. Herein, we present a questionnaire-based study to address this issue.

METHODS

Questionnaires were sent by mail to 216 patients who underwent RPS and 145 who underwent MPS. Patient's satisfaction with cosmesis and body image after colorectal surgery was assessed using a validated Body Image Questionnaire (BIQ) and Photo Series Questionnaire (PSQ).

RESULTS

A total of 76.9 % (166/216) of the RPS patients and 70.3 % (102/145) of the MPS patients returned the questionnaires. BIQ scores gradually improved after surgery, and were more positive overall in the RPS group compared to the MPS group. RPS patients marked significantly better PSQ scores than MPS patients (P < 0.05). In RPS subset analysis, patients with single port surgery (SPS) rated better PSQ scores than patients with SPS with additional port insertion (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We find that RPS, especially SPS, enhances patient satisfaction by reducing abdominal wall trauma. This new advantage of RPS may prove valuable in its consideration as an option in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Anterior Resection Using a Curved Stapler

INTRODUCTION

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy is technically limited because of such factors as instrument crowding, in-line viewing, and insufficient countertraction. In particular, it is technically difficult to cut the distal rectum from the umbilicus using an articulating linear stapler in single-incision laparoscopic anterior resection.

TECHNIQUE

After treating the mesorectum, the 5-mm trocar is replaced with a 12-mm trocar. The cartridge of the curved stapler is mounted while the shaft of the stapler is inserted into the 12-mm port extracorporeally. The curved stapler is inserted through the umbilical incision with the cartridge. A multichannel port is then mounted, and the abdominal cavity is reinsufflated. The curved stapler can then be operated intracorporeally. This procedure facilitates the vertical dissection of the rectum from the umbilicus.

RESULTS

A total of 27 consecutive patients were analyzed in this study. All the procedures were safely performed without any complications. The median distance from the peritoneal reflection to the transection point of the distal bowel in single-incision laparoscopic anterior resection was 5.0 cm (range, -2.0 to 15.0). One stapler firing was required to achieve distal bowel division in 26 patients (96.3 %), whereas 2 firings were required in 1 patient (3.7 %). The median distal margin was 7.0 cm (range, 3.0-13.0). The time from the insertion of the stapler to transection was 180 seconds (range, 100-420). There were no cases of anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSIONS

In single-incision laparoscopic anterior resection, it is feasible to perform rectal transection from the umbilicus by using a curved stapler. This technique may allow for the omission of 1 trocar from the operation.

ECSPECT prospective multicentre registry for single-port laparoscopic colorectal procedures

BACKGROUND

The international multicentre registry ECSPECT (European Consensus of Single Port Expertise in Colorectal Treatment) was established to evaluate the general feasibility and safety of single-port colorectal surgery with regard to preoperative risk assessment.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing single-port colorectal surgery were enrolled from 11 European centres between March 2010 and March 2014. Data were analysed to assess patient-, technique- and procedure-dependent parameters. A validated sex-adjusted risk chart was developed for prediction of single-port colorectal surgery-related conversion and complications.

RESULTS

Some 1769 patients were enrolled, 937 with benign and 832 with malignant conditions. Procedures were completed without additional trocars in 1628 patients (92·0 per cent). Conversion to open surgery was required in 75 patients (4·2 per cent) and was related to male sex and ASA fitness grade exceeding I. Conversions were more frequent in pelvic procedures involving the rectum compared with abdominal procedures (8·1 versus 3·2 per cent; odds ratio 2·69, P < 0·001). Postoperative complications were observed in a total of 224 patients (12·7 per cent). Independent predictors of complications included male sex (P < 0·001), higher ASA grade (P = 0·006) and rectal procedures (P = 0·002). The overall 30-day mortality rate was 0·5 per cent (8 of 1769 patients); three deaths (0·2 per cent; 1 blood loss, 2 leaks) were attributable to surgical causes.

CONCLUSION

The feasibility and safety, conversion and complication profile demonstrated here provides guidance for patient selection.

Single-incision versus standard multi-incision laparoscopic colectomy in patients with malignant or benign colonic disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis and assessment of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) requires only one umbilical port site and (depending on technique) a specimen extraction site. The aim of this study was the assessment of the available evidence for the comparison of SILC to conventional multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MLC) in adult patients, in whom elective colectomy is indicated because of malignant or benign disease. First, previous meta-analyses on this topic were assessed. Secondly, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, was performed.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches (CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE; up to March 2016) were performed. Additionally, we searched clinical trials registries and abstracts from surgical society meetings. For meta-analysis, risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals were calculated and pooled. The quality of previous meta-analyses was evaluated against established criteria (AMSTAR) and their reported results were investigated for consistency.

RESULTS

We identified 6 previous meta-analyses of mostly low methodological quality (AMSTAR total score: 2 - 5 out of 11 items). To fill the evidence gaps, all these meta-analyses had included non-randomised studies, but usually without assessing their risk of bias. In our systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials exclusively, we included two randomised controlled trials with a total of 82 colorectal cancer patients. There was insufficient evidence to clarify whether SILC leads to less local complications (RR = 0.52, 95 % CI 0.14 - 1.94) or lower mortality (1 death per treatment group). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SILC group (MD = -1.20 days, 95 % CI -1.95 to -0.44). One of the two studies found postoperative pain intensity to be lower at the first day. We also identified 7 ongoing trials with a total sample size of over 1000 patients.

CONCLUSION

The currently available study results are too sparse to detect (or rule out) relevant differences between SILC and MLC. The quality of the current evidence is low, and the additional analysis of non-randomised data attempts, but does not solve this problem. SILC should still be considered as an experimental procedure, since the evidence of well-designed randomised controlled trials is too sparse to allow any recommendation.

Reduced port laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer is safe and feasible in terms of short-term outcomes: comparative study with conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery

Purpose

Laparoscopic surgery was previously accepted as an alternative surgical option in treatment for colorectal cancer. Nowadays, single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is introduced as a method to maximize advantages of minimally invasive surgery. However, SPLS has several limitations compared to conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CMLS). To overcome those limitations of SPLS, reduced port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) was introduced. This study aimed at evaluating the short-term outcomes of RPLS.

Methods

Patients who underwent CMLS and RPLS of colon cancer between August 2011 and December 2013 were included in this study. Short-term clinical and pathological outcome were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

Thirty-two patients underwent RPLS and 217 patients underwent CMLS. Shorter operation time, less blood loss, and faster bowel movement were shown in RPLS group in this study. In terms of postoperative pain, numeric rating scale (NRS) of RPLS was lower than that of CMLS. Significant differences were shown in terms of tumor size, harvested lymph node, perineural invasion, and pathological stage. No significant differences were confirmed in terms of other surgical outcomes.

Conclusion

In this study, RPLS was technically feasible and safe. Especially in terms of postoperative pain, RPLS was comparable to CMLS. RPLS may be a feasible alternative option in selected patients with colon cancer.