A meta-analysis comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy and open right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer

How to prevent postoperative ileus in colorectal surgery? a systematic review

Postoperative ileus (PI) after colorectal surgery is a common surgical problem. This systematic review aimed to investigate the available data in the literature to reduce the PI in the area of colorectal surgery out of the enhanced recovery after surgery principles, referring to published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses, and to provide recommendations according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The authors conducted bibliographic research on 1 December 2022. The authors retained meta-analyses and RCTs. The authors concluded that when we combined colonic mechanical preparation with oral antibiotic decontamination, the authors found a significant reduction in PI. The open approach was associated with a higher PI rate. The robotic and laparoscopic approaches had similar PI rates. Low ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery presented a PI similar to that of high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery. There was no difference between the isoperistaltic and antiperistaltic anastomoses or between the intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses. This study summarized the available data in the literature, including meta-analyses and RCTs. For a higher level of evidence, additional multicenter RCTs and meta-analyses of RCTs remain necessary.

Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomoses in Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: A Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Right hemicolectomy is a commonly performed procedure for both benign and malignant diseases of the right colon. However, there is marked technical variation in the anastomosis technique used. In our hospital, both intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) are performed. Our study aimed to assess and compare the short-term outcomes following laparoscopic right hemicolectomies, particularly in regard to the anastomosis technique.

METHODS

All consecutive adult (>18 years of age) patients who underwent elective right hemicolectomy from January 2020 to April 2023 at St Richards Hospital, Chichester, University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust, UK, were included in our retrospective study. Data, including age at operation, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, pathology, type of procedure, type of anastomosis, technique of anastomosis, post-operative high-dependency unit (HDU) stay, hospital length of stay, post-operative ileus, anastomotic leak, return to theater, and in-hospital mortality, were extracted. Patients who did not get an ileocolic anastomosis, had a stoma formation, and had an open procedure or conversion to open procedure were excluded. The cases that fulfilled the criteria were shortlisted for analysis. These cases were then divided into two groups: patients who had an IA and those who had an EA.

RESULTS

From January 2020 to April 2023, 152 patients underwent right hemicolectomy. A total of 139 patients fulfilled our eligibility criteria and were included in our final analysis. The overall mortality rate was 0.7% (1/139), the return to theater rate was 0.7% (1/139), and no anastomotic leaks were recorded. The overall ileus rate was 16.5% (23/139). The hospital length of stay was significantly longer in the EA group as compared to the IA group (p<0.004). A higher proportion (18.75%, n=21) of the patients had a recorded ileus in the EA group as compared to 7.4% (n=2) in the IA group, but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the patients who had IA had reduced hospital length of stay. The IA group also had clinically significant reduced rates of post-operative ileus, but this was not statistically significant. However, other short-term outcomes that were measured were similar in both groups.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision: a retrospective multicenter study with propensity score matching

OBJECTIVE

During the past decade, the concept of complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been developed in an attempt to minimize recurrence for right-sided colon cancer. This study aims to compare outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME for right-sided colon cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective multicenter propensity score matching study. From July 2016 to July 2021, 382 consecutive patients from different Chinese surgical departments were available for inclusion out of an initial cohort of 412, who underwent robotic or laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME. Data of all patients were retrospectively collected and reviewed. Of these, 149 cases were performed by a robotic approach, while the other 233 cases were done by laparoscopy. Propensity score matching was applied at a ratio of 1:1 to compare perioperative, pathologic, and oncologic outcomes between the robotic and the laparoscopic groups (n = 142).

RESULTS

Before propensity score matching, there were no statistical differences regarding the sex, history of abdominal surgery, body mass index (BMI), American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system, tumor location, and center between groups (p > 0.05), while a significant difference was observed regarding age (p = 0.029). After matching, two comparable groups of 142 cases were obtained with equivalent patient characteristics (p > 0.05). Blood loss, time to oral intake, return of bowel function, length of stay, and complications were not different between groups (p > 0.05). The robotic group showed a significantly lower conversion rate (0% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.03), but a longer operative time (200.9 min vs. 182.3 min, p < 0.001) and a higher total hospital cost (85,016 RMB vs. 58,266 RMB, p < 0.001) compared with the laparoscopic group. The number of harvested lymph nodes was comparable (20.4 vs. 20.5, p = 0.861). Incidence of complications, mortality, and pathologic outcomes were similar between groups (p > 0.05). The 2-year disease-free survival rates were 84.9% and 87.1% (p = 0.679), and the overall survival rates between groups were 83.8% and 80.7% (p = 0.943).

CONCLUSION

Despite the limitations of a retrospective analysis, the outcomes of robotic right hemicolectomy with CME were comparable to the laparoscopic procedures with fewer conversions to open surgery. More clinical advantages of the robotic surgery system need to be further confirmed by well-conducted randomized clinical trials with large cohorts of patients.

Audit of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer in Morocco: A report of the results of a prospective multicentre cohort study

Background

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

•

Laparoscopy is the standard technique for colon cancer in rich countries. Little data exists about lower income countries.

•

We evaluated laparoscopy for colon cancer by comparing it to open colon resections in a low-mid income country.

•

We found that Laparoscopy is performed by few surgeons, who apply strict patient selection for laparoscopic cases.

•

Patients in the laparoscopy group also had lower quality resections compared to open surgery.

•

The challenges identified will require more focus on training, certification, centralization, and standardisation of care.

Right colectomy from open to robotic - a single-center experience with functional outcomes in a learning-curve setting

Purpose

Right colectomy (RC) is a frequently performed procedure. Beneath standard conventional open surgery (COS), various minimally invasive techniques had been introduced. Several advantages had recently been described for robotic approaches over COS or conventional laparoscopy. Nevertheless, novel minimally invasive techniques require continuous benchmarking against standard COS to gain maximum patient safety. Bowel dysfunction is a frequent problem after RC. Together with general complication rates postoperative bowel recovery are used as surrogate parameters for postoperative patient outcome in this study.

Methods

Retrospective, 10-year single-center analysis of consecutive patients who underwent sequentially either COS (n = 22), robotic-assisted (ECA: n = 39), or total robotic surgery (ICA: n = 56) for oncologic RC was performed.

Results

The conversion from robotic to open surgery rate was low (overall: 3.2%). Slightly longer duration of surgery had been observed during the early phase after introduction of the robotic program to RC (ECA versus COS, p = 0.044), but not anymore thereafter (versus ICA). No differences were observed in oncologic parameters including rates of tumor-negative margins, lymph node-positive patients, and lymph node yield during mesocolic excision. Both robotic approaches are beneficial regarding postoperative complication rates, especially wound infections, and shorter length of in-hospital stay compared with COS. The duration until first postoperative stool is the shortest after ICA (COS: 4 [2–8] days, ECA: 3 [1–6] days, ICA: 3 [1–5] days, p = 0.0004). Regression analyses reveal neither a longer duration of surgery nor the extent of mesocolic excision, but the degree of minimally invasiveness and postoperative systemic inflammation contribute to postoperative bowel dysfunction, which prolongs postoperative in-hospital stay significantly.

Conclusion

The current study reflects the institutional learning curve of oncologic RC during implementation of robotic surgery from robotic-assisted to total robotic approach without compromises in oncologic results and patient safety. However, the total robotic approach is beneficial regarding postoperative bowel recovery and general patient outcome.

Regional techniques for pain management following laparoscopic elective colonic resection: A systematic review

Introduction

Pain management is an integral part of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) following laparoscopic colonic resection. A variety of regional and neuraxial techniques were proposed, but their efficacy is still controversial. This systematic review evaluates published evidence on analgesic techniques and their impact on postoperative analgesia and recovery for laparoscopic colonic surgery patients.

Methods

We conducted bibliographic research on May 10, 2021, through PubMed, Cochrane database, and Google scholar. We retained meta-analysis and randomized clinical trials. We graded the strength of clinical data and subsequent recommendations according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Results

Twelve studies were included. Thoracic epidural analgesia improved postoperative analgesia and bowel function following laparoscopic colectomy. However, it lengthens the hospital stay. Transversus abdominis plane block was as effective as thoracic epidural analgesia concerning pain control but with better postoperative recovery and lower length of hospital stay. Moreover, Lidocaine intravenous infusion improved postoperative pain management and recovery; Quadratus lumborum block provided similar postoperative analgesia and recovery. Finally, wound infiltration reduced postoperative pain without improving recovery of bowel function, and it could be proposed as an alternative to thoracic epidural analgesia.

Conclusions

Several analgesic techniques have been investigated. We found that abdominal wall blocks were as effective as thoracic epidural analgesia for pain management but with lower hospital stay and better recovery. We registered this review on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021279228).

•

First systematic review assessing the efficacy of analgesic techniques following laparoscopic elective colonic resection.

•

Only colonic resection was evaluated contrary to other studies, including rectal surgery.

•

High-quality studies (randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses) were assessed.

Laparoscopic versus Open Transverse-Incision Approach for Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives: There is general agreement on the benefits of laparoscopy for treatment of rectal and left colon cancers, whereas findings regarding the comparison of laparoscopic and open right colonic resections are discordant. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the outcomes and advantages of laparoscopic versus transverse-incision open surgery for management of right colon cancer. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Comparative studies evaluating the results of laparoscopic and transverse-incision open right hemicolectomies were analyzed. The measured outcomes were mean operative time, time to feeding, duration of hospital stay, and number of lymph nodes harvested. Results: A total of 5 studies including 318 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis revealed no differences in time to resume oral feeding, hospital stay, and number of lymph nodes harvested in between groups, but mean length of surgery was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group. Conclusion: These data confirm that the preferred approach to right hemicolectomy is yet unclear. Laparoscopy has a longer operative time than transverse-incision open surgery, and no significant short-term benefits were observed for the studied parameters. Well-designed randomized control trials (RCTs) might help to identify the differences between these two techniques for the surgical treatment of right colon cancer.