LongTerm Outcomes of Three-Port Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy Versus Five-Port Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: A Retrospective Study

Best Evidence for Each Surgical Step in Minimally Invasive Right Hemicolectomy: A Systematic Review

Objective

The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature for each surgical step of the minimally invasive right hemicolectomy (MIRH) for non-locally advanced colon cancer, to define the most optimal procedure with the highest level of evidence.

Background

High variability exists in the way MIRH is performed between surgeons and hospitals, which could affect patients' postoperative and oncological outcomes.

Methods

A systematic search using PubMed was performed to first identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and if there were none then landmark papers and consensus statements were systematically searched for each key step of MIRH. Systematic reviews were assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool, and selection was based on highest quality followed by year of publication.

Results

Low (less than 12 mmHg) intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) gives higher mean quality of recovery compared to standard IAP. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is associated with lowest recurrence and highest 5-year overall survival rates, without worsening short-term outcomes. Routine D3 versus D2 lymphadenectomy showed higher LN yield, but more vascular injuries, and no difference in overall and disease-free survival. Intracorporeal anastomosis is associated with better intra- and postoperative outcomes. The Pfannenstiel incision gives the lowest chance of incisional hernias compared to all other extraction sites.

Conclusion

According to the best available evidence, the most optimal MIRH for colon cancer without clinically involved D3 nodes entails at least low IAP, CME with D2 lymphadenectomy, an intracorporeal anastomosis and specimen extraction through a Pfannenstiel incision.

Outcomes after natural orifice extraction vs conventional specimen extraction surgery for colorectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) via the anus or vagina replaces conventional transabdominal specimen retrieval via the transabdominal route through a limited mid-line laparotomy or Pfannenstiel incision. Reducing the number of laparoscopic ports further decreases operative abdominal wall trauma. These techniques reduce the surgical wound size as well as the risk of incision-related morbidity.

AIM

To compare short-term outcomes following 3-port NOSE surgery with a matched cohort of conventional non-NOSE colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective 3-port laparoscopic colorectal NOSE surgery between February to October 2021 were identified. Selection criteria for NOSE surgery was adapted from the 2019 International Consensus on Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery for colorectal cancer. Patients with clinical T4 or N2 tumors on staging computed tomography were also excluded. The propensity score-matched cohort was identified amongst patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery from January 2019 to December 2020. Matching was performed in the ratio of 1:4 based on age, gender, type of resection, and p - tumor node metastasis staging.

RESULTS

Over the eight-month study duration, 14 consecutive cases (nine female, five male) of elective 3-port laparoscopic surgery with NOSE were performed for colorectal cancer. Median age and body mass index were 70 (range 43-82) years and 24.1 (range 20.0-31.7) kg/m2 respectively. Six patients underwent transanal NOSE and eight had transvaginal NOSE. Median operative time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative length of stay were 208 (range 165-365) min, 30 (range 10-150) mL and 3 (range 2-6) d respectively. Two (14%) suffered minor postoperative compilations not attributable to the NOSE procedure. Median follow-up duration was 12 (range 8-15) mo. No instances of mortality, local or distant disease recurrence were recorded in this cohort. Compared to the conventional surgery cohort of 56 patients, the 3-port NOSE cohort had significantly quicker mean return of bowel function (2.6 vs 1.2 d, P < 0.001), reduced postoperative pain and patient-controlled analgesia use, and decreased length of hospital stay (6.4 vs 3.4 d, P < 0.001). There were no statistical differences in surgical duration and perioperative complication rates between the NOSE and non-NOSE cohorts.

CONCLUSION

3-port laparoscopic colorectal surgery with NOSE is a feasible technique, augmenting the minimally invasive nature of surgery and producing good outcomes. Appropriate patient selection and expertise in conventional laparoscopy are required.