Totally intracorporeal laparoscopic colectomy (TILC) is associated with similar surgical outcomes in high and low operative risk patients. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013;23:154-158. [PMID: 23579509 DOI: 10.1097/sle.0b013e3182769441]

An experience of total laparoscopic partial colectomy with intracorporeal triangulating anastomosis in an obese patient with descending colon cancer

A 68-year-old woman was transferred to the emergency room of Okayama City Hospital because of worsening epigastric pain. After the examination, she was diagnosed with descending colon cancer, and laparoscopic colectomy was planned. However, exteriorization of the bowels to produce anastomosis was difficult because the rich adipose tissue of the mesocolon hardly stretched, and the abdominal wall was thick as the patient was obese. Therefore, an intracorporeal triangulating end-to-end anastomosis was performed. The colon was divided at 10 cm either side from the tumor using an endoscopic linear stapler. After the resection of the stumps with staples, the posterior walls were tied with stay sutures and then stapled with an endoscopic linear stapler. The anterior wall was stapled twice in the same manner, and the intracorporeal anastomosis was completed. The patient's postoperative course was uneventful. This technique provided an alternative intracorporeal anastomotic technique as troubleshooting in laparoscopic colectomy.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Selection of intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) or extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of IA compared with EA in LRC patients.

Methods

Literature was searched systematically for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IA with EA in LRC patients until May 2021. The eligible studies for risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Data were extracted and analysed for the following outcomes of interest: operative time, length of incision, nodal harvest, bowel function recovery, postoperative pain, postoperative complications (wound infection, anastomotic leak, ileus, obstruction, reoperation), death at 30 days, duration of hospital stay and 30-day readmission.

Results

Five RCTs, including a total of 559 patients, were eligible for meta-analysis. All of the trials reported adequate random sequence generation and allocation concealment. There were significantly better outcomes in the IA group than in the EA group in time to first flatus (mean difference (MD) −0.71 (95 per cent c.i. −1.12 to −0.31), P = 0.0005), time to first passage of stool (MD −0.53 (95 per cent c.i. −0.69 to −0.37), P < 0.00001), visual analogue scale of pain on postoperative day (POD) 3 (MD −0.76 (95 per cent c.i. −1.23 to −0.28), P = 0.002), POD 4 (MD −0.83 (95 per cent c.i. −1.46 to −0.20), P = 0.01), POD 5 (MD −0.60 (95 per cent c.i. −0.95 to −0.25), P = 0.0007), length of incision (MD −1.52 (95 per cent c.i. −2.30 to −0.74), P = 0.0001) and wound infection (relative risk 0.46 (95 per cent c.i. 0.23 to 0.91), P = 0.02). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in duration of hospital stay (P = 0.47), operative time (P = 0.07), number of lymph nodes harvested (P = 0.70), anastomotic leak (P = 0.88), postoperative ileus (P = 0.48), bleeding (P = 0.15), bowel obstruction (P = 0.24), reoperation (P = 0.34), readmission within 30 days (P = 0.26), and death (P = 0.70).

Conclusion

Compared with EA, IA shows a faster recovery of bowel function with fewer wound infections.

Robotic colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis is feasible with no operative conversions during the learning curve for an experienced laparoscopic surgeon developing a robotics program

The benefits of performing a colectomy robotically instead of laparoscopically have not conclusively been demonstrated. Evaluation of studies is limited by sample size, retrospective design, heterogeneity of operative techniques, sparse adjustment for learning curve, and mixed results. Consequently, adoption of robotic colectomy by surgeons has been expectedly slow. The objectives of the study were to compare the outcomes of robotic colectomy to laparoscopic colectomy for patients with right-sided tumors undergoing a standardized completely intracorporeal operation and to examine the impact of prior experience with laparoscopic right colectomies on the performance of robotic right colectomies. Retrospective review of outcomes of consecutive patients undergoing a robotic right colectomy (robot) compared to those undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (LAP). LAP patients were further subdivided into a group during the learning curve (LC) and after the learning curve (post-LC). Data collected included operative time (OT), conversion to laparotomy, lymph nodes harvested (LN), length of stay (LOS), 30-day morbidity, and mortality. Comparison of continuous and categorical variables was assessed with the independent samples t test and Chi-square test, respectively. Data are expressed as mean ± SD, and significance defined as p < 0.05. 122 patients underwent robot (n = 21), LAP (n = 101), LC (n = 51), or post-LC (n = 50). OT was decreased for post-LC compared to LC (198 vs. 228 min). There were no conversions in robot and five with LAP. Morbidity was similar for robot (14%) compared to LAP (22%), LC (24%), or post-LC cases (20%). Median LOS was similar for robot vs. LAP (3 vs. 5 days). Robot had greater mean LN yield vs. LAP (19 vs. 14, p = 0.02). The initial outcomes with completely intracorporeal colectomy achieved robotically were equivalent to results during or after LC for laparoscopic resection. Proficiency gained with LAP seems to positively impact the initial results with the robot.

Surgical approach to right colon cancer: From open technique to robot. State of art

This work is a topic highlight on the surgical treatment of the right colon pathologies, focusing on the literature state of art and comparing the open surgery to the different laparoscopic and robotic procedures. Different laparoscopic procedures have been described for the treatment of right colon tumors: Totally laparoscopic right colectomy, laparoscopic assisted right colectomy, laparoscopic facilitated right colectomy, hand-assisted right colectomy, single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy, robotic right colectomy. Two main characteristics of these techniques are the different type of anastomosis: Intracorporeal (for totally laparoscopic right colectomy, single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy, laparoscopic assisted right colectomy and robotic technique) or extracorporeal (for laparoscopic assisted right colectomy, laparoscopic facilitated right colectomy, hand-assisted right colectomy and open right colectomy) and the different incision (suprapubic, median or transverse on the right side of abdomen). The different laparoscopic techniques meet the same oncological criteria of radicalism as the open surgery for the right colon. The totally laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis and even more the single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy, remain a technical challenge due to the complexity of procedures (especially for the single incision laparoscopic surgery colectomy) and the particular right colon vascular anatomy but they seem to have some theoretical advantages compared to the other laparoscopic and open procedures. Data reported in literature while confirming the advantages of laparoscopic approach, do not allow to solve controversies about which is the best laparoscopic technique (Intracorporeal vs Extracorporeal Anastomosis) to treat the right colon cancer. However, the laparoscopic techniques with intracorporeal anastomosis for the right colon seem to show some theoretical advantages (functional, technical, oncological and cosmetic advantages) even if all studies conclude that further prospective randomized trials are necessary. Robotic technique may be useful to overcome the problems related to inexperience in laparoscopy in some surgical centers.