Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Laparoscopic radical surgery for locally advanced T4 transverse colon cancer and prognostic factors analysis: Evidence from multi-center databases

The safety and efficacies of laparoscopic radical procedures are still controversial for locally advanced pathological T4 (pT4) TCC (transverse colon cancer). Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the oncologic and perioperative outcomes and to recognize the prognostic factors in radical resection for pT4 TCC derived from multi-center databases. 314 patients with TCC who underwent radical resection between January 2004 and May 2017, including 139 laparoscopic resections and 175 open resections, were extracted from multicenter databases. Oncological as well as perioperative outcomes were investigated. The baseline characteristics of the 2 groups did not differ significantly. Nevertheless, the laparoscopic technique was found to be linked with a significantly longer duration of surgery (208.96 vs 172.89 minutes, P = .044) and a significantly shorter postoperative hospital stay (12.23 vs 14.48 days, P = .014) when compared to the conventional open approach. In terms of oncological outcomes, lymph node resection (16.10 vs 13.66, P = .886), 5-year overall survival (84.7% vs 82.7%, P = .393), and disease-free survival (82.7% vs 83.9%, P = .803) were similar between the 2 approaches. Based on multivariate analysis, it was determined that differentiation and N classification were both independent prognostic factors for overall survival. However, it was found that only N classification was an independent prognostic factor for disease-free survival. These findings underscore the significance of differentiation and N classification as key determinants of patient outcomes in this context. Overall, the laparoscopic approach may offer advantages in terms of shorter hospital stays, while maintaining comparable oncological outcomes. Laparoscopic radical procedure can gain a couple of short-term benefits without reducing long-term oncological survival for patients with pT4 TCC.

Analysis of 10 years of open, laparoscopic, and robotic rectal surgeries in the community setting

Background

Colorectal cancer is the fourth most common cancer in the US. Many of these patients will require operations. Although there is significant data in the literature that supports minimally invasive colorectal operations in the academic setting, few studies have examined their performance in community hospitals.

Methods

Data was collected from a high-volume, university-affiliated, community center. Our Cancer Registry Database was queried to include any patients that had rectal surgery at our institution from 2010 to 2020. One hundred-twenty-two patients were identified and reviewed retrospectively. Main outcome measures include estimated blood loss (EBL), blood transfusion, time to first bowel movement, oncologic resection, length of stay (LOS), survival, and cost analysis.

Results

Both robotic and laparoscopic operations resulted in lower average EBL, less blood transfusions, and less time to first bowel movement (p = 0.003, 0.006, 0.003, respectively). There was no significant difference in ability to achieve R0 resection, adequate lymph node retrieval, and adequate total mesorectal excision (TME, p = 0.856, 0.489, 0.500, respectively). LOS was significantly shorter for minimally invasive operations, 4.35 vs 8.48 days, and average survival was longest for laparoscopic operations at 7.19 years as compared to 5.55 years for open operations (p < 0.001, 0.026, respectively). Cost was lowest for robotic operations (0.003).

Conclusions

Minimally invasive rectal operations, especially robotic, lead to better short- and long-term outcomes, equivalent oncologic resection, and are more cost-effective as compared to open operations even in the community setting, supporting continued performance and growth of robotic colorectal operations in the community setting.

Key message

Although there is significant data in the literature that supports minimally invasive colorectal operations in the academic setting, few studies have examined their performance in community hospitals as this study does. This study found that minimally invasive rectal operations, especially robotic, lead to better short- and long-term outcomes, equivalent oncologic resection, and are more cost-effective as compared to open operations even in the community setting, supporting continued performance and growth of robotic colorectal operations in the community setting.

Inferior mesenteric artery ligation level in rectal cancer surgery: still no answer-a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the current scientific evidence regarding the impact of the level of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) ligation on post-operative and oncological outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature up to 06 September 2022. Included were RCTs that compared patients who underwent high (HL) vs. anterior (LL) IMA ligation for resection of rectal cancer. The literature search was performed on Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and the Web of Science without any language restrictions. The primary endpoint was overall anastomotic leakage (AL). Secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes, intraoperative complications, urogenital functional outcomes, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs (1331 patients) were included. The overall rate of AL was lower in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.96). The overall number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD 0.93, 95% CI - 2.21 to 0.34). The number of lymph nodes harvested was assessed in 256 patients, and all had a laparoscopic procedure. The number of lymph nodes was higher when LL was associated with lymphadenectomy of the vascular root than when IMA was ligated at its origin, but there the difference was not statistically significant (MD - 0.37, 95% CI - 1.00 to 0.26). Overall survival at 5 years was slightly better in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05). Disease-free survival at 5 years was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.04).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to support HL or LL according to results in terms of AL or oncologic outcome. Moreover, there is not enough evidence to determine the impact of the level of IMA ligation on functional outcomes. The level of IMA ligation should be chosen case by case based on expected functional and oncological outcomes.

Open versus laparoscopic Hartmann's procedure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Hartmann's procedure is traditionally performed in emergency situations where single-step procedures with immediate anastomosis may be unsafe. However, it can be associated with significant morbidity and low colostomy reversal rate. Whilst randomised controlled trials and a Cochrane review have reported strong evidence of laparoscopic over open colectomies, no such reviews have been performed for Hartmann's procedure. Hence, this paper aims to summarise the existing evidence to determine the efficacy of laparoscopic Hartmann's procedure over its open counterpart.

METHODS

Embase, Medline and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to 15 November 2020 for keywords relating to 'laparoscopy' and 'Hartmann' using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Odds ratio was estimated for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference was estimated for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

From the 836 articles yielded from the search strategy, 12 articles were selected for meta-analysis. Pooled analysis revealed that laparoscopic Hartmann's procedure (LHP) allows for a shorter length of stay, and a lower risk of overall surgical site infections and superficial surgical site infections. There was no significant difference in other outcomes. Single-arm analysis of LHP also showed an unprecedented high colostomy reversal rate of over 80%.

CONCLUSION

In clinically suitable patients, laparoscopic Hartmann's procedure has benefits over open Hartmann's procedure. Despite the selection bias of single-arm studies, LHP has reported a high stoma reversal rate of over 80%. Future well-controlled studies should be done to affirm the findings.

Fast-track surgery nursing intervention in CRC patients with laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery

In this study, the application effect of fast-track surgery (FTS) nursing intervention in laparotomy and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) is investigated, and the optimal perioperative management strategy for CRC surgery is explored. One hundred thirty CRC patients are included in this study, in which 67 patients undergo laparotomy (Group A) and 63 patients undergo laparoscopic surgery (Group B). These patients were also randomly divided into traditional nursing subgroup (Group A1 [n = 33] and Group B1 [n = 31]) and FTS nursing subgroup (Group A2 [n = 34] and Group B2 [n = 32]). The general data of patients, pre-operative preparation, intra-operative data, postoperative recovery data, and postoperative complications are recorded. Both FTS and laparoscopic surgery can advance the anal exhaust time, and shorten postoperative fasting and water deprivation time, and the hospitalization time without increasing the incidence of complications. FTS has advantages in reducing the indwelling time of gastric tube and throat pain. Simultaneous implementation of FTS and laparoscopic surgery has the best effect on the postoperative recovery of CRC patients.

Robotic and robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: A meta-analysis of short-term and long-term results

The usage of robotic surgery in rectal cancer (RC) is increasing, but there is an ongoing debate as to whether it provides any benefit. This study conducted a meta-analysis of rectal cancer surgery for short-term and long-term outcome by Robotic and robotic-assisted surgery (RS) vs laparoscopic surgery (LS).Pubmed, Embase, Ovid, CNKI, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched. Studies clearly documenting a comparison of short-term and long-term effect between RS and LS for RC were selected. Lymph node harvested, operation time, hospital stay, circumferential resection margins（CRM), complications, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year DFS parameters were evaluated. All data were performed by Review Manager 5.3 software. Nine studies were collected that included 1436 cases in total, 716 (49.86%) in the RS group, 720(50.14%) in the LS group. Compared with LS, RS was associated with longer operation time (MD 35.19, 95%CI [7.57, 62.81]; P = 0.01), but similar hospital stay (MD -0.43, 95%CI [-0.87,0.01]; P = 0.05).Lymph node harvested, CRM, complications, 3-year DFS, 5-year DFS had no significance difference between RS and LS groups（MD -0.67，95%CI[-1.53，0.19]；P = 0.13；MD 0.86，95%CI[0.54,1.37]；P = 0.52；MD 0.97，95%CI [0.73,1.29]；P = 0.86；MD 0.94，95%CI[0.60,1.48]；P = 0.79；MD 0.88，95%CI[0.52,1.47]；P = 0.61 respectively）.RS is feasible and safe for RC. It has an advantage in short -term outcome and a similar effect in long-term outcome compared with LS.

Comparison of Short-Term and Long-Term outcomes of Laparoscopy Versus Laparotomy in Rectal Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background and objective: The last randomized controlled trials ,the ACOSOG Z6051 1,2 and the ALaCaRT trial3, 4 could not show the non-inferiority of the laparoscopy in comparison to laparotomy for rectal cancer. In fact, the ten first years of practicing laparoscopy were years when surgeons developed their learning curve. Therefore, by excluding this learning bias, it is possible to end up with a more fair and correct comparison between the two techniques. It is henceforth relevant to pursue a new meta-analysis that compares the two techniques and excludes studies done during the earlier periods of laparoscopic rectal surgery. Results: Six randomized controlled trials met the eligibility criteria, involving a total of 1556 patients in the laparoscopy group and 1188 patients in the laparotomy group. Our meta-analysis was in favor of laparoscopy in a significant way for blood loss, first bowel movement and the number of harvested lymph nodes. It was non-significantly in favour of laparoscopy for 30-days mortality after surgery and length of hospital stay. It was significantly in favor of laparotomy for operative duration. No significant difference was found in anastomotic leakage) , reoperation within 30 days, number of positive CRMs and completeness of mesorectal excision between the two groups. No difference was found in recurrence, disease-free survival and overall survival between laparoscopy group and laparotomy group. Conclusion: The comparison of the randomized controlled trials published before and after 2010, showed no significant difference in outcomes between the learning period and after. Keywords: Laparoscopy, laparotomy, long-term outcomes, meta-analysis, short-term outcomes, rectal cancer

Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been applied in the clinic for decades; nevertheless, which surgical approach has a lower rate of postoperative complications is still inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the postoperative complications within 30 days between robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery based on randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (until May 2020) that compared robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery were searched through PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, and China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc). Data regarding sample size, clinical and demographic characteristics, and postoperative complications within 30 days, including overall postoperative complications, severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ III), anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, bleeding, ileus, urinary complications, respiratory complications, conversion to open surgery, unscheduled reoperation, perioperative mortality, and pathological outcomes, were extracted. The results were analyzed using RevMan v5.3.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials that included 507 robotic and 516 laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery cases were included. Meta-analysis showed that the overall postoperative complications within 30 days [Z = 1.1, OR = 1.18, 95% CI (0.88-1.57), P = 0.27], severe postoperative complications [Z = 0.22, OR = 1.12, 95% CI (0.41-3.07), P = 0.83], anastomotic leakage [Z = 0.96, OR = 1.27, 95% CI (0.78-2.08), P = 0.34], surgical site infection [Z = 0.18, OR = 1.05, 95% CI (0.61-1.79), P = 0.86], bleeding [Z = 0.19, OR = 0.89, 95% CI (0.27-2.97), P = 0.85], ileus [Z = 1.47, OR = 0.66, 95% CI (0.38-1.15), P = 0.14], urinary complications [Z = 0.66, OR = 1.22, 95% CI (0.67-2.22), P = 0.51], respiratory complications [Z = 0.84, OR = 0.64, 95% CI (0.22-1.82), P = 0.40], conversion to open surgery [Z = 1.73, OR = 0.61, 95% CI (0.35-1.07), P = 0.08], unscheduled reoperation [Z = 0.14, OR = 0.91, 95% CI (0.26-3.20), P = 0.89], perioperative mortality [Z = 0.28, OR = 0.79, 95% CI (0.15-4.12), P = 0.78], and pathological outcomes were similar between robotic and laparoscopic rectal surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer was comparable to laparoscopic surgery with respect to postoperative complications within 30 days.

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.

The financial burden of complications following rectal resection: A cohort study

To investigate the costs associated with postoperative complications following rectal resection.Rectal resection is a major surgical procedure that carries a significant risk of complications. The occurrence of complications following surgery has both health and financial consequences. There are very few studies that examine the incidence and severity of complications and their financial implications following rectal resection.We identified 381 consecutive patients who underwent a rectal resection within a major university hospital. Patients were included using the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Complications in the postoperative period were reported using the validated Clavien-Dindo classification system. Both the number and severity of complications were recorded. Activity-based costing methodology was used to report financial outcomes. Preoperative results were also recorded and assessed.A 76.9% [95% CI: 68.3:86.2] of patients experienced one or more complications. Patients who had a complication had a median total cost of $22,567 [IQR 16,607:33,641]. Patients who did not have a complication had a median total cost of $15,882 [IQR 12,971:19,861]. The adjusted additional median cost for patients who had a complication was $5308 [95% CI: 2938:7678] (P < .001). Patients who experienced a complication tended to undergo an open procedure (P = .001), were emergent patients (P = .003), preoperatively had lower albumin levels (36 vs 38, P = .0003) and were anemic (P = .001).Complications following rectal resection are common and are associated with increased costs. Our study highlights the importance of evaluating and preventing complications in the postoperative period.

Creation of a rectal cancer registry in Italy by the Advanced International Mini-Invasive Surgery (AIMS) academy clinical research network

Background: The management of rectal cancer is multimodal and involves a multidisciplinary team of cancer specialists with expertise in medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology and radiology. It is crucial for highly specialized centers to collaborate via networks that aim to maintain uniformity in every aspect of treatment and rigorously gather patients’ data, from the first clinical evaluation to the last follow-up visit.

The Advanced International Mini-Invasive Surgery (AIMS) academy clinical research network aims to create a rectal cancer registry. This will prospectively collect the data of patients operated on for non-metastatic rectal cancer in high volume colorectal surgical units through a well design pre-fashioned database for non-metastatic rectal cancer, in order to take all multidisciplinary aspects into consideration.

Methods/Design: The protocol describes a multicenter prospective observational cohort study, investigating demographics, frailty, cancer-related features, surgical and radiological parameters, and oncological outcomes among patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer who are candidates for surgery with curative intent. Patients enrolled in the present registry will be followed up for 5 years after surgery.

Discussion: Standardization and centralization of data collection for neoplastic diseases is a virtuous process for patient care. The creation of a register will allow the control of the quality of treatments provided and permit prospective and retrospective studies to be carried out on complete and reliable high quality data. Establishing data collection in a prospective and systematic fashion is the only possibility to preserve the enormous resource that each patient represents.