Laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon carcinoma: a surgical challenge but oncologically feasible

Segmental or right hemi-colectomy? The optimal surgical procedure for transverse colon cancer: a propensity score-matched, multicenter, retrospective study

PURPOSE

Extended colectomy is sometimes chosen for treatment of transverse colon cancer (TCC) because of concerns about short- and long-term outcomes. However, there is still a lack of evidence regarding the optimal surgical procedure.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected and analyzed data of patients who underwent surgical treatment of pathological stage II/III TCC at four hospitals from January 2011 to June 2019. We excluded the patients with TCC located at distal transverse colon, and just evaluated and analyzed proximal and middle third TCC. Inverse probability treatment-weighted propensity score analyses was used to compare short- and long-term outcomes between patients who underwent segmental transverse colectomy (STC) and those who underwent right hemicolectomy (RHC).

RESULTS

In total, 106 patients were enrolled in this study (STC group, n = 45; RHC group, n = 61). The patients' backgrounds were well balanced after matching. The incidence of major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) was not significantly different between the STC and RHC groups (4.5% vs. 5.6%, respectively; P = 0.53). The 3-year recurrence-free survival and overall survival rates were not significantly different between the STC and RHC groups (88.2% vs. 81.8%, P = 0.86 and 90.3% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.79, respectively).

CONCLUSION

RHC has no significant benefits over STC with respect to either short- or long-term outcomes. STC with necessary lymphadenectomy could be an optimal procedure for proximal and middle TCC.

Clinical and survival outcomes of colectomy for transverse colon cancer in elderly patients

It remains controversial whether elderly patients with transverse colon cancer present worse prognoses. Our study utilized evidence from multi-center databases to evaluate the perioperative and oncology outcomes of radical resection of colon cancer in elderly and nonelderly patients. In this study, we analyzed 416 patients with transverse colon cancer who underwent radical surgery from January 2004 to May 2017, including 151 elderly (aged ≥ 65 years) and 265 nonelderly (aged < 65 years) patients. We retrospectively compared the perioperative and oncological outcomes between these 2 groups. The median follow-up in the elderly and nonelderly groups was 52 and 64 months, respectively. There were no significant differences in the overall survival (OS) (P = .300) and disease-free survival (DFS) (P = .380) between the elderly and nonelderly groups. However, the elderly group had longer hospital stays (P < .001), a higher complication rate (P = .027), and fewer lymph nodes harvested (P = .002). The N classification and differentiation were significantly associated with OS based on univariate analysis, and the N classification was an independent prognostic factor for OS based on multivariate analysis (P < .05). Similarly, the N classification and differentiation were significantly correlated with the DFS based on univariate analysis. However, multivariate analysis indicated that the N classification was an independent prognostic factor for DFS (P < .05). In conclusion, the survival and surgical outcomes in elderly patients were similar to nonelderly patients. The N classification was an independent factor for OS and DFS. Even though elderly patients with transverse colon cancer present a higher surgical risk than nonelderly patients, performing radical resection in elderly patients can be an appropriate choice for treatment.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN)

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes.

METHODS

This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate.

RESULTS

A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

Mid-transverse Location in Primary Colon Tumor: A Poor Prognostic Factor?

BACKGROUND

The location of colonic tumors has been linked to different clinical and oncologic outcomes. Transverse colon cancers are generally included as right colon cancers. Furthermore, hepatic and splenic flexure tumors are usually included as components of the transverse colon.

OBJECTIVE

This study was aimed at comparing the clinicopathologic characteristics and long-term outcomes between mid-transverse and right and left colon cancers and determining the prognostic impact of the primary tumor location in the mid-transverse colon.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

SETTINGS

Two specialized colorectal centers were included.

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent curative surgery for colon cancer were analyzed. Tumors located in the transverse colon, excluding the flexures, were defined as mid-transverse colon cancers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographic characteristics, operative outcomes, pathologic results, and long-term outcomes were the primary outcome measures.

RESULTS

Of the 487 patients, 41 (8.4%) had mid-transverse, 191 (39.2%) had right, and 255 (52.4%) had left colon cancers. For mid-transverse colon cancers, the mean length of hospital stay, mean length of the resected specimen, and the mean number of harvested lymph nodes were significantly higher. For patients with stage I to III cancer, the 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were significantly worse in the mid-transverse colon cancers than in the right and left colon cancers (overall survival: 55.5% vs 82.8% vs 85.9%, p = 0.004, and disease-free survival; 47.7% vs 72.4% vs 79.5%, p = 0.003). After adjustment for other clinicopathologic factors, mid-transverse colon cancers were significantly associated with a poor prognosis (HR = 2.19 [95% CI, 1.25-3.83]; p = 0.006).

LIMITATIONS

Molecular and genetic information were unavailable in this retrospective study.

CONCLUSIONS

In our case series, colon cancers located in the mid-transverse colon showed poorer prognosis than cancers in other locations. The impact of tumor location in the mid-transverse colon on prognosis, including molecular and genetic markers, should be investigated further in prospective studies. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B631.

LOCALIZACIN TRANSVERSA MEDIA EN EL TUMOR DE COLON PRIMARIO UN FACTOR DE MAL PRONSTICO

ANTECEDENTES:La ubicación de los tumores de colon se ha relacionado con diferentes resultados clínicos y oncológicos. Los cánceres de colon transverso se incluyen generalmente como cánceres de colon derecho. Además, los tumores del ángulo hepático y esplénico suelen incluirse como un componente del colon transverso.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo comparar las características clínico-patológicas y los resultados a largo plazo entre los cánceres de colon transverso medio y derecho e izquierdo y determinar el impacto pronóstico de la ubicación del tumor primario en el colon transverso medio.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio retrospectivo.AJUSTE ENTORNO CLINICO:Se incluyeron dos centros colorrectales especializados.PACIENTES:Se analizaron los pacientes que fueron sometidos a cirugía curativa por cáncer de colon. Los tumores ubicados en el colon transverso, excluidos los ángulos, se definieron como "cánceres de colon transverso medio".PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO VOLARACION:Las características demográficas, los resultados quirúrgicos, los resultados patológicos y los resultados a largo plazo fueron las principales medidas de resultado valoracion.RESULTADOS:De los 487 pacientes, 41 (8,4%) tenían cáncer de colon transverso medio, 191 (39,2%) derecho y 255 (52,4%) cáncer de colon izquierdo. Para los cánceres de colon transverso medio, la duración media de la estancia hospitalaria, la duración de la muestra resecada y el número medio de ganglios linfáticos extraídos fueron significativamente mayores. Para los pacientes en estadio I-III, las tasas de supervivencia general y sin enfermedad a 5 años fueron significativamente peores en los cánceres de colon transverso medio que en los cánceres de colon derecho e izquierdo (supervivencia general: 55,5% frente versus a 82,8% frente versus a 85,9%, p = 0,004 y supervivencia libre de enfermedad; 47,7% frente a 72,4% frente a 79,5%, p = 0,003, respectivamente). Después del ajuste por otros factores clínico-patológicos, los cánceres de colon transverso medio se asociaron significativamente con un pronóstico desfavorable (Razón de riesgo: 2,19; intervalo de confianza del 95%: 1,25-3,83; p = 0,006).LIMITACIONES:La información molecular y genética no estuvo disponible en este estudio retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:En nuestra serie de casos, los cánceres de colon localizados en el colon transverso medio mostraron un peor pronóstico que los cánceres en otras localizaciones. El impacto de la ubicación del tumor en el colon transverso medio sobre el pronóstico, incluidos los marcadores moleculares y genéticos, debe investigarse más a fondo en estudios prospectivos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B631. (Traducción-Dr Adrián Ortega).

Surgical outcomes of various surgical approaches for transverse colon cancer

The transverse colon has anatomical peculiarities in the middle position between the foregut and the midgut. Because the transverse colon harbors a flexure at both ends, mobilization of the transverse colon can be especially challenging compared with other colons. Although transverse colon cancer is relatively uncommon, an optimal surgical management for transverse colon cancer must be established. In transverse colon cancer, proximity to the pancreas and variation in arterial and venous anatomy make radical resection more difficult. Dissection of lymph nodes around the middle colic vessels is a critical step in transverse colon cancer resection. The proximity of the middle colic vessels to the superior mesenteric vessels contributes to the complexity of this step, making it challenging for less-trained surgeons. For these reasons, patients with transverse colon cancer were not included in most landmark studies that compared laparoscopic surgery with open surgery. More radical operations, such as subtotal colectomy or extended right or left hemicolectomy, can be performed for transverse colon cancer to secure an adequate lymphadenectomy. Such cancers have also been treated with limited segmental colectomies, such as right, transverse, or left colectomy. Currently, there is still a lack of standardized definitions and procedures. Therefore, it is time to discuss and establish optimal surgical treatments for transverse colon cancer.

Laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with transverse colon cancer: short-term and oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Studies evaluating the outcomes after laparoscopic resections of transverse colon cancers are scant. This manuscript aimed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes after laparoscopic (Lap) and open procedures for transverse colon carcinomas.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent resection for a cancer located in the transverse colon between 2003 and 2019 were reviewed. Patients were categorized according to the surgical approach (Lap versus open) and groups were compared. Outcome measures were the short-term results, complications and functional recovery; moreover, recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were compared overall and after propensity score matching (PSM) based on age, sex, ASA classification, BMI, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, use of postoperative chemotherapy, location of tumour, stage and grading, operation time, blood loss and complications.

RESULTS

Of 248 transverse resections reviewed, 146 (81 Lap and 65 open) were selected for data analysis. Blood loss, fluid intake and the incidence of wound infection were significantly lower and the hospital stay was significantly shorter in the Lap group (P < 0.001). The operation time and incidence of complications (Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3 or above) did not differ significantly between the two groups. Mean follow-up was of 75.4 months in the Lap group and 78.6 months in the open group. Regression analyses showed that OS was associated with the postoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level (hazard ratio 1.18 (95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.27); P < 0.001), BMI (hazard ratio 0.81 (95 per cent c.i. 0.68 to 0.96); P = 0.017), operation time (hazard ratio 0.99 (95 per cent c.i. 0.97 to 1.00; P = 0.010), and postoperative chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.27 (95 per cent c.i. 0.08 to 0.96); P = 0.042), while RFS was associated with the postoperative CEA level (hazard ratio 1.13 (95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 1.20); P < 0.001). PSM selected 42 patients for data comparison of long-term results, and showed no significant differences between groups (RFS: P = 0.530; OS: P = 0.561).

CONCLUSION

Lap and open resections for transverse colon cancer provided similar outcomes in terms of severe post-operative complication and long-term results.

What is the best surgical procedure of transverse colon cancer? An evidence map and minireview

Colorectal cancers comprise a large percentage of tumors worldwide, and transverse colon cancer (TCC) is defined as tumors located between hepatic and splenic flexures. Due to the anatomy and embryology complexity, and lack of large randomized controlled trials, it is a challenge to standardize TCC surgery. In this study, the current situation of transverse/extended colectomy, robotic/ laparoscopic/open surgery and complete mesocolic excision (CME) concept in TCC operations is discussed and a heatmap is conducted to show the evidence level and gap. In summary, transverse colectomy challenges the dogma of traditional extended colectomy, with similar oncological and prognostic outcomes. Compared with conventional open resection, laparoscopic and robotic surgery plays a more important role in both transverse colectomy and extended colectomy. The CME concept may contribute to the radical resection of TCC and adequate harvested lymph nodes. According to published studies, laparoscopic or robotic transverse colectomy based on the CME concept was the appropriate surgical procedure for TCC patients.

Surgical Approach to Transverse Colon Cancer: Analysis of Current Practice and Oncological Outcomes Using the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment for transverse colon cancer involves either extended colectomy or segmental resection, depending on the location of the tumor and surgeon perspective. However, the oncological safety of segmental resection has not yet been established in large cohort studies.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare segmental resection versus extended colectomy for transverse colon cancer in terms of oncological outcomes.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted using a nationwide cohort.

PATIENTS

A total of 66,062 patients who underwent colectomy with curative intent for transverse stage I to III adenocarcinoma were identified in the National Cancer Database (2004-2015).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients were divided in 2 groups based on the type of surgery received (extended versus segmental resection). The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were 30- and 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate within 30 days of surgical discharge.

RESULTS

Extended colectomy was performed in 44,417 (67.2%) patients, whereas 21,645 (32.8%) patients underwent segmental resection. Extended colectomy was associated with lower survival at multivariate analysis (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10; p < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed that extended resection was independently associated with poorer survival in mid transverse colon cancers (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.12; p < 0.001) and in stage III tumors (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.18; p < 0.001). The number of at least 12 harvested lymph nodes was an independent predictor of improved survival in both overall and subgroup analyses.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Extended colectomy was not associated with a survival advantage compared with segmental resection. On the contrary, extended colectomy was associated with slightly poorer survival in mid transverse cancers and locally advanced tumors. Segmental resection was found to be safe when appropriate margins and adequate lymph node harvest were achieved. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B454.

ABORDAJE QUIRRGICO DEL CNCER DE COLON TRANSVERSO ANLISIS DE LA PRCTICA ACTUAL Y LOS RESULTADOS ONCOLGICOS UTILIZANDO LA BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL DE CNCER

ANTECEDENTES:El tratamiento quirúrgico para el cáncer de colon transverso implica colectomía extendida o resección segmentaria, según la ubicación del tumor y la perspectiva del cirujano. Sin embargo, la seguridad oncológica de la resección segmentaria aún no se ha establecido en estudios de cohortes grandes.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo comparar la resección segmentaria versus la colectomía extendida para el cáncer de colon transverso en términos de resultados oncológicos.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se realizó utilizando una cohorte a nivel nacional.PACIENTES:Un total de 66,062 pacientes que se sometieron a colectomía con intención curativa por adenocarcinoma de colon transverso en estadio I-III fueron identificados en la Base de Datos Nacional del Cáncer (2004-2015).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los pacientes se dividieron en dos grupos según el tipo de cirugía recibida (resección extendida versus resección segmentaria). El resultado primario fue la supervivencia global. Los resultados secundarios fueron la mortalidad a los 30 y 90 días, la duración de la estancia hospitalaria y la tasa de reingreso dentro de los 30 días posteriores al alta quirúrgica.RESULTADOS:Se realizó colectomía extendida en 44,417 (67.2%) casos, mientras que 21,645 (32.8%) pacientes fueron sometidos a resección segmentaria. La colectomía extendida se asoció con una menor supervivencia en el análisis multivariado (HR 1.07 IC 95% 1.04-1.10; p <0.001). El análisis de subgrupos mostró que la resección extendida se asoció de forma independiente con una menor supervivencia en los cánceres de colon transverso medio (HR 1.08 IC 95% 1.04-1.12; p <0.001) y en tumores en estadio III (HR 1.11 IC 95% 1.04-1.18; p <0.001). Un número de al menos 12 ganglios linfáticos cosechados fue un predictor independiente de una mejor supervivencia en los análisis general y de subgrupos.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:La colectomía extendida no se asoció con una ventaja de supervivencia en comparación con la resección segmentaria. Por el contrario, la colectomía extendida se asoció con una supervivencia levemente menor en cánceres de colon transverso medio y tumores localmente avanzados. Se encontró que la resección segmentaria es segura cuando se logran los márgenes apropiados y la cosecha adecuada de ganglios linfáticos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B454.

Laparoscopic versus open radical resection for transverse colon cancer: evidence from multi-center databases

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic approach is still a controversy for transverse colon cancer. Our investigation aimed to evaluate the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open radical resection for transverse colon cancer based on evidence from multi-center databases.

METHODS

416 patients with transverse colon cancer undergoing radical surgery were analyzed including 181 laparoscopic resections and 235 open resections from January 2004 to May 2017 based on multi-center databases. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

No statistical differences regarding the baseline characteristics were observed between the two groups except the procedure type. Compared with open approach, laparoscopic approach was associated with statistically longer operation time (209.96 vs. 173.31 min, P = 0.002), significantly shorter time to soft food intake (4.73 vs. 6.01 days, P = 0.034), and shorter postoperative hospitalization (12.05 vs. 14.44 days, P = 0.001). In terms of oncologic outcomes, laparoscopic resection was correlated with statistically more lymph node retrieval (13.52 vs. 15.91, P = 0.002) and similar 5-year overall survival (91.2% vs. 89.1%, P = 0.356) and disease-free survival (89.6% vs. 86.0%, P = 0.873), compared with open resection.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with transverse colon cancer, laparoscopic approach can achieve several short-term advantages without decreasing long-term oncologic survival.

Comparing the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and open colectomy in transverse colon cancer: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

In order to compare the safety, efficacy, and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic (LC) and open colectomy (OC) for transverse colon cancer (TCC) patients, the present systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was designed.

METHODS

This study was conducted following the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the PRISMA guidelines. A systematic screening of the electronic databases was performed (Medline, Web of Science and Scopus). The validity of the pooled results was verified through the performance of trial sequential analysis (TSA). The level of evidence was estimated using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Overall, 21 studies and 2498 patients were included in our study. Pooled comparisons and TSA analyses reported a superiority of LC over OC in terms of postoperative complications (OR 0.64, p = 0.0003), blood loss (WMD - 86.84, p < 0.00001), time to first flatus (WMD - 0.94, p < 0.00001) and oral diet (WMD - 1.25, p < 0.00001), and LOS (WMD - 2.39, p < 0.00001). Moreover, OC displayed a lower operation duration (p < 0.00001). A higher rate of complete mesocolic excision (p = 0.001) was related to OC. Although inconclusive in TSA, the recurrence rate in LC group was lower. LC and OC were equivalent in terms of postoperative survival outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering several limitations of the eligible studies and the subsequent low level of evidence, further RCTs of a higher quality and methodological level are required to verify the findings of our meta-analysis.

Randomized controlled trial to evaluate laparoscopic versus open surgery in transverse and descending colon cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery for transverse and descending colon cancer remain controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of this procedure.

METHODS

We conducted a single-institutional randomized controlled trial. Patients with transverse or descending colon cancer were randomly allocated to receive laparoscopic surgery (LAC) or conventional open surgery (OC). The primary endpoint was the overall complication rate between the two groups. The secondary endpoints were the length of the postoperative hospital stay, the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) score (at 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery), the 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS), and the 5-year overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Between August 2008 and October 2012, a total of 66 patients were enrolled (33 in the LAC group and 33 in the OC group). The patient characteristics showed no significant differences between the two groups. The complication rates (≥ grade 3) were 6.1% in the LAC group and 12.1% in the OC group (p = 0.392). The length of postoperative stay was not significantly different between the two groups. Regarding the HRQOL, the physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, social functioning, mental health, and role component summary at 1 month after surgery and the social functioning and mental health at 6 months after surgery were better in the LAC group than in the OC group. The 5-year RFS and OS rates were similar between the LAC and OC groups (RFS 90.5% and 87.3%, respectively, p = 0.752; OS 93.3% and 100.0%, respectively, p = 0.543).

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for transverse and descending colon cancer are almost equal to those of open surgery. Laparoscopic resection is a better choice than open surgery for managing this cancer with regard to the short- and mid-term QOL.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01861691 .

Four-directional approach to the meso-transverse attachment combined with preoperative radiological vascular simulation facilitates short-term surgical outcomes in laparoscopic transverse colon cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Transverse colon resection is one of the most difficult laparoscopic procedures because of anatomic hazards such as variations in the mesenteric vascular anatomy and the complex structure of organs and surrounding membranes.

METHODS

We evaluated the short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopic transverse colon resection using a creative approach. This approach included preoperative surgical simulation using virtual surgical anatomy by CT, a four-directional approach to the mesentery, and 3-D imaging during laparoscopic surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 45 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for transverse colon cancer from June 2013 to December 2017 were enrolled in this study. All procedures were completed safely, with minor postoperative complications, including two patients with anastomotic stenosis, two with intra-abdominal phlegmon, one with delayed gastric emptying, and one with pneumonia, all treated non-operatively. There were no conversions to open resection. Operation time was 203 min (range, 125-322 min), and the estimated blood loss during surgery was 5 mL (range, 0-370 mL). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 10 days (range, 7-21 days), and no patients required readmission.

CONCLUSION

Short-term surgical outcomes after laparoscopic transverse colon resection demonstrated that this creative approach was safe and feasible. The four-directional approach to the meso-transverse attachment combined with preoperative radiological simulation can facilitate laparoscopic transverse colon surgery.

A Transverse Colectomy is as Safe as an Extended Right or Left Colectomy for Mid-Transverse Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Although extended colectomy is often chosen for patients with transverse colon cancer, the optimal surgical approach for mid-transverse colon cancer has not been established.

METHODS

We identified patients who underwent a transverse (TC) or an extended colectomy (EC) for mid-transverse colon cancer between 2004 and 2014. To adjust for potential selection bias between the groups, a propensity score matching analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients were included, of whom 63% underwent EC (right 47%, left 17%) and 37% TC. EC patients tend to have worse short-term outcomes. Although fewer lymph nodes were harvested after TC, 5-year overall (OS) ad disease-free survival (DFS) was comparable between the groups. When comparing long-term outcomes stage-by-stage, worse OS and DFS were seen in stage-II. All stage-II patients died of a non-cancer-related cause and recurrence occurred in pT4 TC patients who did not receive adjuvant therapy. The propensity-matched cohort demonstrated similar postoperative morbidity, but more laparoscopic procedures in EC. Additionally, TC tumors were correlated with poorer histopathological features and disease recurrence was only seen after TC.

CONCLUSION

Our study underlines the oncological safety of a transverse colectomy for mid-transverse colon cancer. Although TC tumors were associated with poorer histopathological features, survival rates were comparable.

Optimal Surgery for Mid-Transverse Colon Cancer: Laparoscopic Extended Right Hemicolectomy Versus Laparoscopic Transverse Colectomy

BACKGROUND

Although the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer have been shown by the recent studies, the optimal laparoscopic approach for mid-transverse colon cancer is controversial.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with the mid-transverse colon cancer at our institutions between January 2007 and April 2017. Thirty-eight and 34 patients who received extended right hemicolectomy and transverse colectomy, respectively, were enrolled.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in operating time, blood loss, and hospital stay between the two groups. Postoperative complications developed in 10 of 34 patients (29.4%; wound infection: 2 cases, anastomotic leakage: 2 cases, bowel obstruction: 1 case, incisional hernia: 2 cases, others: 3 cases) for the transverse colectomy group and in 4 of 38 patients (10.5%; wound infection: 1 case, anastomotic leakage: 0 case, bowel obstruction: 2 cases, incisional hernia: 0 case, others: 1 case) for the extended right hemicolectomy group (P = 0.014). Although the median number of harvested #221 and #222 LNs was similar between the two groups (6 vs. 8, P = 0.710, and 3 vs. 2, P = 0.256, respectively), that of #223 was significantly larger in extended right hemicolectomy than in transverse colectomy (3 vs. 1, P = 0.038). The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates were 92.4 and 90.3% for the extended right hemicolectomy group, and 95.7 and 79.6% for the transverse colectomy group (P = 0.593 and P = 0.638, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy and laparoscopic transverse colectomy offer similar oncological outcomes for mid-transverse colon cancer. Laparoscopic extended right hemicolectomy might be associated with fewer postoperative complications.

Surgical techniques for advanced transverse colon cancer using the pincer approach of the transverse mesocolon

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer, not only early cancer but also advanced cancer, has become standardized by some randomized controlled studies. However, cases involving advanced transverse colon cancer were excluded from these studies due to the technical difficulty of the surgery. Hence, laparoscopic surgery for advanced transverse colon cancer is still a theme that we need to overcome. To solve these issues, it is necessary to establish a standardized approach and surgical technique.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUES

The advantage of our method, which approaches from both sides of the transverse mesocolon, is that it is easier to achieve hemostasis when active bleeding occurs because this approach provides space for ligating and sealing. This allows the surgeon to perform lymphadenectomy around the superior mesenteric artery and vein.

CONCLUSIONS

We introduced the usefulness of the "Pincer approach of the transverse mesocolon" to standardize laparoscopic surgery for advanced transverse colon cancer.

Vascular anatomy of the transverse mesocolon and bidirectional laparoscopic D3 lymph node dissection for patients with advanced transverse colon cancer

Laparoscopic D3 lymph node dissection for transverse colon cancer is technically demanding because of complicated anatomy. Here, we reviewed the vascular structure of the transverse mesocolon, explored the extent of the base of the transverse mesocolon, and evaluated the feasibility and oncological safety of D3 lymph node dissection. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 42 patients with advanced transverse colon cancer who underwent curative surgery and D3 dissection at Kyushu University Hospital between January 2008 and December 2015. We examined the venous and arterial anatomy of the transverse mesocolon of each resection and compared surgical outcomes between patients who underwent laparoscopic D3 (Lap D3) and open D3 (Open D3) dissection. Patients included two with Stage I, 18 with Stage II, 20 with Stage III, and two with Stage IVA. Thirty-six (85.7%) and six (14.3%) patients underwent Lap D3 or Open D3, respectively. The tumor sizes of the Open D3 and Lap D3 groups were 7.8 and 3.7 cm, respectively (P < 0.001). The Lap D3 group had significantly less blood loss (26 mL vs 272 mL, P = 0.002). The other outcomes of the two groups were not significantly different, including 3-year overall survival (87.7% vs 83.3%, P = 0.385). We observed four patterns of the middle colic artery (MCA) arising from the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), and the frequency of occurrence of a single MCA was 64.3%. The right-middle colic vein (MCV) was present in 92.9% of resections and served as a tributary of the gastrocolic trunk, and 90.5% of the left MCVs drained into the superior mesenteric vein (SMV). The root of the transverse mesocolon was broadly attached to the head of the pancreas and to the surfaces of the SMV and SMA. Laparoscopic D3 lymph node dissection may be tolerated by patients with advanced transverse colon cancer.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Transverse Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The survival benefits, oncological adequacy, effectiveness, and safety of laparoscopic transverse colectomy (LTC) were compared with that of open transverse colectomy (OTC) using a meta-analysis.

METHODS

EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane library, and Google scholar databases were searched for the last 20 years. Meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival were estimated using the inverse variance hazard ratio method.

RESULTS

No survival benefits were detected between the two LTC and OTC cohorts. OTC showed shorter operative time by 38 min compared to LTC [mean difference (MD) = 38(15.23-60.77), p = 0.001]. However, LTC was associated with earlier postoperative recovery. The time to flatus and time to oral intake for LTC were MD = -1.12(-1.68 to -0.55, p = 0.001) and MD = -1.57(-2.38 to -0.76, p = 0.001), respectively. In addition, LTC was associated with a shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days [MD = -4.64(-7.52 to -1.75), p = 0.002].

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to OTC, LTC provides similar survival benefits, earlier postoperative recovery, and shorter hospital stay by 4.5 days.

Is Robotic Complete Mesocolic Excision Feasible for Transverse Colon Cancer?

Introduction: Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) for transverse colon cancer is technically challenging. Robotic technology has been developed to reduce technical limitations of laparoscopy. Yet, no data are available on the role of robotic approach for CME of transverse colon cancer. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and short-term outcomes of robotic CME in this subset of colon cancer. Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of 29 consecutive patients undergoing robotic CME for transverse colon adenocarcinoma between December 2014 and December 2017 was performed. Data on demographics, tumor characteristics, postoperative 30-day complications, and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Results: There were 21 (72%) men and 8 women with a mean age of 62.9 ± 15.6 years and a body mass index of 26.4 ± 4.8 kg/m². Of the 29 robotic CME procedures, 12 patients underwent extended right colectomy, 10 extended left colectomy, 6 subtotal colectomy, and 1 total colectomy. The mean operative time was 321.7 ± 111.3 minutes and estimated blood loss was 106.9 ± 110.9 mL (median, 50; range, 10-400 mL). The intra- and postoperative complication rates were 7% and 24%, respectively. There were no conversions. The mean time to first bowel movement was 3.5 ± 1.3 and length of hospital stay was 7.1 ± 3.0 days. All the resections were R0. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes in extended and subtotal/total colectomy procedures was 36.6 ± 13.1 and 71.0 ± 30.3, respectively. The rate of mesocolic plane surgery was 79%. There were no statistically significant differences between the mesocolic and the intramesocolic/muscularis propria plane resections with respect to clinical characteristics, operative outcomes, and pathology results (P > .05). Conclusions: Robotic CME for transverse colon cancer is feasible and can be a procedure of choice to achieve a good surgical quality.

Oncological outcome following laparoscopic versus open surgery for cancer in the transverse colon: a nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

The literature on transverse colonic cancer resection is sparse. The optimal surgical approach for this disease is thus unknown. This study aimed to examine laparoscopic versus open surgery for transverse colonic cancer.

METHODS

This study was a nationwide, retrospective cohort study of all patients registered with a transverse colonic cancer in Denmark between 2010 and 2013. Data were obtained from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, the Danish Pathology Registry, Danish National Patient Registry, and patients' records. Main outcome measures were surgical resection plane, lymph node yield, and long-term cancer recurrence and survival.

RESULTS

In total, 357 patients were included. Non-mesocolic resection was more frequent with laparoscopic compared with open resection (adjusted odds ratio 2.44, 95% CI 1.29-4.60, P = 0.006). Median number of harvested lymph nodes was higher after open compared with laparoscopic resection (22 versus 19, P = 0.03). Non-mesocolic resection (adjusted hazard ratio 2.45, 95% CI 1.25-4.79, P = 0.01) and increasing tumor stage (P < 0.001) were factors associated with recurrence. Cancer recurrence was significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 4.32, 95% CI 2.75-6.79, P < 0.001). Overall mortality was, however, not associated with the surgical approach or surgical plane.

CONCLUSIONS

Although associated with a lower rate of mesocolic resection plane and fewer lymph nodes harvested, laparoscopic surgery for transverse colonic cancers led to similar long-term results compared with open resection.

A comparison of laparoscopic and open D3 lymphadenectomy for transverse colon cancer

PURPOSE

The type of surgery or surgical approach for transverse colon cancer treatment largely depends on the tumor location or surgeon's preference. However, extensive lymphadenectomy appears to improve the long-term outcomes of locally advanced colon cancers. This study was designed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes after surgery via the laparoscopic or open approach with radical D3 lymph node dissection in patients with stage II and III transverse colon cancer.

METHODS

Patients were treated for stage II and III transverse colon cancer between May 2006 and December 2014. This retrospective study evaluated data collected prospectively at a tertiary teaching hospital. Radical D3 lymphadenectomy included the principal middle colic artery nodes.

RESULTS

The study included 144 patients among whom 118 (81.9%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. Significantly more patients in the laparoscopic group underwent extended right hemicolectomy compared with the open group (90.7 vs. 65.4%, p = 0.005). The operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (151.3 vs. 131.2 min, p = 0.021), and the open group had a greater estimated blood loss volume (160.8 vs. 289.3 ml, p = 0.011). Although the groups differed in terms of tumor size (5.8 vs 7.9 cm, p = 0.007), other pathologic outcomes did not differ. The groups did not differ regarding postoperative parameters or disease-free, overall, and cancer-specific survivals.

CONCLUSION

Despite differences in surgical methods and related factors, no long-term differences in outcomes were observed between laparoscopic and open approaches to radical D3 lymphadenectomy in patients with stage II and III transverse colon cancer.

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Colon Cancer

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons is dedicated to ensuring high-quality patient care by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus. The Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee is composed of society members who are chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery. This committee was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus. This is accompanied by developing Clinical Practice Guidelines based on the best available evidence. These guidelines are inclusive and not prescriptive. Their purpose is to provide information on which decisions can be made, rather than to dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, health care workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. It should be recognized that these guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient.

Laparoscopic versus open resection for transverse and descending colon cancer: Short-term and long-term outcomes of a multicenter retrospective study of 1830 patients

INTRODUCTION

Previous randomized controlled trials demonstrated similar oncological outcomes between laparoscopic and open colectomies, except for cases involving transverse colon and splenic flexure colon cancer. The objective of this study was to confirm the oncological safety and advantages of the short-term results of laparoscopic surgery for transverse and descending colon cancer in comparison with open surgery.

METHODS

The study data were retrospectively collected from the databases of 45 hospitals. Patients with transverse or descending colon cancer who underwent laparoscopic or open R0 resection were registered. The primary end-points were the 3-year overall survival and relapse-free survival rates according to pathological stage. The secondary end-points were the short-term results, including blood loss, operative time, diet intake, hospital stay, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Of the 1830 eligible patients, 872 underwent open colectomy and 958 underwent laparoscopic colectomy. The median follow-up period was 38.4 months. The conversion rate to open resection was 4.5%. The 3-year overall survival rate of the laparoscopic group was significantly higher than that of the open group for stage I patients (96.2% vs 99.2%; P = 0.04); it was also higher for stage II (94.0% vs 95.5%) and stage III (87.4% vs 90.2%) patients, but there were no significant differences. The 3-year relapse-free survival rate of the laparoscopic group was significantly higher than that of the open group for stage I patients; there were no differences between the open and laparoscopic groups among the stage II and III patients. In the multivariate analyses, laparoscopic resection was a significant factor in relapse-free survival. Laparoscopic patients had significantly lower blood loss and a significantly longer operative time than the open groups. Also, postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter and postoperative morbidity was significantly lower in the laparoscopic group.

CONCLUSION

Although this retrospective study has limitations, we can conclude that laparoscopic surgery for transverse and descending colon cancer is oncologically safe and yields better short-term results than open surgery.

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.

Laparoscopic Colectomy Versus Open Colectomy for Treatment of Transverse Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical management of transverse colon cancer (TCC) is still not standardized. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of laparoscopic colectomy (LC) for treatment of TCC in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes compared with open colectomy.

METHOD

A systematic literature search with no limits was performed in PubMed and Embase. The last search was performed on September 15, 2016. The short-term outcomes included intraoperative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and oncological surgical quality. The long-term outcomes included overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

Thirteen articles and one conference abstract published between 2010 and 2016 with a total of 1728 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis. LC was associated with significant less estimated blood loss, fewer total postoperative complications, and shorter time to first flatus, time to liquid diet, length of hospital stay, and length of postoperative hospital stay. However, longer operative time was needed in LC. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups concerning the intraoperative complications, mortality, ileus, anastomotic leakage, bleeding, wound infection, abdominal infection, lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, distal resection margin, OS, or DFS.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that LC is a safe and feasible technique for TCC associated with less estimated blood loss, fewer total postoperative complications, quicker recovery of intestinal function, shorter length of hospital stay, and equivalent long-term outcomes. Furthermore, a large-scaled, prospective randomized controlled study is warranted to verify those results.

Laparoscopic vs open approach for transverse colon cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of short and long term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Transverse colon malignancies have been excluded from all randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic against open colectomies, potentially due to the advanced laparoscopic skills required for dissecting around the middle colic vessels and the associated morbidity. Concerns have been expressed that the laparoscopic approach may compromise the oncological clearance in transverse colon cancer. This study aimed to comprehensively compare the laparoscopic (LPA) to the open (OPA) approach by performing a meta-analysis of long and short term outcomes.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Scopus and Web of Knowledge databases were interrogated. Selected studies were critically appraised and the short-term morbidity and long term oncological outcomes were meta-analyzed. Sensitivity analysis according to the quality of the study, type of procedure (laparoscopic vs laparoscopically assisted) and level of lymphadenectomy was performed. Statistical heterogeneity and publication bias were also investigated.

RESULTS

Eleven case control trials (1415 patients) were included in the study. There was no difference between the LPA and the OPA in overall survival [Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.83 (0.56, 1.22); P = 0.34], disease free survival (p = 0.20), local recurrence (p = 0.81) or distant metastases (p = 0.24). LPA was found to have longer operative time [Weighted mean difference (WMD) = 45.00 (29.48, 60.52); P < 0.00001] with earlier establishment of oral intake [WMD = -1.68 (-1.84, -1.53); P < 0.00001] and shorter hospital stay [WMD = -2.94 (-4.27, -1.62); P = 0.0001]. No difference was found in relation to anastomotic leakage (p = 0.39), intra-abdominal abscess (p = 0.25), lymph nodes harvested (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

LPA seems to be safe with equivalent oncological outcomes to OPA and better short term outcomes in selected patient populations. High quality Randomized control trials are required to further investigate the role of laparoscopy in transverse colon cancer.

Short-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Along with an aging society, the number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer treated with a surgical modality has gradually increased. Our purpose is to verify the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer in elderly patients.

METHODS

We compared the short-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic surgery in patients aged 80 years or older with colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2014.

RESULTS

Of 150 elderly colorectal patients, 62 patients received laparoscopic surgery, and 88 patients, open surgery. In the laparoscopic surgery group, two patients were converted to open surgery due to extensive adhesion. The amount of blood loss was smaller in patients treated with laparoscopic surgery than those with open surgery (44.0 ± 86.5 vs. 329.9 ± 482.1 ml, P < 0.01). In the laparoscopic surgery group, days until oral intake (5.3 ± 1.9 vs. 7.0 ± 3.0 days, P < 0.01) and hospital stay (17.2 ± 6.8 vs. 22.0 ± 14.0 days, P < 0.01) were shorter. Morbidity (30.6 vs. 42.0 %) and mortality (1.6 vs. 1.1 %) in laparoscopic and open surgery groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer was a safe and less invasive alternative to open surgery, with less blood loss and shorter hospital stay.

Operative Method for Transverse Colon Carcinoma: Transverse Colectomy Versus Extended Colectomy

BACKGROUND

The type of surgery performed for primary transverse colon cancer varies based on tumor characteristics and surgeon perspective. The optimal oncological outcome following different surgical options has not been clearly established, and transverse colectomy has shown oncological equivalence only in small cohort studies.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to compare long-term oncological outcomes after transverse colectomy versus extended resection for transverse colon cancer.

DESIGN

This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

SETTING

This study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital.

METHOD

All patients treated for transverse colon cancer at the Samsung Medical Center between 1995 and 2013 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Oncological outcomes were compared between 2 groups of patients: a transverse colectomy group and an extended colectomy group (which included extended right hemicolectomy and left hemicolectomy).

RESULTS

A total of 1066 patients were included, of whom 750 (70.4%) underwent extended right hemicolectomy, 127 (11.9%) underwent transverse colectomy, and 189 (17.7%) underwent left hemicolectomy. According to univariate analysis, surgical approach, histological type, tumor morphology, cancer T and N stage, cancer size, and lymphovascular invasion were significant factors contributing to disease-free survival (DFS). However, as seen in multivariate analysis, only node-positive disease (HR = 2.035 (1.188-3.484)), tumors with ulcerative morphology (HR = 3.643 (1.132-11.725)), and the presence of vascular invasion (HR = 2.569 (1.455-4.538)) were significant factors for DFS. Further analysis with a propensity-matched cohort between the transverse and extended colectomy groups demonstrated no significant differences in DFS and overall survival.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited because it was performed at a single institution and it was retrospective in nature.

CONCLUSION

In terms of perioperative and oncological outcomes, transverse colectomy and extended colectomy did not differ despite a shorter specimen length and fewer lymph nodes harvested in the transverse colectomy group. Independent prognostic factors for DFS were node-positive disease, the presence of vascular invasion, and ulcerative morphology.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for transverse colon cancer: a retrospective multicenter study

Purpose

The purpose of the present study was to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes between laparoscopic surgery and open surgery for transverse colon cancer.

Patients and methods

We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent surgery for transverse colon cancer at six Hallym University-affiliated hospitals between January 2005 and June 2015. The perioperative outcomes and oncologic outcomes were compared between laparoscopic and open surgery.

Results

Of 226 patients with transverse colon cancer, 103 underwent laparoscopic surgery and 123 underwent open surgery. There were no differences in the patient characteristics between the two groups. Regarding perioperative outcomes, the operation time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (267.3 vs 172.7 minutes, P<0.001), but the time to soft food intake (6.0 vs 6.6 days, P=0.036) and the postoperative hospital stay (13.7 vs 15.7 days, P=0.018) were shorter in the laparoscopic group. The number of harvested lymph nodes was lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (20.3 vs 24.3, P<0.001). The 5-year overall survival (90.8% vs 88.6%, P=0.540) and disease-free survival (86.1% vs 78.9%, P=0.201) rates were similar in both groups.

Conclusion

The present study showed that laparoscopic surgery is associated with several perioperative benefits and similar oncologic outcomes to open surgery for the resection of transverse colon cancer. Therefore, laparoscopic surgery offers a safe alternative to open surgery in patients with transverse colon cancer.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: Current status and implementation of the latest technological innovations

The introduction of laparoscopy is an example of surgical innovation with a rapid implementation in many areas of surgery. A large number of controlled studies and meta-analyses have shown that laparoscopic colorectal surgery is associated with the same benefits than other minimally invasive procedures, including lesser pain, earlier recovery of bowel transit and shorter hospital stay. On the other hand, despite initial concerns about oncological safety, well-designed prospective randomized multicentre trials have demonstrated that oncological outcomes of laparoscopy and open surgery are similar. Although the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery has increased in recent years, the percentages of patients treated with surgery using minimally invasive techniques are still reduced and there are also substantial differences among centres. It has been argued that the limiting factor for the use of laparoscopic procedures is the number of surgeons with adequate skills to perform a laparoscopic colectomy rather than the tumour of patients’ characteristics. In this regard, future efforts to increase the use of laparoscopic techniques in colorectal surgery will necessarily require more efforts in teaching surgeons. We here present a review of recent controversies of the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery, such as in rectal cancer operations, the possibility of reproducing complete mesocolon excision, and the benefits of intra-corporeal anastomosis after right hemicolectomy. We also describe the results of latest innovations such as single incision laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for colon and rectal diseases.

Laparoscopic Surgery for Transverse Colon Cancer: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in Comparison with Conventional Open Surgery

BACKGROUND

Published studies on laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer are scarce. More studies are necessary to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

From April 1996 to December 2010, 102 consecutive patients with stage II or III disease who had undergone curative resection for transverse colon cancer were enrolled. Seventy-nine patients underwent laparoscopy-assisted colectomy (LAC), whereas 23 patients underwent conventional open colectomy (OC). Short- and long-term outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The OC group had a larger tumor size (7.6 ± 3.4 cm versus 5.2 ± 2.3 cm, P = .004) and more retrieved lymph nodes (26.4 ± 11.6 versus 17.5 ± 9.4, P = .002), without differences in resection margins. In the LAC group, return to diet was faster (4.5 ± 1.2 days versus 5.4 ± 1.8 days, P = .013), and postoperative hospital stay was shorter (12.1 ± 4.2 days versus 15.9 ± 4.8 days, P = .000). There were no differences in occurrence of intra- or postoperative complications. There were no statistically significant differences in overall survival rate (OS) or disease-free survival rate (DFS) between the two groups (5-year OS, 90.4% versus 90.5%, P = .670; 5-year DFS, 84.2% versus 90.7%, P = .463).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer has better short-term outcomes compared with open surgery, with acceptable long-term outcomes. As in colorectal cancer of other sites, laparoscopic surgery can be a feasible alternative to conventional surgery for transverse colon cancer.

Outcome of Laparoscopic Versus Open Resection for Transverse Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection for transverse colon cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study is to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer.

METHODS

A total of 278 patients with transverse colon cancer from a single institution were included. All patients underwent curative surgery, 156 patients underwent laparoscopic resection (LR), and 122 patients underwent open resection (OR). The short- and long-term results were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between two groups. Conversions were required in eight (5.1 %) patients. LR group was associated with significantly longer median operating time (180 vs. 140 min; P < 0.001). Median estimated blood loss was significantly less in LR group (90 vs. 100 ml; P = 0.001). Time to first flatus and oral intake was significantly earlier in LR group. Perioperative mortality and morbidity rate were not significantly different between two groups. Tumor size, number of lymph nodes harvested, length of proximal, and distal resection margin were comparable between two groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in LR group (9 vs. 10d; P < 0.001). Five-year disease-free survival and overall survival rate were similar between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic resection for transverse colon cancer is associated with better short-term outcomes and equivalent long-term oncologic outcomes.

Factors associated with conversion from laparoscopic to open colectomy using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database

AIM

Conversion rates from laparoscopic to open colectomy and associated factors are traditionally reported in clinical trials or reviews of outcomes from experienced institutions. Indications and selection criteria for laparoscopic colectomy may be more narrowly defined in these circumstances. With the increased adoption of laparoscopy, conversion rates using national data need to be closely examined. The purpose of this study was to use data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) to identify factors associated with conversion of laparoscopic to open colectomy at a national scale in the United States.

METHOD

The ACS-NSQIP Participant Use Data Files for 2006-2011 were used to identify patients who had undergone laparoscopic colectomy. Converted cases were identified using open colectomy as the primary procedure and laparoscopic colectomy as 'other procedure'. Preoperative variables were identified and statistics were calculated using sas version 9.3. Logistic regression was used to model the multivariate relationship between patient variables and conversion status.

RESULTS

Laparoscopy was successfully performed in 41 585 patients, of whom 2508 (5.8%) required conversion to an open procedure. On univariate analysis the following factors were significant: age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, presence of diabetes, smoking, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ascites, stroke, weight loss and chemotherapy (P < 0.05). The following factors remained significant on multivariate analysis: age, BMI, ASA class, smoking, ascites and weight loss.

CONCLUSION

Multiple significant factors for conversion from laparoscopic to open colectomy were identified. A novel finding was the increased risk of conversion for underweight patients. As laparoscopic colectomy is become increasingly utilized, factors predictive of conversion to open procedures should be sought via large national cohorts.

Laparoscopic versus open resection for transverse colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Previous large randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic (LR) and open resection (OR) for colon cancer have not specifically analyzed the outcomes in patients with transverse colon cancer. The aims of this study were to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LR transverse colon cancer resection and to compare our findings with the results available in the literature.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients undergoing LR or OR for histologically proven adenocarcinoma of the transverse colon.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients were included in this study: 66 LR and 57 OR. Median operating time was similar in the two groups. Median blood loss was higher in the OR group, even though the difference was not statistically significant. The rate of conversion from LR to OR was 16.7 %. Return of bowel function occurred significantly earlier in the LR group. The incidence and severity of 30-day postoperative complications and mortality rates were similar in the two groups. The median hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LR group. There was a trend toward a greater number of lymph nodes harvested in the OR group than in the LR group, although the difference was not statistically significant. The time to first flatus and bowel movement was significantly earlier in the LR group. Five-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were similar in the LR and OR groups (86.4 vs. 88.6 %, p = 0.770 and 80.4 vs. 77.3 %, p = 0.516, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

LR of transverse colon cancer is feasible and safe, with similar early short-term outcomes when compared to OR. Larger prospective comparative studies with long-term follow-up are needed to assess the oncological equivalence of the two approaches.

A systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the role of laparoscopic surgical resection of transverse colon tumours

OBJECTIVES

A meta-analysis of published literature comparing outcomes after laparoscopic resection (LR) with open resection (OR) for transverse colon tumours.

METHODS

Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE and Cochrane were searched from inception to October 2013. The text words "minimally invasive", "keyhole surgery" and "transverse colon" were used in combination with the medical subject headings "laparoscopy" and "colon cancer". Outcome variables were chosen based upon whether the included articles reported results. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain a summative outcome.

RESULTS

Six comparatives involving 444 patients were analysed. Of them 245 patients were in the LR group and 199 in the OR group. There was a significant increase in operative time in the LR group compared with the OR group [random effects model: SMD = -0.65, 95% CI (-1.01, -0.30), z = -3.60, p < 0.001] but there was significant heterogeneity amongst trials (Q = 15.51, df = 5, p = 0.008, I(2) = 68). There was less blood loss in the LR group [fixed effects model: SMD = 0.70, 95% CI (0.47, 0.93), z = 6.01, p < 0.001] and patients returned to oral diet earlier [random effects model: SMD = 0.78, 95% CI (0.40, 1.16), z = 4.01, p < 0.001] and had a reduced time to functioning bowel [fixed effects model: SMD = 0.86, 95% CI (0.60, 1.11), z = 6.63, p < 0.001]. No difference was seen for overall morbidity (p = 0.76) or mortality (p = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

LR of transverse colon tumours is a safe and effective technique. Although there is an increase in operating time, operative and clinical outcomes of intraoperative blood loss and faster recovery are seen with laparoscopic procedures.

Evidence based medicine and surgical approaches for colon cancer: Evidences, benefits and limitations of the laparoscopic vs open resection

AIM: To report a meta-analysis of the studies that compared the laparoscopic with the open approach for colon cancer resection.

METHODS: Forty-seven manuscripts were reviewed, 33 of which employed for meta-analysis according to the PRISMA guidelines. The results were differentiated according to the study design (prospective randomized trials vs case-control series) and according to the tumor’s location. Outcome measures included: (1) short-term results (operating times, blood losses, bowel function recovery, post-operative pain, return to the oral intake, complications and hospital stay); (2) oncological adequateness (number of nodes harvested in the surgical specimens); and (3) long-term results (including the survivals’ rates and incidence of incisional hernias) and (4) costs.

RESULTS: Meta-analysis of trials provided evidences in support of the laparoscopic procedures for a several short-term outcomes including: a lower blood loss, an earlier recovery of the bowel function, an earlier return to the oral intake, a shorter hospital stay and a lower morbidity rate. Opposite the operating time has been confirmed shorter in open surgery. The same trend has been reported investigating case-control series and cancer by sites, even though there are some concerns regarding the power of the studies in this latter field due to the small number of trials and the small sample of patients enrolled. The two approaches were comparable regarding the mean number of nodes harvested and long-term results, even though these variables were documented reviewing the literature but were not computable for meta-analysis. The analysis of the costs documented lower costs for the open surgery, however just few studies investigated the incidence of post-operative hernias.

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy is superior for the majority of short-term results. Future studies should better differentiate these approaches on the basis of tumors’ location and the post-operative hernias.

Comparative study of oncologic outcomes for laparoscopic vs. open surgery in transverse colon cancer

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic resection for transverse colon cancer is a technically challenging procedure that has been excluded from various large randomized controlled trials of which the long-term outcomes still need to be verified. The purpose of this study was to evaluate long-term oncologic outcomes for transverse colon cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (LAC) or open colectomy (OC).

METHODS

This retrospective review included patients with transverse colon cancer who received a colectomy between January 2006 and December 2010. Short-term and five-year oncologic outcomes were compared between these groups.

RESULTS

A total of 131 patients were analyzed in the final study (LAC, 84 patients; OC, 47 patients). There were no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index, tumor location, operative procedure, or blood loss between groups, but the mean operative time in LAC was significantly longer (LAC, 246.8 minutes vs. OC, 213.8 minutes; P = 0.03). Hospital stay was much shorter for LAC than OC (9.1 days vs. 14.5 days, P < 0.01). Postoperative complication rates were not statistically different between the two groups. In terms of long-term oncologic data, the 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival were not statistically different between both groups, and subgroup analysis according to cancer stage also revealed no differences.

CONCLUSION

LAC for transverse colon cancer is feasible and safe with comparable short- and long-term outcomes.

Laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer in an automated peritoneal dialysis patient: A case report

INTRODUCTION

To date, intra-abdominal surgery in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD) has been considered to be associated with increased risk even when it is performed laparoscopically. To our knowledge, this is the first case of laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer in a patient undergoing automated PD (APD).

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 67-year-old man undergoing APD for end-stage chronic renal failure secondary to diabetic nephropathy was diagnosed with transverse colon cancer. Laparoscopic tumor resection without removal of the PD catheter was performed uneventfully. After surgery, PD was interrupted for 4 weeks and then safely resumed after confirming no severe complications of anastomotic leakage or intra-abdominal abscess.

DISCUSSION

In patients undergoing PD, the safety of laparoscopic surgery without removal of the catheter and the optimal timing of resuming postoperative PD with or without temporary hemodialysis remain controversial.

CONCLUSION

We believe that laparoscopic colectomy can be safely performed in patients undergoing PD. Further case reports and investigations on this procedure with special reference to safety are warranted in future.