Can the quality of colonic surgery be improved by standardization of surgical technique with complete mesocolic excision?

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.

Usefulness of participation of endoscopic surgical skill qualification system-qualified surgeons in laparoscopic high anterior resection

INTRODUCTION

A technical qualification system was established by the Japanese Society of Endoscopic Surgery in 2004, and its effectiveness in low anterior resection (LAR) has been reported. We herein performed a subgroup analysis of the effectiveness of the participation of technically qualified surgeons in laparoscopy-assisted high anterior resection (HAR), a procedure used for the technical qualification of surgeons.

METHODS

The EnSSURE study enrolled 3188 patients who underwent laparoscopic rectal resection for rectal cancer between January 2014 and December 2016 at 56 Japanese hospitals. The outcomes of HAR were compared between groups with and without the participation of technically qualified surgeons. The background of the two groups were equalized by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

In the group with the participation of qualified surgeons, the operative time was significantly shorter (p = .0427), more lymph nodes were dissected (p = .0207), and the conversion rate to open surgery was lower (p = .0016); however, no significant difference was observed in blood loss (p = .0616), the R0 resection rate (p = 1.00), intraoperative complication rate (p = .160), postoperative complication rate (p = 1.00), or reoperation rate (p = .6999) between the two groups. Furthermore, no significant difference was noted in long-term outcomes (recurrence-free survival (p = .275) or overall survival (p = .941)).

CONCLUSIONS

In HAR, the technical benefits of the participation of qualified surgeons was limited to a shorter operative time and lower conversion rate. Nevertheless, the qualification is unique in that it predicts the usefulness of reducing complications in more technically challenging procedures when its effectiveness in LAR is considered.

Comparison between laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision and D2 radical operation in colon carcinoma resection: A propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Surgery remains the most effective treatment for colon cancer. However, there are still controversies regarding the tumor treatment effect, prognosis, and perioperative impact of complete mesocolic excision (CME) surgery in colon carcinoma resection.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (LCME) and traditional open D2 radical surgery in colon carcinoma resection through a retrospective analysis using 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

98 cases undergoing LCME or open D2 colon carcinoma resection at our hospital from January 2014 to November 2021 were retrospectively collected. After excluding cases and 1:1 matching using PSM based on baseline clinical data, 86 patients were assigned in research queue. 43 patients were in each group. Two groups were compared for general clinical baseline indicators. Surgical results and postoperative adverse events of patients were also compared. Disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate was analyzed.

RESULTS

After 1:1 PSM matching, there was no statistically significant differences in baseline data between the LCME group and D2 group (P> 0.05). LCME was characterized by longer total duration of surgery (P< 0.001), less intraoperative bleeding volume (P< 0.001), more postoperative drainage fluid volume (P< 0.001), greater number of lymph nodes retrieved (P= 0.014). No statistically differences was observed regarding intraoperative blood transfusion, hospital stay, Clavien-Dindo complicating disease classification (all P> 0.05), 1 and 3-year DFS rate (P= 0.84) and OS rate (P⩾ 0.1).

CONCLUSION

LCME had a longer duration of surgery but less intraoperative bleeding volume and more postoperative drainage fluid volume and retrieved lymph nodes compared to D2 radical surgery. LCME surgery is comparable to D2 surgery in terms of postoperative prognosis, but LCME surgery shows a positive trend in the overall survival curve.

Robotic splenic flexure cancer resection: technique and short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Surgical approach for splenic flexure cancer is demanding due to the complex regional anatomy and the variety of vascular and lymphatic reticula. Minimally invasive approach is recommended to reduce morbidity and postoperative stay, however, laparoscopic SFC resection may results challenging due to vascular and lymphatic dissection. Robotic assistance may help in performing such a procedure thanks to its enhanced dexterity, increased range of motion, enhanced precision and visualization.

METHODS

From a database of 287 colorectal procedures, data of twelve consecutive patients who underwent elective splenic flexure resection for SFC with curative intent from 2018 to 2024 at our institution were included in this retrospective cohort study. Parameters considered for statistical analysis were operative time, time to bowel canalization, length of postoperative stay, and 30-day postoperative complications. Kaplan-Meier method was used for univariate survival analysis.

RESULTS

All patients underwent robotic left splenic flexure resections for cancer using the da Vinci Si surgical system in the first 9 and the Vinci Xi surgical system in the last 3 procedures. Median operative time was 267 minutes. Median operative time in the three procedures carried out by Xi system was 200 minutes. All procedures were R0. One postoperative complication occurred. Three conversions were needed, one for pulmonary failure and two for technical difficulties in severe locally advanced tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic splenic flexure resection for SFC seems to be safe and feasible, Xi system is promising in reducing time and ameliorate a fast postoperative recovery. Further studies are needed to confirm the role of robotic in splenic flexure resection for SFC.

Proposal for standardization of laparoscopic D3 lymphadenectomy for right colon cancer

BACKGROUND

This study presents a laparoscopic surgical protocol for right hemicolectomy and D3 lymphadenectomy (R-D3L) in right colon cancer and reports the oncological outcomes based on a prospective series.

METHODS

The study comprises two phases. In the first phase, a dynamic demonstration of the R-D3L surgical protocol is provided through textual explanation, illustrations, and edited surgical videos. The protocol emphasizes technical steps such as dissection of the embryological plane of the right mesocolon, high tie of ileocolic vessels, surgical trunk of Gillot dissection, and high tie of superior right colic vein (SRCV). In the second phase, a prospective observational study was conducted involving patients undergoing R-D3L surgery with this protocol between July 2015 and July 2021. Demographic, perioperative, and postoperative variables are analyzed, along with anatomopathological variables and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients were analyzed. Median operative time was 202 min. Perioperative bleeding occurred in 6%. Postoperative complications were mild (Clavien-Dindo III in 2%). Postoperative ileus was observed in 15%. No anastomotic dehiscence was reported. The median postoperative stay was 7 days. The median number of resected lymph nodes was 26, with 27% having positive nodes and 70% were classified as stage T3 or T4. After a median follow-up of 45 months, local recurrence, distant recurrence, and carcinomatosis rates were 0%. Mortality rate from other causes was 9%.

CONCLUSION

The surgical protocol shown in the present study could help in the implementation of this technique in those units that consider it appropriate.

[D2 and D3 lymph node dissection for colon cancer]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate surgical and oncological results of standard and extended lymph node dissection (D2 and D3) in patients with colon cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We analyzed treatment outcomes in 74 patients with colon cancer stage T1-4aN0-2M0 who underwent right- and left-sided hemicolectomy, resection of sigmoid colon with standard and extended lymph node dissection (D2 and D3).

RESULTS

Surgical approach and level of D3 lymph node dissection did not increase intra- and postoperative morbidity. Laparoscopic interventions were followed by significantly lower intraoperative blood loss and earlier gas discharge. Metastatic lesion of apical lymph nodes was observed in 5 out of 36 patients who underwent D3 lymph node dissection (13.8%), and metastases in regional lymph nodes rN1-2 were found in all these patients. Overall 5-year survival was 86%. Disease-free and overall 5-year survival were similar after D2 and D3 lymph node dissection.

CONCLUSION

D3 lymph node dissection is safe for colon cancer. Metastatic lesions of apical lymph nodes during D3 lymph node dissection were detected only in patients with lesions of regional lymph nodes (rN1-2). Disease-free and overall 5-year survival were similar after D2 and D3 lymph node dissection.

Monotropein Induced Apoptosis and Suppressed Cell Cycle Progression in Colorectal Cancer Cells

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether monotropein has an anticancer effect and explore its potential mechanisms against colorectal cancer (CRC) through network pharmacology and molecular docking combined with experimental verification.

METHODS

Network pharmacology and molecular docking were used to predict potential targets of monotropein against CRC. Cell counting kit assay, plate monoclonal assay and microscopic observation were used to investigate the antiproliferative effects of monotropein on CRC cells HCT116, HT29 and LoVo. Flow cytometry and scratch assay were used to analyze apoptosis and cell cycle, as well as cell migration, respectively in HCT116, HT29, and LoVo cells. Western blotting was used to detect the expression of proteins related to apoptosis, cell cycle, and cell migration, and the expression of proteins key to the Akt pathway.

RESULTS

The Gene Ontology and Reactome enrichment analyses indicated that the anticancer potential of monotropein against CRC might be involved in multiple cancer-related signaling pathways. Among these pathways, RAC-beta serine/threonine-protein kinase (Akt1, Akt2), cyclin-dependent kinase 6 (CDK6), matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP9), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), cell division control protein 42 homolog (CDC42) were shown as the potential anticancer targets of monotropein against CRC. Molecular docking suggested that monotropein may interact with the 6 targets (Akt1, Akt2, CDK6, MMP9, EGFR, CDC42). Subsequently, cell activity of HCT116, HT29 and LoVo cell lines were significantly suppressed by monotropein (P<0.05). Furthermore, our research revealed that monotropein induced cell apoptosis by inhibiting Bcl-2 and increasing Bax, induced G1-S cycle arrest in colorectal cancer by decreasing the expressions of CyclinD1, CDK4 and CDK6, inhibited cell migration by suppressing the expressions of CDC42 and MMP9 (P<0.05), and might play an anticancer role through Akt signaling pathway.

CONCLUSION

Monotropein exerts its antitumor effects primarily by arresting the cell cycle, causing cell apoptosis, and inhibiting cell migration. This indicates a high potential for developing novel medication for treating CRC.

Application of a three-dimensional printed pelvic model in laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer

Introduction

To investigate the application value of a three-dimensional (3D) printed pelvic model in laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer.

Methods

Clinical data of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery in The Second People's Hospital of Lianyungang City from May 2020 to April 2022 were selected. Patients were randomly divided into general imaging examination group (control group, n=25) and 3D printing group (observation group, n=25) by random number table method, and the perioperative situation of patients in the two groups was compared.

Results

There was no significant difference in general data between the two groups (p>0.05). Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative time to locate inferior mesenteric artery, intraoperative time to locate left colic artery, first postoperative exhaust time and length of hospital stay in the observation group were all lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05); There were no significant differences in the total number of lymph nodes and complications between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Discussion

The application of 3D printed pelvic model in laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer is conducive to understanding pelvic structure and mesenteric vascular anatomy, reducing intraoperative bleeding and shortening operation time, which is worthy of further clinical application.

Efficacy and Feasibility of Complete Mesocolic Excision with Central Vascular Ligation in Complicated Colorectal Cancer

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL) involves sharp dissection through the embryological planes. However, it may be associated with high mortalities and morbidities especially in colorectal emergencies. This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of CME with CVL in complicated colorectal cancers (CRCs). This was a retrospective study of emergency CRC resection in a tertiary center between March 2016 and November 2018. A total of 46 patients, with a mean age of 51 years, underwent an emergency colectomy for cancer (males, 26 [56.5%]; females, 20 [43.5%]). CME with CVL was performed for all patients. The mean operative time and blood loss were 188 min and 397 mL, respectively. Only five (10.8%) patients presented with burst abdomen, whereas only three (6.5%) presented with anastomotic leakage. The mean length of vascular tie was 8.7 cm, and the mean number of harvested lymph nodes (LNs) was 21.2. Emergency CME with CVL is a safe and feasible technique when performed by a colorectal surgeon and will result in obtaining a superior specimen with a large number of LNs.

Impact of a digital surgical workflow including Digital Device Briefing Tool on morbidity and mortality in a patient population undergoing primary stapled colorectal anastomosis for benign or malignant colorectal disease: protocol for a multicentre prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

With growing emphasis on surgical safety, it appears fundamental to assess the safety of colorectal resection involving primary stapled anastomosis. Surgical stapling devices can considerably foster patient safety in colorectal surgery, but their misuse or malfunction encompass a unique risk of postoperative complications. The Digital Device Briefing Tool (DDBT) is a digital cognitive aid developed to enhance safe use of the Ethicon circular stapling device during colorectal resection. The purpose of this study is to evaluate how a digital operative workflow, including DDBT, compared with routine surgical care, affects morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing left-sided colorectal resection with primary stapled colorectal anastomosis for colorectal cancer or benign disease.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A multicentre, prospective cohort study will be conducted at five certified academic colorectal centres in Germany. It compares a non-digital with a Johnson & Johnson digital solution (Surgical Process Institute Deutschland (SPI))-guided operative workflow in patients undergoing left hemicolectomy, sigmoidectomy, anterior rectal resection and Hartmann reversal procedure. The sample size is set at 528 cases in total, divided into 3 groups (a non-digital and two SPI-guided workflow cohorts, with and without DDBT) in a ratio of 1:1:1, with 176 patients each. The primary endpoint is a composite outcome comprising the overall rate of surgical complications, including death, during hospitalisation and within the first 30 days after colorectal resection. Secondary endpoints include operating time, length of hospital stay and 30-day hospital readmission rate.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study will be performed in line with the Declaration of Helsinki. The ethics committee of the Charité-University Medicine Berlin, Germany, approved the study (No: 22-0277-EA2/060/22). Study Investigators will obtain written informed consent from each patient before a patient may participate in this study. The study results will be submitted to an international peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00029682.

Feasibility of two laparoscopic surgeries for colon cancer performed by the same surgeon on a single day

BACKGROUND

Although the proportion of laparoscopic colectomies (LCs) for colon cancer is increasing, the feasibility of the same surgeon performing two LCs on a single day remains unknown. This study was conducted to clarify the feasibility of this practice by evaluating short-term and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis enrolled patients with pathological stage I-III colon cancer who underwent LC at the Shizuoka Cancer Center between 2010 and 2020. Patients were divided into two groups based on the timing of the surgery for the surgeon. The first group (n = 1485) comprised patients who underwent LC as the first surgery of the day for the surgeon. The second group (n = 163) comprised patients who underwent LC as the second LC of the day for the surgeon. Propensity score matching was performed to balance the baseline characteristics of the first and second groups. The short-term and long-term outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, there were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo classification grade II or higher between the first (10.4%, 17/163) and second groups (5.5%, 9/163). There were no significant differences in other perioperative outcomes, including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and incidence of conversion to open surgery, between the two groups. Regarding long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in overall survival or relapse-free survival between the two groups both in the full cohort and in the propensity score-matched cohort. In the propensity score-matched cohort, 5-year overall survival was 92.7% in the first group and 94.4% in the second group; 5-year relapse-free survival was 87.1% and 90.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that the same surgeon performing two LCs for colon cancer on a single day is feasible in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes.

Mid-term oncological outcomes after complete versus conventional mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

The correct extent of mesocolic dissection for right-sided colon cancer (RCC) is still under debate. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has not gained wide diffusion, mainly due to its technical complexity and unclear oncological superiority. This study aims to evaluate oncological outcomes of CME compared with non-complete mesocolic excision (NCME) during resection for I-III stage RCC.

METHOD

Prospectively collected data of patients who underwent surgery between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively analysed. 1:1 Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics of CME and NCME patients. The primary endpoint of the study was local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). The two groups were also compared in terms of short-term outcomes, distant recurrence-free survival, disease-free survival, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 444 patients included in the study, 292 were correctly matched after PSM, 146 in each group. The median follow-up was 45 months (IQR 33-63). Conversion rate, complications, and 90-day mortality were comparable in both groups. The median number of lymph nodes harvested was higher in CME patients (23 vs 19, p = 0.034). 3-year LRFS rates for CME patients was 100% and 95.6% for NCME (log-rank p = 0.028). At 3 years, there were no differences between the groups in terms of overall survival, distant recurrence-free survival, and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Our PSM cohort study shows that CME is safe, provides a higher number of lymph nodes harvested, and is associated with better local recurrence-free survival.

Qualitative umbrella review of systematic reviews on complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) of colon cancer with extended lymphadenectomy was suggested to improve radical resection of colon cancer. This comprehensive review aimed to assess the current literature for the outcomes of CME of colon cancer through an appraisal of the findings of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

METHODS

A systematic literature review searching for the studies that assessed the outcome of CME of colon cancer was conducted. Electronic databases were queried from 2009 through November 2020. The main objectives of this review were to illustrate the technical aspects and outcome of CME and to summarize the findings of the published systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Thirteen systematic reviews were retrieved. All reviews found CME to provide longer bowel, larger area of mesentery resected, and more lymph nodes (LNs) retrieved than standard colectomy. All systematic reviews except two found similar complication rates between CME and standard colectomy. Four systematic reviews documented the survival benefit of CME in regards to improved overall and disease-free survival. Using the laparoscopic approach for CME did not compromise the oncologic outcomes of the procedures, yet was associated with less intraoperative blood loss, faster recovery, and potential survival benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

CME is associated with better specimen quality, more LNs clearance, and potential survival benefits compared to standard colectomy. However, the lack of robust data from well-designed multicenter randomized trials may prevent drawing firm conclusions on the oncologic benefits of CME. Further high-quality studies are needed before recommending CME as the standard of care for colon cancer.

Consensus statements on complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer-technical steps and training implications

Background

CME is a radical resection for colon cancer, but the procedure is technically demanding with significant variation in its practice. A standardised approach to the optimal technique and training is, therefore, desirable to minimise technical hazards and facilitate safe dissemination. The aim is to develop an expert consensus on the optimal technique for Complete Mesocolic Excision (CME) for right-sided and transverse colon cancer to guide safe implementation and training pathways.

Methods

Guidance was developed following a modified Delphi process to draw consensus from 55 international experts in CME and surgical education representing 18 countries. Domain topics were formulated and subdivided into questions pertinent to different aspects of CME practice. A three-round Delphi voting on 25 statements based on the specific questions and 70% agreement was considered as consensus.

Results

Twenty-three recommendations for CME procedure were agreed on, describing the technique and optimal training pathway. CME is recommended as the standard of care resection for locally advanced colon cancer. The essential components are central vascular ligation, exposure of the superior mesenteric vein and excision of an intact mesocolon. Key anatomical landmarks to perform a safe CME dissection include identification of the ileocolic pedicle, superior mesenteric vein and root of the mesocolon. A proficiency-based multimodal training curriculum for CME was proposed including a formal proctorship programme.

Conclusions

Consensus on standardisation of technique and training framework for complete mesocolic excision was agreed upon by a panel of experts to guide current practice and provide a quality control framework for future studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08395-0.

Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision Without Routine Gastro-Pancreatico-Colic Trunk Dissection: Survival Outcomes and Morbidity for 567 Cases

Purpose: It is unclear whether the principles of open complete mesocolic excision (CME) can be safely applied to laparoscopic surgery. Furthermore, definitions vary over how radical optimal CME surgery should be. We report morbidity and oncological outcomes for laparoscopic CME without routine gastro-pancreatico-colic trunk (GPCT) dissection. Materials and Methods: An observational study with consecutive data for patients with Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) stage I-III colon adenocarcinoma who underwent elective laparoscopic resection between 2006 and 2015. Data were retrieved for demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, and histology from prospectively maintained databases. Standardized, routinely video recorded, laparoscopic resections were performed in two United Kingdom centers from The National Training Programme for Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery. Overall survival and disease-free survival (DFS) were reported using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression. Results: Laparoscopic CME was performed in 567 patients, 52.7% (288/546) women, median (interquartile range [IQR]) age 73 (65-80) years. Median (IQR) length of stay was 4 (3-5) days with 4.0 (2.2-5.7)-year follow-up. Significant DFS predictors (hazard ratio [HR]) by multivariable Cox regression were age >80 years (1.9), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) 3 and 4 (HR = 1.1), right colon cancer (1.7), UICC stage III (3.4), and intramesocolic grade (2.2). Overall 4-year DFS (95% confidence interval) was 81.3% (77-85). Four-year DFS by UICC grades I, II, and III was 94.6% (89-99), 83.4% (77-88), and 72.2% (66-78), respectively (log-rank P = .001). Morbidity by Clavien-Dindo grade was III 18 (3.2%), IV 4 (0.7%) and V 7 (1.2%). Conclusion: This large series suggests standardized laparoscopic CME without routine GPCT dissection has a low morbidity and achieves equivalent outcomes to the most radical open CME techniques.

Nonmicroradical Resection Margin as a Predictor of Recurrence in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer Undergoing Complete Mesocolic Excision: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The prognostic value of the present definition of microradicality in colon cancer is poorly understood, especially considering the vast influence it has in rectal cancer prognosis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate whether the risk of recurrence after complete mesocolic excision for stage III colon cancer is associated with the distance from tumor tissue to resection margin and whether the location of the involved margin is of any significance.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort of patients was stratified into 2 groups to distinguish between direct margin invasion (0-mm resection margin) and a ≤1-mm resection margin without direct invasion or 3 groups to distinguish between the location of margin involvement (lateral tumor resection margin, central vascular ligation margin, and nonperitonealized mesocolic resection margin). Patients with microradical resections were used as a control group.

SETTINGS

We included all patients undergoing elective complete mesocolic excision for International Union Against Cancer stage III colon cancer at Nordsjællands Hospital between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2016.

PATIENTS

A total of 276 patients met all inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was risk of recurrence after 3.2 years.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients (15%) had a nonmicroradical resection. The 3.2-year cumulative incidence of recurrence for a 0-mm margin was 43% and 24% for a ≤1-mm margin without direct invasion, corresponding with an HR of 4.3 (p = 0.0146) and 1.3 (p = 0.474). The location of the involved margin showed no significant differences.

LIMITATIONS

This was a single-center study containing a limited number of patients with a nonmicroradical resection with a risk of type II error.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no increased risk of recurrence for a ≤1-mm margin without direct invasion, indicating that the present classification of microradicality might not be justified if an intact posterior mesocolic fascia without invasion of tumor tissue is present. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B625.

MARGEN DE RESECCIN NO MICRORRADICAL COMO PREDICTOR DE RECURRENCIA EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE COLON EN ESTADIO III SOMETIDOS A ESCISIN MESOCLICA COMPLETA UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE PROSPECTIVO

ANTECEDENTES:El valor pronóstico de la definición actual de microrradicalidad en el cáncer de colon es poco conocido, especialmente considerando la gran influencia que tiene en el pronóstico del cáncer de recto.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo investigar si el riesgo de recurrencia después de la escisión mesocólica completa (CME) para el cáncer de colon en estadio III está asociado con la distancia desde el tejido tumoral hasta el margen de resección y si la localización del margen afectado tiene alguna importancia.DISEÑO:Una cohorte prospectiva de pacientes se estratificó en dos grupos para distinguir entre la invasión del margen directo (margen de resección de 0 mm) y un margen de resección ≤1 mm sin invasión directa, o tres grupos para distinguir entre la localización de la afectación del margen (resección lateral del margen del tumor, margen de ligadura vascular central y margen de resección mesocólica no peritonizada). Los pacientes con resecciones microrradicales se utilizaron como grupo control.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Incluimos a todos los pacientes sometidos a CME electiva por cáncer de colon en estadio III de la UICC en el Hospital Nordsjællands, Dinamarca, entre el 1 de enero de 2008 y el 31 de diciembre de 2016.PACIENTES:Un total de 276 pacientes cumplieron todos los criterios de inclusión y ninguno de los criterios de exclusión.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue el riesgo de recurrencia después de 3 · 2 años.RESULTADOS:Un total de 41 (15%) pacientes tuvieron una resección no microrradical. La incidencia acumulada de recurrencia a los 3,2 años para un margen de 0 mm fue del 43% y del 24% para un margen ≤1 mm sin invasión directa, lo que corresponde a un cociente de riesgo de 4,3 (p = 0,0146) y 1,3 (p = 0,474) respectivamente. La localización del margen afectado no mostró diferencias significativas.LIMITACIONES:Estudio unicéntrico con un número limitado de pacientes con resección no microrradical con riesgo de error tipo II.CONCLUSIONES:No encontramos un mayor riesgo de recurrencia para un margen ≤1 mm sin invasión directa, lo que indica que la clasificación actual de microrradicalidad podría no estar justificada si está presente una fascia mesocólica posterior intacta sin invasión del tejido tumoral. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B625. (Traducción-Dr Yazmin Berrones-Medina).

Initial Retrocolic Endoscopic Tunnel Approach As an Ergonomic and Oncologically Apt Laparoscopic Technique for Resection of Malignant Right Colonic Lesions: An Experience from a University Hospital

Introduction: Radical minimal access cancer surgery has demonstrated similar outcomes as open surgery of late, but with less morbidity, improving the quality of life especially in patients with colorectal cancer. Initial retrocolic endoscopic tunnel approach (IRETA) has been described in the literature by Palanivelu et al. as a laparoscopic technique for radical resection of malignant right colonic lesions (MRCL) following the modified concept of medial to lateral dissection. In this work, the authors present their experience of this ergonomic surgical technique. Materials and Methods: To begin with, retrocolic dissection was carried out to free and dissect the ascending colon up to hepatic flexure with the reflection of the peritoneum over the right colon along the white line of Toldt with abdominal wall kept intact initially to sustain intracorporeal specimen steadiness. Subsequently, the specimen is lifted medially in a distinct lymphovascular sheath, leading to high ligation of ileocolic, right colic, and the right branch of the middle colic vein with a consequent definite en bloc thorough removal of the lesion. The specimen was delivered through a transumbilical incision. Results: Ten patients (age 45.4 ± 5.6 years) underwent resection by the IRETA technique with a mean operating time of 185 ± 30 minutes and blood loss of 90 ± 20 mL. Mean hospital stay was 6 days. R0 surgical resection was achieved in all patients with proper marginal clearance. Ninety percent had adequate lymph nodal resection. One patient had an intraoperative complication and n = 3 patients developed postoperative ileus. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given and there is no recurrence on 28 months of average follow-up. Conclusion: With the increasing use of laparoscopic surgery for the management of colorectal cancers, the IRETA technique appears to be an ergonomic and oncologically robust procedure for the removal of MRCL. The presented data set needs to be increased with at least 5 years of follow-up to establish long-term surgical outcomes.

Survival outcomes for right-versus left-sided colon cancer and rectal cancer in England: A propensity-score matched population-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate 5-year overall survival (OS) in patients operated on for potentially curable right versus left-sided colon cancer and rectal cancer in England.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective propensity-score matched population-based cohort study was performed using data from English Hospital Episode Statistics, Office for National Statistics and National Bowel Cancer Audit dataset. Patients ≥18 who underwent elective resection for right-colon, left-colon, or rectal cancer between 2000 and 2015 were included. Patients were matched using propensity scores with the dependant variable being site of primary tumour (right-colon, left-colon, or rectum) and independent variables age, Charlson comorbidity index, operation year and Duke's stage. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 167,606 patients were included. Following propensity-score matching 26,662 patients remained in each group (right-colon, left-colon, and rectum). 5-year OS was significantly worse for patients with Duke's A-C right-sided primaries compared to left-sided and rectal cancers in the unmatched (58.8% vs 66.7% vs 70.0% p=<0.001) and matched cohorts (62.6%, 66.8%, 65.8% p=<0.001). Superior OS for patients with left-sided colon cancer was demonstrated across all stages (Duke's A HR 0.845, p = 0.003; Duke's B HR 0.947, p = 0.045; Duke's C HR 0.783, p < 0.0001). Secondary analysis demonstrated equivalent OS between study groups when ≥22 lymph nodes were harvested.

CONCLUSION

There is a significant difference in survival between comparable patients with right and left sided colon cancers in England. The quality and/or extent of mesenteric resection may be of particular importance in right-sided colon cancer.

A Novel Pyroptosis-Associated Long Noncoding RNA Signature to Predict the Prognosis of Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Purpose

Pyroptosis plays an important role in tumor progression. However, there is no pyroptosis-associated long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) signature to predict the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

Materials and Methods

The RNA sequencing data (RNA-seq) and corresponding clinical information relating to CRC patients were obtained from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database and the GSE39582 dataset. Univariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify pyroptosis-associated lncRNAs linked to CRC prognosis. Subsequently, multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to construct a pyroptosis-associated lncRNAs signature within the TCGA cohort, which was then validated using the GSE39582 dataset. We used Kaplan-Meier (K-M) analysis, principal component analysis (PCA), and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis to evaluate our novel lncRNA signature. Finally, gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed to explore the potential function of the lncRNA signature.

Results

We constructed a pyroptosis-associated lncRNA signature comprising four lncRNAs (ELFN1-AS1, PCAT6, TNRC6C-AS1, and ZEB1-AS1). CRC patients were subdivided into high- and low-risk groups based on median risk scores. The results of the K-M, PCA, and ROC analyses showed that this signature could accurately predict the prognosis of CRC patients. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses showed that the pyroptosis-associated signature was an independent prognostic factor. Functional analysis suggested that tumor-associated pathways were enriched for in the high-risk CRC patient group.

Conclusion

Our study established an effective prognostic signature for CRC patients that may represent a potential therapeutic target.

Right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision is safe, leads to an increased lymph node yield and to increased survival: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The introduction of complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right colon cancer has raised an important discussion in relation to the extent of colic and mesenteric resection, and the impact this may have on lymph node yield. As uncertainty remains regarding the usefulness of and indications for right hemicolectomy with CME and the benefits of CME compared with a traditional approach, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the two procedures in terms of safety, lymph node yield and oncological outcome.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature from 2009 up to March 15th, 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two hundred eighty-one publications were evaluated, and 17 met the inclusion criteria and were included. Primary endpoints analysed were anastomotic leak rate, blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, 3- and 5-year oncologic outcomes. Secondary outcomes were operating time, conversion, intraoperative complications, reoperation rate, overall and Clavien-Dindo grade 3-4 postoperative complications.

RESULTS

In terms of safety, right hemicolectomy with CME is not inferior to the standard procedure when comparing rates of anastomotic leak (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.38-1.79), blood loss (MD -32.48, 95% CI -98.54 to -33.58), overall postoperative complications (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67-1.00), Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV postoperative complications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.82-2.28) and reoperation rate (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26-1.75). Traditional surgery is associated with a shorter operating time (MD 16.43, 95% CI 4.27-28.60) and lower conversion from laparoscopic to open approach (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.00-2.96). In terms of oncologic outcomes, right hemicolectomy with CME leads to a higher lymph node yield than traditional surgery (MD 7.05, 95% CI 4.06-10.04). Results of statistical analysis comparing 3-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival were better in the CME group, RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.27-0.66 and RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.56, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Right hemicolectomy with CME is not inferior to traditional surgery in terms of safety and has a greater lymph node yield when compared with traditional surgery. Moreover, right-sided CME is associated with better overall and disease-free survival.

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision plus D3 lymphadenectomy (CME + D3): a new medial approach for central vascular ligation

Due to the high risk of vascular injuries, it remains a technical challenge and time-consuming procedure for surgeons to perform CME and D3 lymph node dissection in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. To overcome this difficulty, we developed a novel method of the vessel's management for central vascular ligation (CVL). The key feature of this new approach focused on vascular dissection in two aspects. The first one was to expose the superior mesentery vein (SMV) and the branches of the superior mesentery artery (SMA) at their roots from left to right after dividing the peritoneum near the left border of SMV, which has the advantage of exposing SMV and controlling bleeding. The second was to selectively ligate the colic tributaries of gastrocolic trunk of Henle (GTH) after expanding its surrounding spaces. We named this technique the "new approach (NA)". Thirty-eight patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with the new approach (NA) were retrospectively analyzed and compared with data from 35 patients, who underwent the conventional medial approach (TA) performed by the same surgical team from April 2017 to March 2021. There was no significant difference between the two groups in baseline data (all p > 0.05). All 38 operations were completed with this procedure successfully. The NA approach was associated with a shorter operation time (190.5 min vs.215.5 min; P < 0.05) and a smaller blood loss (50 ml vs. 95 ml; P < 0.05) compared with the conventional approach. Two cases of vascular injuries occurred in the TA group and had been managed laparoscopically. The lymph nodes count (15 vs. 16; P > 0.05) was not significantly different; additionally, no difference was observed regarding anastomotic leakage (both n = 0) and postoperative complications (3/31 vs. 3/30; P > 0.05). No mortality was observed. NA is feasible and can be an optional method of vessel's management in laparoscopic CME and D3 lymphadenectomy for right-sided colon cancer.

Recurrence after complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer: post hoc sensitivity analyses-early recurrence, surgery by specialist and dissection in the mesocolic plane

AIM

The aim was to investigate whether the previously reported causal treatment effect of complete mesocolic excision on the risk of recurrence was biased by inclusion of patients with potentially undiagnosed disseminated disease at the time of surgery, by non-specialist surgery, or caused by mesocolic plane dissection.

METHOD

A population of 1069 patients, 813 undergoing conventional resection and 256 complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer during the period 2008-2013, was stepwise reduced in the following order by excluding patients with recurrence diagnosed within 6 months of the resection, having surgery performed by a non-specialist without supervision, and specimens assessed as not being mesocolic plane dissection. The primary outcome measure was risk of recurrence after 5.2 years using competing risk analyses.

RESULTS

The absolute risk reduction of complete mesocolic excision was 6.0% (95% CI 1.8-10.2; P = 0.0049) after excluding patients with recurrence within 6 months of resection, 6.1% (95% CI 1.9-10.4; P = 0.0045) after excluding non-specialist surgery, and 7.5% (95% CI 2.9-12.0; P = 0.0013) after the exclusion of patients whose specimens were assessed as dissections not being performed in the mesocolic plane.

CONCLUSION

The absolute risk reduction of recurrence after complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer in our previous study was not biased by potentially undiagnosed disseminated disease at the time of surgery or non-specialist surgery, and was not solely caused by dissection in the mesocolic plane. Central vascular dissection with central lymphadenectomy seems a major factor for better oncological results.

Complete mesocolic excision versus conventional surgery for colon cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) lacks consistent data advocating operative superiority compared to conventional surgery for colon cancer. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis, analysing population characteristics and perioperative, pathological and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

D3 extended lymphadenectomy dissection was considered comparable to CME, and D2 and D1 dissection to be comparable to conventional surgery. Outcomes reviewed included lymph node yield, R1 resection, overall complications, overall survival and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

In all, 3039 citations were identified; 148 studies underwent full-text reviews and 31 matched inclusion criteria: total cohort 26 640 patients (13 830 CME/D3 vs. 12 810 conventional). Overall 3- and 5-year survival was higher in the CME/D3 group compared with conventional surgery: relative risk (RR) 0.69 (95% CI 0.51-0.93, P = 0.016) and RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.64-0.95, P = 0.011) respectively. Five-year disease-free survival also demonstrated CME/D3 superiority (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.86, P < 0.001), with similar findings at 1 and 3 years. There were no statistically significant differences between the CME/D3 and conventional group in overall complications (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.97-1.14, P = 0.483) or anastomotic leak (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81-1.29, P = 0.647).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis suggests CME/D3 may have a better overall and disease-free survival compared to conventional surgery, with no difference in perioperative complications. Quality of evidence regarding survival is low, and randomized control trials are required to strengthen the evidence base.

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision versus conventional resection for right-sided colon cancer: a propensity score matching analysis of short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right-sided colon cancer (RCC) is a demanding operation, especially when performed laparoscopically. The potential impact of CME in increasing postoperative complications is still unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic CME compared with laparoscopic non-complete mesocolic excision (NCME) during colectomy for RCC.

METHODS

Data from a prospectively collected database of patients who underwent laparoscopic right and extended right colectomy at our institution between January 2008 and February 2020 were retrieved and analyzed. Short-term outcomes of patients undergoing CME and NCME were compared. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline characteristics between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 663 consecutive patients underwent resection of RCC in the study period. Among these, 500 met the inclusion criteria and after PSM a total of 372 patients were correctly matched, 186 in each group. A similar rate of overall postoperative complications was found between the CME and NCME groups (21.5% and 18.3%, p = 0.436). No difference was found in terms of conversion rate, severe complications, reoperations, readmissions, and mortality. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the CME group (22 versus 19, p = 0.003), with a lower rate of inadequate sampling (7.0% and 15.1%, p = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic CME for RCC is technically feasible and safe. It does not seem to be associated with a higher rate of complications or mortality compared with the "traditional" approach, but it allows better nodal sampling.

Complete Mesocolic Excision and D3 Lymphadenectomy versus Conventional Colectomy for Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUNDS

Previous systematic reviews suggest that the implementation of 'complete mesocolon excision' (CME) for colon tumors entails better specimen quality but with limited long-term outcomes. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the pathological, perioperative, and oncological results of CME with conventional surgery (CS) in primary colon cancer.

METHODS

Embase, MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases were searched using Medical Subject Headings for CME and D3 lymphadenectomy. The systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 18,989 patients from 27 studies were included. Postoperative complications were higher in the CME group (relative risk [RR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.22, I² = 0%), while no differences were observed in terms of anastomotic leak (I² = 0%) or perioperative mortality (I² = 49%). CME was associated with a higher number of lymph nodes harvested (I² = 95%), distance to high tie (I² = 65%), bowel length (I² = 0%), and mesentery area (I² = 95%). CME also had positive effects on 3- and 5-year overall survival (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.15, I² = 88%; and RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08, I² = 62%, respectively) and 3-year disease-free survival (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.17, I² = 22%), as well as decreased local (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24-0.51, I² = 51%) and distant recurrences (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.60-0.85, I² = 34%).

CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence suggests that CME improves oncological outcomes with a higher postoperative adverse events rate but no increase in anastomotic leak rate or perioperative mortality, compared with CS.

Complete mesocolic excision and D3 lymphadenectomy with central vascular ligation in right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review of postoperative outcomes, tumor recurrence and overall survival

BACKGROUND

In right-sided colon cancer surgery, currently there is a great deal of discussion and debate regarding complete mesocolic excision (CME) versus conventional right hemicolectomy (CRH) on postoperative outcomes and oncological results. Our aim was to perform a systematic review of the short- and long-term outcomes of CME to standardize surgical approach in patients with right-sided colon cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed examining available data on randomized and non-randomized studies evaluating the role of CME and D3 lymphadenectomy in the treatment of right-sided colon cancer, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards.

RESULTS

After literature search, 919 studies have been recorded, 110 studies underwent full-text reviews and 30 studies met inclusion criteria. The total number of CME procedures was 5931. Postoperative complications was reported in 28 studies with pooled overall complications of 1.88% for CME surgery. Six studies reported 0% of overall postoperative complications and they demonstrated a low incidence of complications following CME procedure. Anastomotic leak was reported in 27 studies with pooled proportion of 0.92% after CME resections. There were 16 papers reporting overall survival following CME procedure, with a mean of 85% of patients survived at 5 years. Mean 5-year overall survival was 93.05% in stage I patients, 89.76% in stage II patients and 79.65% in stage III patients. Local and distant recurrence were included in 21 studies, reporting tumor recurrence rate of 12.25% following CME. 5-year tumor recurrence was 5.8% in stage I patients, 7.68% in stage II patients and 15.69% in stage III patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CME does not increase the risk of postoperative complications and significantly improves the long-term oncological impact. Prospective multicentre studies results are needed to verify if CME could be considered standard surgery for right colon cancer.

Complete mesocolic excision versus conventional hemicolectomy in patients with right colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has introduced a promising surgical approach for treatment of right colon cancer. However, benefits of CME are still a matter of debate. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess safety and long-term outcomes of CME versus conventional right hemicolectomy (CRH).

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase for retrieving studies comparing CME with CRH in right colon cancer. After data extraction from the included studies, meta-analysis was performed to compare postoperative complications, anastomotic leakage, 30-day mortality, number of lymph node yield, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Eight studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1871 patients enrolled. No difference was observed in postoperative complications (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.88-1.47, p = 0.34). CME was associated with significantly higher number of lymph nodes retrieved (MD 9.17, CI 4.67-13.68, p < 0.001). CME also improved 3-year OS (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.17-2.11, p = 0.003), 5-year OS (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.06-1.89, p = 0.02), and 5-year DFS (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.29-3.07, p = 0.002). A sub-group analysis for patients with stage III colon cancer showed no significant impact of CME on 3-year and 5-year OS (OR 2.47, 95% CI 0.86-7.06, p = 0.09; OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.78-1.94, p = 0.38).

CONCLUSION

Although with limited evidence, CME shows similar postoperative complication rates and an improved survival outcome compared with CRH.

Robotic complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation for right colonic tumours - a propensity score-matching study comparing with standard laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) of the right colon with central vascular ligation (CVL) is a technically demanding procedure. This study retrospectively evaluated the feasibility, safety and oncological outcomes of the procedure when performed using the da Vinci® robotic system.

METHODS

A prospective case series was collected over 3 years for patients with right colonic cancers treated by standardized robotic CME with CVL using the superior mesenteric vessels first approach. The CME group was compared to a 2 : 1 propensity score-matched non-CME group who had conventional laparoscopic right colectomy with D2 nodal dissection. Primary outcomes were total lymph node harvest and length of specimen. Secondary outcomes were operative time, postoperative complications, and disease-free and overall survival.

RESULTS

The study included 120 patients (40 in the CME group and 80 in the non-CME group). Lymph node yield was higher (29 versus 18, P = 0.006), the specimen length longer (322 versus 260 mm, P = 0.001) and median operative time was significantly longer (180 versus 130 min, P < 0.001) with robotic CME versus laparoscopy, respectively. Duration of hospital stay was longer with robotic CME, although not significantly (median 6 versus 5 days, P = 0.088). There were no significant differences in R0 resection rate, complications, readmission rates and local recurrence. A trend in survival benefit with robotic CME for disease-free (P = 0.0581) and overall survival (P = 0.0454) at 3 years was documented.

CONCLUSION

Robotic CME with CVL is feasible and, although currently associated with a longer operation time, it provides good specimen quality, higher lymph node yield and acceptable morbidity, with a disease-free survival advantage.

A prognostic predictive model constituted with gene mutations of APC, BRCA2, CDH1, SMO, and TSC2 in colorectal cancer

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant tumor that seriously threatens human health. A CRC predictive model can be used as an effective method to provide an appropriate treatment for CRC patients.

Methods

A total of 34 CRC patients were enrolled in this study. After performing 1000-gene panel targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS), high-frequency mutation genes were screened, and their functional terms and pathways were enriched. In The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) CRC cases, the risk factors for overall survival (OS) were screened by univariate and multivariate analysis, and a predictive model was constructed and verified. Subsequently, the relationship among mutation status, gene expression, methylation level, and OS was analyzed to explore the molecular mechanism of CRC progression.

Results

A total of 26 high-frequency mutation genes were screened, which were mainly enriched in breast cancer and proteoglycans in cancer pathways. The clinical parameters of age, stage, recurrence and metastasis, the mutation status of APC, BRCA2, CDH1, SMO, and TSC2 were identified as risk factors for the construction of the predictive model. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were 0.734, 0.754, 0.774, and 0.74 for 1-, 3-, 5- and 7-year survival in the model group, respectively.

Conclusions

We identified several mutated genes and clinical parameters affecting OS and established a model to better predict the OS of CRC patients.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Right Colectomy for Cancer in the Era of Complete Mesocolic Excision with Central Vascular Ligation: Pathology and Short-Term Outcomes

Background: Colectomies performed according to complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation (CME-CVL) principles have been associated with enhanced oncologic outcomes. Nonetheless, laparoscopic CME-CVL right hemicolectomy has not been widely adopted. We aimed to compare the perioperative and pathology outcomes of laparoscopic and open CME-CVL right hemicolectomy. Materials and Methods: We compared data from a prospectively collected database regarding patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open CME-CVL right hemicolectomy for nonmetastatic right colon cancer in a University Hospital, between January 2012 and December 2018. Results: A total of 130 consecutive patients were included in the study. Of them, 73 patients underwent laparoscopic and 57 patients open right colectomy, following the CME-CVL principles. The laparoscopic approach was associated with less hospital stay (6.6 versus 9.1 days; P < .001) and septic complications (P = .046), at a cost of an increased operative time (180 versus 125.1 minutes; P < .001). Patients treated with either open or laparoscopic approach presented similar outcomes regarding pathology endpoints. In fact, both groups demonstrated similar R0 resection rate (P = .202), number of harvested and positive lymph nodes (P = .751 and P = .734, respectively), number of harvested lymph nodes at the level of D1 and D2 lymph node dissection (P > .05), rate of vascular (P = .501), and perineural infiltration (P = .956). Furthermore, no difference was found regarding the rate of intact mesocolic plane (P = .799), along with the tumor diameter (P = .154) and the length of specimen (P = .163). Conclusion: Laparoscopic CME-CVL right hemicolectomy appears to offer certain advantages in short-term outcomes compared to open procedure. Pathology outcomes did not differ between the two approaches. Future studies should further evaluate their long-term outcomes.

D3-lymphadenectomy enhances oncological clearance in patients with right colon cancer. Results of a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

D3-Lymphadenectomy, together with complete mesocolic excision (CME), were introduced to provide oncological results after right colon cancer. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to assess the short and long-term outcomes of right-sided hemicolectomy with CME + D3 as compared with classic right hemicolectomy. Secondary aims included the prevalence of D3-metastasis and skip metastasis when performing CME + D3.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted, according to PRISMA methodology.

RESULTS

29 studies were enrolled (2592 patients). No differences were accounted in morbidity variables associated with the measured techniques. CME + D3 was significantly associated with a greater distance between the tumour and the closest vascular tie, a longer colonic resection, a wider resection of mesentery and an increased number of harvested lymph nodes. Regarding to long-terms outcomes, we found a significant decrease in local recurrence in patients undergoing CME + D3 (HR:0.17) and a significant improvement in 3-year and 5-year overall survival rates (HR:0.53 vs. HR:0.57, respectively), as well as an improving survival in patients with stage II and III disease. Overall prevalence of patients with lymphatic metastases in D3-territory was of 8.6% and 2.2% of skip metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

CME + D3 is a feasible surgical procedure that allows to obtain specimens with higher quality oncological resection, without greater associated morbidity, thus improving survival in patients with stage II and III right colon cancer.

Does the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System improve patients' outcome following laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer? A multicentre, retrospective analysis with propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to investigate the short-term and oncological impact of the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System (ESSQS) by the Japan Society for Endoscopic Surgery on the operator performing laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was based on medical records from a multicentre database. A total of 417 patients diagnosed with stage II/III colon and rectosigmoid cancer treated with curative resection were divided into two groups according to whether they were operated on by qualified surgeons (Q group, n=352) or not (NQ group, n=65). Through strict propensity score matching, 98 cases (49 in each group) were assessed.

RESULTS

Operative time was significantly longer in the NQ group than in the Q group (199 vs. 168 min, p=0.029). The amount of blood loss, post-operative complications, and duration of hospitalisation were similar between both groups. No mortality was observed. One conversion case was seen in the NQ group. The 3-year recurrence-free survival rate was 86.6% in the NQ group and 88.2% in the Q group, which was not statistically significant (log-rank p=0.966).

CONCLUSION

Direct operation by ESSQS-qualified surgeons contributed to a shortened operation time. Under an organised educational environment, almost equivalent safety and oncological outcomes are expected regardless of the surgeon's qualifications.

Laparoscopic versus Open Complete Mesocolic Excision for Right Colon Cancer

Results

The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LCME group than that in the OCME group with less mean intraoperative blood loss. Conversion was required in 4 patients (8.3%) in the LCME group. The use of laparoscopy increased the number of harvested lymph nodes compared to the open approach (39.81 ± 16.74 vs. 32.65 ± 12.28, respectively, P=0.010). The laparoscopic approach was associated with a shorter time interval to first flatus as well as shorter time interval to liquid and normal diet after surgery. The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LCME group. The complication rate was slightly lower in the LCME (14.7%) than in the OCME group (27.2%) (P=0.252). The 3-year OS in the LCME group was similar to that in OCME (78.2% vs. 63.2%, respectively, P value = 0.423). The three-year DFS in the laparoscopic group was higher (74.5%) than the open group (60.0%), but did not reach statistical significance (P value = 0.266).

Conclusions

In conclusion, laparoscopic CME right hemicolectomy is a technically feasible and safe procedure if surgeon expertise is present. LCME has long-term oncologic outcomes (recurrence and survival) comparable to open surgery for management of patients with stage II or III colon cancer.

Metastasis to lymph nodes around the vascular tie worsens long-term oncological outcomes following complete mesocolic excision and conventional colectomy for right-sided colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncologic outcomes after complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer are under investigation. The aim of our study was to compare CME and conventional colectomy (CC) in terms of pathological and oncological outcomes for right colon cancer and to evaluate the impact of lymph node metastasis around the vascular tie on survival.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with right colon cancer who had CME or CC between January 2011 and August 2018 at two specialized centers in Turkey were included. Statistical analyses were performed with respect to demographic characteristics, operative and pathologic outcomes, harvested and metastatic lymph nodes around the vascular tie (LNVT), recurrences, and survival.

RESULTS

There were 91 patients in the CME group (58 males, mean age 64 ± 16 years) and 192 patients in the CC group (96 males, mean age 66 ± 14 years). The mean number of harvested lymph nodes (CME: 42 ± 15 vs CC: 34 ± 13, p = 0.01) and LNVT were higher in the CME group (CME: 3.2 ± 2.2 vs CC: 2.4 ± 1.6, p = 0.001). LNVT metastases were 7.7% and 8.3% in the CME and CC groups, respectively (p = 0.85). Three-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 96.4% and 90.9% in the CME group and 90.4% and 87.6% in the CC group in stage I-III patients (p > 0.05). In stage III patients, the 3-year overall survival (92.5% vs 63.5%, p = 0.03) and disease-free survival (85.6% vs 52.1%, p = 0.008) were significantly better in LNVT-negative patients than in LNVT-positive patients.

CONCLUSION

LNVT metastasis seems to be the key factor associated with poor disease-free and overall survival in right colon cancer regardless of the radicality of surgery.

Oncological reasons for performing a complete mesocolic excision: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been shown to have an oncological benefit as compared to conventional colonic surgery for colon surgery, this benefit must be weighed up against the risk of major intra-abdominal complications. This paper aimed to assess the comparative oncological benefits of CME.

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines, a systematic review of the literature until May 2020 was performed. Comparative studies assessing CME versus conventional colonic surgery for colon cancer were compared, and outcomes were pooled.

RESULTS

A total of 700 publications were identified, of which 19 were found to meet the inclusion criteria. A total of 25 886 patients were compared, with 14 431 patients in the CME arm. CME was associated with a significantly higher rate of vascular injury (odds ratio 3, P < 0.001). Rates of local and distant recurrence were lower in the CME group (odds ratio 0.66 and 0.73, respectively, both P < 0.001). CME patients had a significantly higher lymph node yield (P < 0.001). While no significant differences were noted between the two groups in terms of pooled 3- or 5-year disease-free survival, pooled 5-year overall survival was significantly higher in the CME group (relative risk 0.82, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, CME is associated with improved oncologic outcomes at the expense of higher complication rates, including vascular injury. The oncological benefits need to weighed up against a multitude of factors including the level of hospital support, surgeon experience, patient age, and associated comorbidities.

Laparoscopic Colectomy vs Laparoscopic CME: a Retrospective Study of Two Hospitals with Comparable Laparoscopic Experience

PURPOSE

To compare laparoscopic non-CME colectomy with laparoscopic CME colectomy in two hospitals with similar experience in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

Data was collected retrospectively from Päijät-Häme Central Hospital (PHCH, NCME group) and Central Finland Central Hospital (CFCH, CME group) records. Elective laparoscopic resections performed during 2007-2016 for UICC stage I-III adenocarcinoma were included to assess differences in short-term outcome and survival.

RESULTS

There were 340 patients in the NCME group and 325 patients in the CME group. CME delivered longer specimens (p < 0.001), wider resection margins (p < 0.001), and more lymph nodes (p < 0.001) but did not result in better 5-year overall or cancer-specific survival (NCME 77.9% vs CME 72.9%, p = 0.528, NCME 93.2% vs CME 88.9%, p = 0.132, respectively). Thirty-day morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay were similar between the groups. Conversion to open surgery was associated with decreased survival.

DISCUSSION

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is reported to improve survival. Most previous studies have compared open CME with open non-CME (NCME) or open CME with laparoscopic CME. NCME populations have been historical or heterogeneous, potentially causing bias in the interpretation of results. Studies comparing laparoscopic CME with laparoscopic NCME are few and involve only small numbers of patients. In this study, diligently performed laparoscopic non-CME D2 resection delivered disease-free survival results comparable with laparoscopic CME but was not safer.

An Autophagy-Related Long Noncoding RNA Signature Contributes to Poor Prognosis in Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer is one of the most common malignant primary tumors, prone to metastasis, and associated with a poor prognosis. As autophagy is closely related to the development and treatment of colorectal cancer, we investigated the potential prognostic value of long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) associated with autophagy in colorectal cancer.

METHODS

In this study, we acquired information on the expression of lncRNAs in colorectal cancer from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database and found that 860 lncRNAs were associated with autophagy-related genes. Subsequently, univariate Cox regression analysis was used to investigate 32 autophagy-related lncRNAs linked to colon cancer prognosis. Subsequently, eight of the 32 autophagy-related lncRNAs (i.e., long intergenic nonprotein coding RNA 1503 [LINC01503], ZEB1 antisense RNA 1 [ZEB1-AS1], AC087481.3, AC008760.1, AC073896.3, AL138756.1, AL022323.1, and TNFRSF10A-AS1) were selected through multivariate Cox regression analysis. Based on these autophagy-related lncRNAs, a risk signature was constructed, and the patients were divided into high- and low-risk groups.

RESULTS

The high-risk group's overall survival time was significantly shorter than that of the low-risk group (p < 0.0001). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to further confirm the validity of the model (area under the curve: 0.689). Moreover, multivariate regression suggested that the risk score was a significant prognostic risk factor in colorectal cancer. Gene set enrichment analysis showed that these gene sets are significantly enriched in cancer-related pathways, such as Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS) signaling.

CONCLUSION

The risk signature of eight autophagy-related lncRNAs has prognostic potential for colorectal cancer. These autophagy-related lncRNAs may play a vital role in the biology of colorectal cancer.

Minimally invasive complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation (CME/CVL) for right colon cancer

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard of care in rectal cancer surgery. Complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation (CME and CVL) are surgical concepts that are extrapolated from the principles of TME. Increasingly adopted by surgical units worldwide, laparoscopic CME/CVL for right sided colon cancer is a challenging procedure that requires meticulous dissection by the surgeon and detailed knowledge of the colonic vascular anatomy. This review article addresses the main issues pertaining to this surgical technique and also discusses steps on how to perform this operation safely.

Efficacy and Safety of Complete Mesocolic Excision in Patients With Colon Cancer: Three-year Results From a Prospective, Nonrandomized, Double-blind, Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the oncological outcomes of complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer patients.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

CME is considered a standard procedure for colon cancer patients. However, previous evidence regarding the effect of CME on prognosis has fundamental limitations that prevent it from being fully accepted.

METHODS

Patients who underwent radical resection for colon cancer were enrolled between November 2012 and March 2016. According to the principles of CME, patients were stratified into 2 groups based on intraoperative surgical fields and specimen photographs. The primary outcome was local recurrence-free survival (LRFS). The clinicopathological data and follow-up information were collected and recorded. The final follow-up date was April 2016. The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT01724775).

RESULTS

There were 220 patients in the CME group and 110 patients in the noncomplete mesocolic excision (NCME) group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Compared with NCME, CME was associated with a greater number of total lymph nodes (24 vs 20, P = 0.002). Postoperative complications did not differ between the 2 groups. CME had a positive effect on LRFS compared with NCME (100.0% vs 90.2%, log-rank P < 0.001). Mesocolic dissection (100.0% vs 87.9%, log-rank P < 0.001) and nontumor deposits (97.2% vs 91.6%, log-rank P < 0.022) were also associated with improved LRFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that, compared with NCME, CME improves 3-year LRFS without increasing surgical risks.

Complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer: is it worth it?

Total mesorectal excision (TME) has been the miracle surgical technique which has since allowed the outcomes of rectal cancer to surpass that of colon cancer. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) attempts to adopt the same principles as that of TME and apply it to colon cancer surgery. Initial retrospective case series and comparative studies have shown promising oncological outcomes. CME entails the en bloc removal of a sufficient length of colonic specimen within an intact peritoneal envelop with extended lymphadenectomy through a high central ligation of vessels. This technique, standardizing the method for resection of right sided colon cancer, has witness promising perioperative and oncological data for both open and laparoscopic methods. However, most data available are mostly retrospective with a glaring lack of level 1 evidence. Despite the technique showing similar outcomes to that of conventional colectomy, parts of the procedure put the patient (and surgeon) at risk of potentially catastrophic complications. As promising as the initial results of CME has been, more well-designed randomized control trials are necessary to justify the increased risks taken and effort to mount the learning curve for CME.

Comparison of outcomes of complete mesocolic excision with conventional radical resection performed by laparoscopic approach for right colon cancer

Background

This retrospective study compared the outcomes of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) guided by superior mesenteric artery with laparoscopic conventional radical resection (CRR) performed for right-sided colon cancer.

Methods

Patients with right-sided colon cancer underwent CME (n=107; January 2011 to December 2015) or CRR (n=60; January 2008 to December 2010).

Results

The 2 groups were comparable regarding age, gender, body mass index, maximum tumor diameter, and tumor stage. In the CME group, the distances between the tumor and the high vascular tie (HVT; 12.6 cm), and between the closest bowel wall and HVT (10.4±0.9 cm) was significantly greater than that of the CRR group (11.5 cm and 9.3±1.0 cm, respectively; P<0.001). In the CME group, the number of retrieved lymph nodes (23.2) was significantly higher, and the volume of intraoperative bleeding (108.4 mL) was less than that of the CRR (14.0 and 128.7 mL; P<0.001). The length of resected bowel in the 2 groups was similar (25.8±0.7 cm and 25.5±2.1 cm; P=0.106), as was the operative time, postoperative hospitalization, time of first bowel movement, and complications. The 3-year recurrence rate of the CME group (8.4%) was significantly lower than that of the CRR (20.0%), the 3-year overall survival was significantly higher (93.5% cf. 85.0%), and the survival rates of T4 stage, N1 stage, pTNM stage II, pTNM stage III and lympho vascular invasion were significantly higher (P<0.05). The 2 groups were similar for survival rates of Tis, T1, T2, T3, N2 stage, pTNM stage I and perineural invasion (P>0.05).

Conclusion

CME for right-sided colon cancer guided by superior mesenteric artery has similar short-term outcomes, higher lymph node yield, and higher 3-year overall survival compared with CRR.

Complete mesocolic excision for colonic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Complete mesocolic excision for colonic cancer is similar in concept to total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. This review aims to provide the embryological and anatomical rationale behind CME, and to review the current literature on CME, relative to the feasibility via laparoscopy, the oncological adequacy and outcomes.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was performed at the end of 2017 according the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews. Of 3980 articles found, we analyzed 96 articles. Of note, many case series had overlapping populations; there were five review articles, two consensus conference proceedings, six comparative but only one randomized trial.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The embryonic and anatomical rationale is well described. CME is feasible via laparoscopy, which may facilitate dissection and anatomic precision: no statistically significant differences were found when compared to open CME regarding overall survival. However, morbidity may be higher in the hands of non-expert laparoscopic surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncological adequacy can be obtained with laparoscopic CME, with increased lymph node retrieval. However, until now, there is no formal proof that CME improves local recurrence or survival.

Comparison between conventional colectomy and complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer: a systematic review and pooled analysis : A review of CME versus conventional colectomies

BACKGROUND

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is advocated based on oncologic superiority, but not commonly performed in North America. Many data are case series with few comparative studies. Our aim was to perform a systematic review comparing outcomes between CME and non-CME colectomy.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines of MEDLINE, EMBASE, HealthStar, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Studies were included if they compared conventional resection (non-CME) to CME for colon cancer. Quality was assessed using methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). The main outcome measures were short-term morbidity and oncologic outcomes. Weighted pooled means and proportions with 95% CI were calculated using a random-effects model when appropriate.

RESULTS

Out of 825 unique citations, 23 studies underwent full-text reviews and 14 met inclusion criteria. Mean MINORS score was 13.3 (range 11-15). The mean sample size in CME group was 1166 (range 45-3756) and 945 (range 40-3425) in non-CME. Four papers reported plane of dissection, with CME plane achieved in 85.8% (95% CI 79.8-91.7). Mean OR time in CME group was 167 min (163-171) and 138 min (135-142) in conventional group. Perioperative morbidity was reported in six studies, with pooled overall complications of 22.5% (95% CI 18.4-26.6) for CME and 19.6 (95% CI 13.6-25.5) for non-CME. Anastomotic leak occurred in 6.0% (95% CI 2.2-9.7) of CME resections versus 6.0% (95% CI 4.1-7.9) in non-CME. CME had more lymph nodes, longer distance to high tie, and specimen length in all studies. Nine studies compared long-term oncologic outcomes and only three reported statistically significant higher disease-free or overall survival in favor of CME. Local recurrence was lower after CME in two of four studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of evidence is limited and does not consistently support the superiority of CME. Better data are needed before CME can be recommended as the standard of care for colon cancer resections.