Controversy of hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Thirteen-year experience with hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery in colorectal patients

BACKGROUND

We report outcomes on 324 consecutive cases of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) in colorectal patients over 13 years performed by a single surgeon.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database was used to identify all patients undergoing HALS colorectal procedures for benign or malignant indications from September 2004 to February 2018, at two major tertiary centres in Sydney, Australia.

RESULTS

Median age was 64 years, 51% were female and median body mass index was 26. Colorectal cancer (55%), diverticular disease (13%) and polyp related conditions (13%) were common indications. Anterior resection (65%) and right hemicolectomy (18%) were most commonly performed. Median operative time was 244 min (190-300) and 75% of Gelport incisions were Pfannenstiel. Sixty-three percent of colorectal cancer patients had a T3 or T4 cancer. Median tumour size was 35 mm (25-45). Seven percent required conversion to open and 4% a re-operation in the early post-operative period. Thirty-six percent had a post-operative complication, and 11% were major complications. Follow-up extended to 12.8 years and there were 33 late deaths. Being in a high dependency unit or intensive care unit was significant for late mortality (odds ratio 2.8, 95% confidence interval 1.06-7.78, P = 0.037). Three percent developed an incisional hernia and 6% had small bowel obstruction at long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

HALS is an effective technique for both benign and malignant colorectal indications with the added advantage of tactile feedback and a lower rate of conversion to open.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional open surgery in intraoperative and postoperative outcomes for colorectal cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

This meta-analysis aims to compare hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and conventional open surgery (OS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and to explore the safety, feasibility of HALS for CRC surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search with no limits was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Medline. The last search was performed on April 23, 2017. The outcomes of interests included intraoperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, length of incision, transfusion, and lymph nodes harvested), postoperative outcomes (length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus, time to first liquid diet, time to first soft diet, time to first bowel movement, postoperative complications, reoperation, ileus, anastomotic leakage, wound infection, urinary complication, pulmonary infection, and mortality).

RESULTS

Fifteen articles published between 2007 and 2017 with a total of 1962 patients with CRC were included in our meta-analysis. HALS was associated with longer operative time, less blood loss, smaller length of incision, shorter hospital days and postoperative hospital days, less time to first flatus, less wound infection, and less postoperative complications. There was no difference in blood transfusion, lymph node harvested, time to first liquid or soft diet, time to first bowel movement, reoperation, ileus, anastomotic leakage, pulmonary infection, urinary complications, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests that HALS in CRC surgery improves cosmesis and results in better postoperative recovery outcomes by reducing postoperative complications and hospital days. Furthermore, a large randomized control study is warranted to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of those 2 techniques for CRC treatment.

Laparoscopy for Rectal Cancer

It is evident that the use of laparoscopy in the management of rectal cancer has gained popularity in the last few years. It is still, however, not widely accepted as the standard of care. Multiple randomized trials have shown that short-term outcomes and perioperative morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic proctectomy are equivalent to open surgery. However, data regarding long-term oncologic outcomes are still scarce, with only a few randomized trials reporting similar outcomes in both laparoscopic and open group. A more recent trial failed to replicate those results in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. In this article, we will look at the most recent evidence regarding the use of laparoscopy for patients with rectal cancer. We will also briefly discuss the different approaches and new minimally invasive techniques used in this field, and we will talk about the challenges facing the widespread adoption of laparoscopic surgery in the management of rectal cancer.

Complete mesocolic excision in right hemicolectomy: comparison between hand-assisted laparoscopic and open approaches

Purpose

To demonstrate the feasibility, safety, and technical strategies of hand-assisted laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (HAL-CME) and to compare oncological outcomes between HAL-CME and the open approach (O-CME) for right colon cancers.

Methods

Patients who were scheduled to undergo a right hemicolectomy were divided into HAL-CME and O-CME groups. Measured outcomes included demographic variables, perioperative parameters, and follow-up data. Demographic variables included age, sex distribution, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, previous abdominal surgery, tumor localization, and potential comorbidities. Perioperative parameters included incision length, operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, postoperative pain score, postoperative first passage of flatus, duration of hospital stay, total cost, number of lymph nodes retrieved, TNM classification, and postoperative complications. Follow-up data included follow-up time, use of chemotherapy, local recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate, and short-term survival rate.

Results

In total, 150 patients (HAL-CME, 78; O-CME, 72) were included. The groups were similar in age, sex distribution, BMI, ASA classification, history of previous abdominal surgeries, tumor localization, and potential comorbidities. Patients in the HAL-CME group had shorter incision lengths, longer operative times, less operative blood loss, lower pain scores, earlier first passage of flatus, shorter hospital stay, higher total costs, similar numbers of lymph nodes retrieved, similar TNM classifications, and a comparable incidence of postoperative complications. The 2 groups were also similar in local recurrence rate, distant metastasis rate, and short-term survival rate.

Conclusion

The results demonstrate that the HAL-CME procedure is a safe, valid, and feasible surgical method for right hemicolon cancers.

Current application and prospects of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery in gastrointestinal tumors

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) refers to operations in which the surgeon inserts his/her non-dominant hand through a specific auxiliary device into the peritoneal cavity to assist the laparoscopic instruments. Because there is one hand to assist in the operation, HALS can reduce the difficulty of operation and shorten operative time. Previously, HALS is considered the transitional bridge from the traditional open surgery to laparoscopic surgery, but now, HLAS, together with total laparoscopic surgery and laparoscopic assisted surgery, is considered three forms of routine laparoscopic surgery. Along with the extensive use of laparoscopic surgery in gastrointestinal tumors, HALS, as a new method of laparoscopic surgery, has been gradually used in gastrointestinal tumors in recent years.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic vs open colectomy: an assessment from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program procedure-targeted cohort

BACKGROUND

Perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted colorectal laparoscopic (HALS) vs open colectomy were compared using recently released procedure-targeted database.

METHODS

Review was conducted using the 2012 colectomy-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to final surgical approach: HALS vs open (planned). Groups were matched (1:1) based on age, gender, body mass index, surgical procedure, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and wound classification. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted for group comparison.

RESULTS

Of 7,303 patients, 1,740 patients were matched in each group. Open group had higher proportion of patients with preoperative dyspnea (P = .01), ascites (P = .01), weight loss (P < .001), smoking history (P = .04), and increased work relative value units (P < .001). After adjusting for difference in baseline comorbidities, overall morbidity, superficial, deep, and organ-space surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, ileus, reoperation, readmission, and hospital stay were significantly higher in open group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted-data demonstrated several advantages of HALS compared with open colonic resection including shorter hospital stay and lower complication rate. Further adoption of HALS technique as a bridge to straight laparoscopy or tool in difficult cases can positively impact the short-term outcomes after colectomy when compared with open technique.

Minimally invasive surgery of rectal cancer: current evidence and options

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of colorectal cancer has become more popular in the past two decades. Laparoscopic colectomy has been accepted as an alternative standard approach in colon cancer, with comparable oncologic outcomes and several better short-term outcomes compared to open surgery. Unlike the treatment for colon cancer, however, the minimally invasive approach in rectal cancer has not been established. In this article, we summarize the current status of MIS for rectal cancer and explore the various technical options.

Hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch--anal anastomosis

PURPOSE

Few studies have reported minimally invasive total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). We herein report a novel hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic technique for patients with FAP and UC.

METHODS

Between February 2010 and March 2014, six patients underwent hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic total proctocolectomy with IPAA. The abdominal colectomy was performed laparoscopically with hand assistance through a transverse suprapubic incision, also used to fashion the ileal pouch. The proctectomy was carried out with the da Vinci Surgical System. The IPAA was hand-sewn through a trans-anal approach. The procedure was complemented by a temporary diverting loop ileostomy.

RESULTS

The mean hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) time was 154.6 (±12.8) min whereas the mean robotic time was 93.6 (±8.1) min. In all cases, a nerve-sparing proctectomy was performed, and no conversion to traditional laparotomy was required. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 13.2 (±7.4) days. No anastomotic leakage was observed. To date, no autonomic neurological disorders have been observed with a mean of 5.8 (±1.3) bowel movements per day.

CONCLUSIONS

The hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic approach to total proctocolectomy with IPAA has not been previously described. Our report shows the feasibility of this hybrid approach, which surpasses most of the limitations of pure laparoscopic and robotic techniques. Further experience is necessary to refine the technique and fully assess its potential advantages.

Comparative Study on Therapeutic Efficacy Between Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery and Conventional Laparotomy for Acute Obstructive Right-Sided Colon Cancer

INTRODUCTION

This retrospective study aims to compare open colectomy and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) in the management of acute obstructive right-sided colon cancer and to analyze and evaluate the feasibility and safety of HALS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ten consecutive patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy due to acute obstructive right-sided colon cancer were retrospectively well matched with 25 patients scheduled for a conventional laparotomy during the same time. Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data were assessed.

RESULTS

The HALS group had the advantage in the length of incision (5.8±0.7 cm) over the conventional group (16±2.3 cm) (P<.05), and the mean blood loss during the operations was significantly less in the HALS group (30±15.2 mL) than in the laparotomy group (90±29.4 mL) (P<.05). Moreover, the time of postoperative ambulation was earlier (2.5±0.8 days versus 3.2±0.9 days) (P<.05). Seven cases underwent intestinal decompression for severe intestinal dilatation and had a satisfactory result. The hand-assisted device can fairly meet the demands of a minimally invasive operation and can protect the abdominal incision and avoid infection. There was no intergroup difference in complication rate, although the conventional group had a higher rate.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, compared with conventional laparotomy for acute obstructive right-sided colon neoplasm, HALS is associated with less blood loss, shorter incision, and earlier ambulation. Emergency laparoscopic-assisted right hemicolectomy can be safely performed in patients with obstructing right-sided colonic carcinoma. If practiced more, it might be advocated as a bridge between the conventional open approach and traditional laparoscopic surgery.

Learning curve for hand-assisted laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy

AIM: To describe the learning curves of hand-assisted laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy (HALG) for the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS: The HALG surgical procedure consists of three stages: surgery under direct vision via the port for hand assistance, hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery, and gastrointestinal tract reconstruction. According to the order of the date of surgery, patients were divided into 6 groups (A-F) with 20 cases in each group. All surgeries were performed by the same group of surgeons. We performed a comprehensive and in-depth retrospective comparative analysis of the clinical data of all patients, with the clinical data including general patient information and intraoperative and postoperative observation indicators.

RESULTS: There were no differences in the basic information among the patient groups (P > 0.05). The operative time of the hand-assisted surgery stage in group A was 8-10 min longer than the other groups, with the difference being statistically significant (P = 0.01). There were no differences in total operative time between the groups (P = 0.30). Postoperative intestinal function recovery time in group A was longer than that of other groups (P = 0.02). Lengths of hospital stay and surgical quality indicators (such as intraoperative blood loss, numbers of detected lymph nodes, intraoperative side injury, postoperative complications, reoperation rate, and readmission rate 30 d after surgery) were not significantly different among the groups.

CONCLUSION: HALG is a surgical procedure that can be easily mastered, with a learning curve closely related to the operative time of the hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery stage.

Three-step hand-assisted laparoscopic d2 radical gastrectomy for chinese obese patients: a highly efficient and feasible surgical approach

Three-step hand-assisted laparoscopic D2 radical gastrectomy (HALG) is a modified surgical procedure that has achieved satisfactory results for obese patients in our surgical center. To fully elucidate the advantages of this procedure, in this study, comprehensive and in-depth comparative analyses were performed to assess clinical data from obese gastric cancer patients who underwent HALG, laparoscopic-assisted D2 radical gastrectomy (LAG), and open D2 radical gastrectomy (OG) in our surgical center during a specific time period. For the 3 groups, incision length was 1.25 cm longer for the HALG group than for the LAG group but was significantly shorter for the HALG group than for the OG group (P =0.00). The rate of conversion to laparotomy , the pneumoperitoneum time and the number of recovered lymph nodes were significantly better for the HALG group than for the LAG group (P <0.05). The pain score at day 2 after surgery, intestinal function recovery time, and duration of postoperative hospital stay were not significantly different for the HALG and LAG groups ( P >0.05) but were significantly better for the HALG group than for the OG group (P <0.05). There were significantly fewer postoperative complications for the HALG group than for the LAG and OG groups (P =0.049). According to the results, the “three-step HALG method” incorporates both the thoroughness of the radical OG approach and the minimal invasiveness of the LAG approach for obese patients. Thus, the HALG approach is a relatively safe and extremely feasible surgical procedure for the treatment of these patients.

Evolution of technique in performance of minimally invasive colectomies

BACKGROUND

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is commonly used in colorectal surgery and provides benefit in complex cases.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the minimally invasive surgical trends, patient characteristics, and operative variables unique to patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective medical chart review.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in a tertiary care medical center.

PATIENTS

Patients included in the study were those who underwent pure laparoscopic colectomies, hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomies, and traditional open surgery for elective treatment of diverticular disease, colorectal cancer, IBD, and benign polyp disease.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes included patient characteristics and operative variables unique to patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery and documentation of operative technique trends within an experienced colorectal group.

RESULTS

Diverticular disease characteristics specific to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery included the presence of dense inflammatory adhesions (p < 0.0001), diverticular fistulas (p < 0.0001), and unresolved phlegmon (p = 0.0003). Characteristics specific for colorectal cancer included intraoperative tumor bulk (p < 0.0001) and the inability to achieve appropriate surgical resection margins (p < 0.001). Similarly, variables identified for benign polyp disease included adhesions (p < 0.0001) and the ability to gain adequate exposure (p < 0.0001). Limited use of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery was observed in patients with IBD.

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective, observational study from a single center.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery provides benefit in surgical scenarios where dense inflammatory adhesions, diverticular fistulas, and intra-abdominal postdiverticulitis phlegmon are present. In addition, benefit is observed in patients with colorectal cancer where laparoscopic dissection of bulky tumor proves to be difficult and where the technical ability to obtain margins using pure laparoscopy is compromised. Although our practice has changed to favor pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery continues to play an important role in complex colorectal cases that otherwise would require open surgery (see video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A146).

Comparison of hand-assisted laparoscopy with open total colectomy for slow transit constipation: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (HALC) and open colectomy (OC) for patients with slow transit constipation (STC).

METHODS

Data of patients with STC who underwent total colectomy from January 2008 to December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed after clinical evaluation and an exclusion of secondary causes. These patients were further divided into the HALC and OC groups. Patients' outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative data on their recovery and complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients with STC were finally enrolled in the study, including 32 in the HALC group and 36 in the OC group. The baseline characteristics did not significantly differ between the two groups. Compared with the OC group, patients in the HALC group had a shorter length of incision, a longer operative time and less blood loss volume. There was no conversion to OC for patients undergoing HALC and no intraoperative complications in both groups. Furthermore, after operation, patients in HALC group experienced less pain (3.4 ± 0.7 vs 4.8 ± 1.0), earlier first passage of flatus (58.3 ± 6.3 h vs 73.4 ± 13.0 h), shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (8.8 ± 1.2 days vs 11.3 ± 1.7 days) but higher medical cost (RMB 33 979 ± 3 135 vs RMB 29 828 ± 3 216). The overall postoperative complications and the satisfaction in defecation were comparable in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

HALC is a safe, minimally invasive and effective surgical alternative for treating STC, which is comparable to OC.

Does nasogastric tube decompression get used less often with laparoscopic and hand-assisted compared with open colectomy?

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic surgery is associated with well-known benefits, one of which is earlier return of bowel function. Since the laparoscopic approach to colon resections was introduced in the early 1990s, it has become the standard of care. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is a surgical approach in which dissection is facilitated by the surgeon's hand within the abdominal cavity during laparoscopy. The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of postoperative ileus and the need for nasogastric tube (NGT) decompression in patients undergoing elective colon resections.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

Following institutional review board approval, we performed a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. Included were patients who underwent elective left-sided large bowel resections between 2009 and 2012. Exclusion criteria were urgent operation, stoma creation, ASA IV classification, NGT left in place at the end of surgery, and postoperative anastomotic leakage. Patients were divided into three groups: laparoscopic surgery, HALS, and open surgery. We evaluated the incidence of postoperative ileus and the use of nasogastric decompression in each group.

RESULTS

A total of 243 patients were included in this study; 73 patients underwent open surgery, 89 patients underwent HALS, and 81 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery. The proportion of patients who needed postoperative nasogastric decompression was significantly reduced in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery (3.7%) or HALS (4.5%) compared with those who underwent open resection (17.8%). The time from surgery to first flatus and first bowel movement, the time to tolerate solid diet, and the total length of postoperative hospital stay also were all significantly reduced in the laparoscopic and HALS groups compared with the open surgery group. There were no significant differences in any of these measures between the laparoscopic group and the hand-assisted group.

CONCLUSIONS

Like laparoscopy, HALS is associated with less postoperative ileus and necessitates less NGT decompression than does open surgery.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colorectal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery remains one of the most challenging techniques to learn.

METHODS

The authors collected studies that have compared hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and open surgery for the treatment of colorectal disease over the past 17 years. Data of interest for HALS and open surgery were subjected to meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twelve studies that included 1,362 patients were studied. In total, 2.66% of HALS procedures were converted to laparotomy. Compared with the open surgery group, blood loss, rate of wound infection, and ileus in the HALS group decreased, and incision length, recovery of gastrointestinal function, and hospitalization period were shorter. There were no significant differences in operating time, hospitalization costs, mortality, and complications, including urinary tract infection, pneumonia, and anastomotic leak, between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

HALS has the advantages of minimal invasion, lower blood loss, shorter incision length, and faster recovery, and it can shorten the length of hospitalization without an increase in costs. The drawbacks are that a small number of patients who undergo HALS may need to be converted to laparotomy, and the oncologic safety and long-term prognosis are not clear.

Small bowel obstruction after hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy for cancer

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) was introduced as a bridge towards totally laparoscopic procedures. Some concerns are raised regarding its long-term complications such as incisional hernia and adhesive small bowel obstruction. A woman was admitted with colicky central abdominal pain, distension and vomiting. She had a hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoid colectomy for cancer 6 years earlier. Clinical examination revealed a well-healed periumbilical scar with no evidence of incisional hernia. The abdomen was distended with exaggerated bowel sounds. A CT scan showed dilated loops of small bowel with a transitional zone and distally collapsed bowel. A diagnostic laparoscopy revealed a twisted segment of small bowel that was adherent to the anterior abdominal wall at the hand-port closure site. This segment was released laparoscopically without the need for a resection. Adhesive small bowel obstruction to the hand-port site closure may occur years after HALS and can simply be relieved by laparoscopic exploration.

The role of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery in total colectomy for colonic inertia: a retrospective study

Purpose

To compare and assess the efficacy, safety and utility of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) with open surgery (OS) in total colectomy with ileorectal for colonic inertia.

Methods

From January 2001 to February 2012, 56 patients diagnosed with colonic inertia who failed to respond to medical treatments underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis. Another 68 patients underwent laparotomy. Main parameters such as clinical manifestations, conversion to open procedure, operative time, incision length, pain score, intraoperative blood loss, time to first flatus and hospitalization, early postoperative complications and hospitalization cost were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative defecating frequencies were followed up in both groups.

Results

All patients received successful operation, no surgical mortality happened and none of the patients required conversion to an exploratory laparotomy in HALS group. The clinical features, the estimated blood loss, incision length, pain score, first passing flatus time, and postoperative hospitalization time were superior in HALS group (P < 0.05). The early postoperative complications and frequency of defecation were similar. However, the mean operative time was longer and hospitalization cost was higher in HALS group than those in OS group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

HALS total colectomy can be a safe and efficient technique in the treatment of colonic inertia. HALS can result in a better cosmetic result and a quicker postoperative recovery, but requires higher direct cost.

Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Spleen-preserving Total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Technical Feasibility and Early Results

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of hand-assisted laparoscopic spleen-preserving total gas-trectomy for gastric cancer, we compared the operative outcomes between two methods for dissection of lymph nodes along the distal splenic artery (No. 11d) and at the splenic hilum (No. 10). Sixty-four patients with proximal or total gastric cancer operated on in our department from October 2009 to February 2012 were divided into two groups: the extracorporeal method group (EMG) and the intracorporeal method group (IMG). Operative time, estimated blood loss, number of lymph node retrieval, times of analgesic injection, time to the first flatus, and postoperative hospital stay were compared between the two groups. Estimated blood loss, times of analgesic injection, time to the first flatus, and postoperative hospital stay were equivalent between the two groups. The operative time was significantly shorter in the IMG than the EMG. There were no significant differences in tumor size, retrieved lymph nodes, American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control staging, or resection margins between the two groups. Hand-assisted laparoscopic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy is technically feasible and safe and allows for adequate lymphadenectomy.

Identifying specific surgical tools and methods for laparoscopic colorectal operations in obese patients

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic operations for obese patients remain challenging due to technical difficulties at operation as well as higher comorbidities and high risk of postoperative complications. The aim of this study is to identify specific surgical tools and methods for laparoscopic colorectal operations for obese patients, applying knowledge of previous literature as well as our expertise in both laparoscopic and bariatric operations.

CONCLUSIONS

Current knowledge of bariatric surgery is invaluable in establishing a "customized" approach for laparoscopic colorectal operations in obese patients. The instruments routinely used during surgery on patients with normal body mass index (BMI) should often be modified and substituted according to the patient's BMI. We believe such an approach will prove beneficial to surgeons performing laparoscopic operations on obese patients.

Clinical application of hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: An analysis of 56 cases

AIM: To explore the clinical value of hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALS) right hemicolectomy.

METHODS: The clinical data for 56 patients who underwent HALS right hemicolectomy were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS: One case required conversion to open surgery due to abnormal blood vessels and bleeding, and all the others successfully recovered after HALS surgery. No operative deaths occurred. Operative time ranged from 90 to 150 min, with a mean value of 136 min. Operative blood loss ranged from 20 to 230 mL, with an average of 87 mL. Postoperative hospital stay was 4-10 d. Postoperative pain was mild. The patients progressed to a liquid diet 2 d postoperatively and underwent removal of stitches and extubation on postoperative day 7. Two patients developed postoperative mechanical intestinal obstruction but recovered after receiving treatment.

CONCLUSION: HALS right hemicolectomy is a safe treatment with fewer traumas, less bleeding, and faster recovery, in line with the concept of fast track surgery.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open right hemicolectomy: short-term outcomes in a single institution from China

AIM

To compare the perioperative parameters and short-term outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (HALC) and open colectomy (OC) for the treatment of patients with cancer of the right hemicolon.

METHODS

Patients who were scheduled to perform right hemicolectomy between August 2009 and December 2010 were randomized into either HALC or OC group. Patients were excluded if they had synchronous cancers, hepatic metastases, acute intestinal obstruction, or intestinal perforations. All the operations in the 2 groups were performed by a single surgical team. Measured outcomes included the demographic variables and perioperative parameters. The former included age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, prior abdominal surgery, distribution of tumors, and histopathologic stage; whereas the latter included length of incision, operative time, estimated blood loss, conversion rate, number of lymph nodes retrieved, postoperative pain score, time to return of bowel function, postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, and total cost.

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen patients with cancer of the right hemicolon (HALC=59, OC=57) were recruited. The 2 groups of patients were similar in age, sex distribution, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and previous abdominal surgery. No significant difference was observed between the 2 groups in terms of distribution of tumors and the final histopathologic staging. HALC had a significantly shorter incision length and longer operative time than OC. Patients in the HALC group had significantly less operative blood loss, less pain and earlier passage of flatus after operation than those in the OC group. The number of lymph nodes recovered in the specimen and the overall postoperative complications was comparable in the 2 groups. The postoperative duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the HALC group, whereas the median overall costs in the HALC group were significantly higher than that in the OC group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from the present study demonstrate that the HALC is a valid surgical approach for cancer of the right hemicolon that retains the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. We believe that this technique is a safe, useful, and feasible method for patients with right-sided colonic cancer. If practiced more, it might be advocated as a "bridge" between traditional laparoscopic surgery and conventional open procedures.