Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery in a regional hospital: the implementation of a standardized surgical procedure counterbalances the lack of experience

Endoscopic submucosal dissection vs transanal endoscopic surgery for rectal tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) and transanal endoscopic submucosal dissection (TES) are widely employed surgical techniques. However, the comparative efficacy and safety of both remain inconclusive.

AIM

To comprehensively analyze and discern differences in surgical outcomes between ESD and TES.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and CINAHL from inception till August 2023. We analyzed outcomes including recurrence rate, en bloc resection, R0 resection rate, perforation rate, procedure length, and hospital stay length applying a random-effects inverse-variance model. We assessed publication bias by conducting an Egger's regression test and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

We pooled data from 11 studies involving 1013 participants. We found similar recurrence rates, with a pooled odds ratio of 0.545 (95%CI: 0.176-1.687). En bloc resection, R0 resection, and perforation rate values were also similar for both ESD and TES. The pooled analysis for procedure length indicated a mean difference of -4.19 min (95%CI: -22.73 to 14.35), and the hospital stay was on average shorter for ESDs by about 0.789 days (95%CI: -1.671 to 0.093).

CONCLUSION

Both ESD and TES displayed similar efficacy and safety profiles across multiple outcomes. Our findings show that individualized patient and surgeon preferences, alongside specific clinical contexts, can be considered when selecting between these two techniques.

Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery Techniques

Colorectal surgery has witnessed a transformative shift with the advent of minimally invasive techniques, offering patients reduced postoperative discomfort, shorter hospital stays, and accelerated recovery compared to conventional open surgery. This comprehensive review aims to assess the current state of minimally invasive approaches in colorectal surgery, encompassing various techniques such as single-incision laparoscopic surgery, robot-assisted surgery, and conventional laparoscopic surgery. The article meticulously explores the benefits and drawbacks of each technique, delves into the established criteria for their application, delineates cautious circumstances, and analyzes the outcomes of minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Additionally, the integration of virtual reality and augmented reality for surgical planning and training is discussed, shedding light on the future trajectory of this field. Surgeons and researchers striving to enhance patient care and surgical outcomes in colorectal surgery will find this review article an invaluable resource, presenting crucial components of minimally invasive colorectal surgery and paving the way for continued advancements in the field.

Is non-mentored initiation of laparoscopic colorectal surgery safe? Single surgeon initial experience with the first 40 cases

Introduction

Although laparoscopic colorectal surgery is now accepted as a standard procedure in treating colorectal cancer, the proportion of laparoscopically operated patients with colorectal cancer is still generally quite low. The aim of this study is to assess feasibility, safety, and outcomes of a non-mentored initiation of laparoscopic colorectal resections by a young surgeon without previous experience in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Materials and methods

We analyzed the characteristics of the first 40 elective cases of laparoscopic colorectal resections performed by a single surgeon during the period between June 2019 and March 2022. All of the operations were performed without the attendance or supervision of an experienced surgeon in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The patients were divided into three groups (the early, intermediate, and late group).

Results

The conversion rate, complications rate, and postoperative recovery were similar among groups. The mean overall operative time was 219.5 min (range 130-420 min) and had reduced significantly during the learning curve (p = 0.047). The overall conversion rate was 12.5%. In two cases (5%), the oncological principles were violated (incomplete total mesorectal excision). In three patients (7.5%), intraoperative complications had occurred (small bowel injury, splenic injury, and significant bleeding from the minor peripancreatic artery). Three cases of major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade III) were recorded, two of which required reoperation (anastomotic bleeding and fascial dehiscence). There was no 90-day mortality reported. The overall mean number of lymph nodes retrieved was 12.45, which did not differ significantly among groups (p = 0.678). The average follow-up was 13.75 months (range 1-31 months). Cancer recurrence was recorded in four patients (10%). Port-site metastasis was not detected in any of the cases.

Conclusion

A safe and non-mentored initiation of laparoscopic colorectal surgery with an acceptable rate of complications and acceptable oncological results can be achieved. Still, when compared with a structured initiation in a controlled environment with the supervision of an experienced surgeon in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, the results of a non-mentored initiation are worse in most of the fields, including operative time, conversion rate, complications rate, and duration of hospital stay. Therefore, I strongly recommend engaging young surgeons in fellowship programs on structured laparoscopic colorectal surgery whenever possible before starting performing these procedures on their own.

Training curriculum in minimally invasive emergency digestive surgery: 2022 WSES position paper

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), including laparoscopic and robotic approaches, is widely adopted in elective digestive surgery, but selectively used for surgical emergencies. The present position paper summarizes the available evidence concerning the learning curve to achieve proficiency in emergency MIS and provides five expert opinion statements, which may form the basis for developing standardized curricula and training programs in emergency MIS.

METHODS

This position paper was conducted according to the World Society of Emergency Surgery methodology. A steering committee and an international expert panel were involved in the critical appraisal of the literature and the development of the consensus statements.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies regarding the learning curve in emergency MIS were selected. All but one study considered laparoscopic appendectomy. Only one study reported on emergency robotic surgery. In most of the studies, proficiency was achieved after an average of 30 procedures (range: 20-107) depending on the initial surgeon's experience. High heterogeneity was noted in the way the learning curve was assessed. The experts claim that further studies investigating learning curve processes in emergency MIS are needed. The emergency surgeon curriculum should include a progressive and adequate training based on simulation, supervised clinical practice (proctoring), and surgical fellowships. The results should be evaluated by adopting a credentialing system to ensure quality standards. Surgical proficiency should be maintained with a minimum caseload and constantly evaluated. Moreover, the training process should involve the entire surgical team to facilitate the surgeon's proficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence exists concerning the learning process in laparoscopic and robotic emergency surgery. The proposed statements should be seen as a preliminary guide for the surgical community while stressing the need for further research.

Minimally invasive colorectal surgery learning curve

The learning curve in minimally invasive colorectal surgery is a constant subject of discussion in the literature. Discordant data likely reflects the varying degrees of each surgeon’s experience in colorectal, laparoscopic or robotic surgery. Several factors are necessary for a successful minimally invasive colorectal surgery training program, including: Compliance with oncological outcomes; dissection along the embryological planes; constant presence of an expert tutor; periodic discussion of the morbidity and mortality rate; and creation of a dedicated, expert team.

The learning curve of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excisions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of rectal carcinoma is surgical resection according to the total mesorectal excision principle, either by open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal technique. No clear consensus exists regarding the length of the learning curve for the minimal invasive techniques. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the current literature regarding the learning curve of minimal invasive TME.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for studies with the primary or secondary aim to assess the learning curve of either laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal TME for rectal cancer. The primary outcome was length of the learning curve per minimal invasive technique. Descriptive statistics were used to present results and the MINORS tool was used to assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

45 studies, with 7562 patients, were included in this systematic review. Length of the learning curve based on intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, pathological outcomes, or a composite endpoint using a risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis was 50 procedures for the laparoscopic technique, 32-75 procedures for the robot-assisted technique and 36-54 procedures for the transanal technique. Due to the low quality of studies and a high level of heterogeneity a meta-analysis could not be performed. Heterogeneity was caused by patient-related factors, surgeon-related factors and differences in statistical methods.

CONCLUSION

Current high-quality literature regarding length of the learning curve of minimal invasive TME techniques is scarce. Available literature suggests equal lengths of the learning curves of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal TME. Well-designed studies, using adequate statistical methods are required to properly assess the learning curve, while taking into account patient-related and surgeon-related factors.

Multidimensional evaluation of the learning curve for laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision for right colon cancer: a risk-adjusted cumulative summation analysis

AIM

Despite the suggested potential benefit of complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right-sided colon cancer (RCC) for patient survival, concerns about its safety and feasibility have contributed to delayed acceptance of the procedure, especially when performed by a minimally invasive approach. Thus, the aim of this work was to evaluate the actual learning curve (LC) of laparoscopic CME for experienced colorectal surgeons.

METHOD

Prospectively collected data for consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic CME for RCC between October 2015 and January 2021 at our institution, operated on by experienced surgeons, were analysed. A multidimensional assessment of the LC was performed through cumulative sum (CUSUM) and risk-adjusted (RA) CUSUM analysis.

RESULTS

Two hundred and two patients operated by on by three surgeons were considered. The CUSUM graphs based on operating time showed one peak of the curve between 17 and 27 cases. The CUSUM graphs based on surgical failure showed one peak of the curve between 20 and 24 cases The RA-CUSUM curve also showed one preeminent peak at 24-33 cases. Based on the CUSUM and RA-CUSUM analyses all the surgeons reached proficiency in 24-33 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that an experienced minimally invasive colorectal surgeon acquires proficiency in laparoscopic CME for RCC after performing 24-33 cases.

Technical feasibility and perioperative outcome of laparoscopic resection rectopexy with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) and intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA)

Purpose

Laparoscopic rectosigmoid resection rectopexy (LRR) is the most effective treatment of obstructive defecation syndrome but is associated with a higher postoperative morbidity compared to transanal approaches. Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) has been described as a promising technique to lower morbidity in colorectal cancer surgery. In this study, we analyze the technical challenges of adapting this technique to LRR and compare the perioperative results to the conventional laparoscopic technique with specimen extraction via minilaparotomy and extracorporeal anastomosis.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 45 patients who underwent laparoscopic rectosigmoid resection rectopexy due to obstructive defecation syndrome at our institutions. From September 2020 to July 2021, we treated 17 consecutive patients with NOSE-LRR and compared the results to a historic cohort of 28 consecutive patients treated with conventional laparoscopic rectosigmoid resection rectopexy plus minilaparotomy (LAP-LRR) for specimen extraction between January 2019 and July 2020. Assessed were patient- and disease-specific parameters, operative time, hospital and postoperative complications and subjective patient satisfaction after 6 months of follow-up.

Results

Both groups were comparable in terms of gender distribution, age, and comorbidities. The median operating time was similar and the perioperative morbidity was comparable in both groups. The length of stay in hospital was significantly shorter in the NOSE-LRR group (median 6 vs 8 days).

Conclusion

NOSE-LRR can be implemented safely, performed in a comparable operating time, and is associated with a comparable rate of postoperative complications. The technique offers the a potentially fast postoperative recovery compared to the conventional laparoscopic technique.

Systemic inflammatory response in robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer (SIRIRALS): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background

Robot-assisted surgery is being increasingly adopted in treating colorectal cancer, and the transition from laparoscopic surgery to robot-assisted surgery is a trend. The evidence of the benefits of robot-assisted surgery is sparse. However, findings are associated with improved patient-related outcomes and overall morbidity rates compared to laparoscopic surgery. This induction is unclear, considering both surgical modalities are characterized as minimally invasive. This study aims to evaluate the systemic and peritoneal inflammatory stress response induced by robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopic surgery for elective colon cancer resections in a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial.

Methods

This study is a single-centre randomized controlled superiority trial with 50 colon cancer participants. The primary endpoint is the level of systemic inflammatory response expressed as serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin 6 (IL-6) levels between postoperative days one and three. Secondary endpoints include (i) levels of systemic inflammation in serum expressed by a panel of inflammatory and pro-inflammatory cytokines measured during the first three postoperative days, (ii) postoperative surgical and medical complications (30 days) according to Clavien-Dindo classification and Comprehensive Complication Index, (iii) intraoperative blood loss, (iv) conversion rate to open surgery, (v) length of surgery, (vi) operative time, (vii) the number of harvested lymph nodes, and (viii) length of hospital stay. The exploratory endpoints are (i) levels of peritoneal inflammatory response in peritoneal fluid expressed by inflammatory and pro-inflammatory cytokines between postoperative day one and three, (ii) patient-reported health-related quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15), (iii) 30 days mortality rate, (iv) heart rate variability and (v) gene transcript (mRNA) analysis.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first clinical randomized controlled trial to clarify the inflammatory stress response induced by robot-assisted or laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer resections.

Trial registration This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04687384) on December, 29, 2020, Regional committee on health research ethics, Region of Southern Denmark (N75709) and Data Protection Agency, Hospital Sønderjylland, University Hospital of Southern Denmark (N20/46179).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12893-021-01355-4.

Robotic Colorectal Cancer Surgery. How to Reach Expertise? A Single Surgeon-Experience

The complexity associated with laparoscopic colorectal surgery requires several skills to overcome the technical difficulties related to this procedure. To overcome the technical challenges of laparoscopic surgery, a robotic approach has been introduced. Our study reports the surgical outcomes obtained by the transition from laparoscopic to robotic approach in colorectal cancer surgery to establish in which type of approach the proficiency is easier to reach. Data about the first consecutive 15 laparoscopic and the first 15 consecutive robotic cases are extracted, adopting as a comparator of proficiency the last 15 laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer. The variables studied are operative time, number of harvested nodes, conversion rate, postoperative complications, recovery outcomes. Our analysis includes 15 patients per group. Our results show that operative time is significantly longer in the first 15 laparoscopic cases (p = 0.001). A significantly lower number of harvested nodes was retrieved in the first 15 laparoscopic cases (p = 0.003). Clavien Dindo I complication rate was higher in the first laparoscopic group, but without a significant difference among the three groups (p = 0.09). Our results show that the surgeon needed no apparent learning curve to reach their laparoscopic standards. However, further multicentric prospective studies are needed to confirm this conclusion.