Totally robotic modified complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation for right-sided colon cancer: technical feasibility and mid-term oncologic outcomes

Safety and feasibility of robotic surgery for colon cancer patients with previous abdominal surgery: a propensity score-matching analysis

Robotic surgery is widely used in gastrointestinal surgery. While the application of robotic surgery for colon cancer patients with previous abdominal surgery (PAS) remains controversial for the fear of intra-abdominal adhesions. This study was aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic colectomy for patients with PAS. The medical records of colon cancer patients who underwent robotic surgery at our hospital from June 2015 to August 2020 were extracted and analyzed. Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was implemented to minimize selection bias. We compared perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications between the patients with PAS or with no PAS (NPAS). A total of 79 patients (PAS group) and 348 patients (NPAS group) were included in our study. After PSM, 79 patients of PAS group and 79 patients of NPAS group were selected for further analysis. We did not find statistical difference in operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph nodes retrieved, length of hospital stay and hospital costs between the two groups. No difference was noted in the incidence of postoperative complications, conversion to open surgery and mortality between the two groups. According to the results of multivariate analysis, PAS was not identified as risk factor for postoperative complications. Left hemicolectomy and perioperative transfusion were associated with postoperative complications. PAS did not negatively affect the outcomes of robotic colectomy. After individually preoperative assessment, robotic surgery could be performed feasibly and safely for colon cancer patients with PAS.

Variations of the double superior mesenteric vein are not rare: An observational study using computed tomography, three-dimensional image reconstruction, and surgery

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have evaluated variations of the main trunk of the superior mesenteric vessels. Particularly, the double superior mesenteric vein (DSMV) has not been described in detail. This study aimed to establish the definition, anatomical characteristics, and underlying clinical significance of the DSMV.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 115 patients with colorectal cancer were included in this retrospective study between March 2020 and March 2022. The anatomical characteristics were analyzed using computed tomography, three-dimensional image reconstructions, and surgical videos.

RESULTS

Among the patients enrolled, 22 (19.1%) had DSMVs. The median diameters of the right and left superior mesenteric veins were similar. The superior mesenteric artery was sandwiched between the right and the left superior mesenteric veins. The left superior mesenteric vein mainly crossed the ventral side of the superior mesenteric artery (63.6%). In 1 case, the right superior mesenteric vein was mistakenly resected intraoperatively. The DSMV was classified into types I and II based on whether the right and left trunks formed a common trunk; it was further classified into subtypes a and b based on the colonic vein confluence. The proportions of type I-a, I-b, II-a, and II-b were 4.5%, 27.3%, 9.1%, and 59.1%, respectively. The middle colic veins drained into the left superior mesenteric vein in 19 cases (86.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The DSMV is more common than previously thought. For the first time, the definition and four types of the DSMV were proposed. The presence of a DSMV should be considered during right hemicolectomies.

Effect of intracorporeal anastomosis on postoperative ileus after laparoscopic right colectomy

Purpose

Laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) remains the most widely adopted technique despite mounting evidence that intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) offers several advantages. This study aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes of ICA and ECA and to investigate the effect of ICA on postoperative ileus after LRC.

Methods

This retrospective study included 45 patients who underwent ICA and 63 who underwent ECA in LRC for right-sided colonic diseases between January 2015 and December 2019.

Results

There were no significant differences in total operation time, blood loss, total length of incisions, tolerance of diet, postoperative pain score on postoperative days 1 and 2, or length of hospital stays between the 2 groups. However, the ICA group had a significantly shorter time to first flatus passage (3.0 ± 0.9 days vs. 3.8 ± 1.9 days, P = 0.013). The rate of postoperative ileus was significantly higher in the ECA group (2.2% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.033); however, there was no significant difference in the overall morbidity within 30 days after surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the ECA technique (odds ratio [OR], 0.098; 95% confidence interval [CI]; 0.011-0.883, P = 0.038) and previous abdominal operation (OR, 5.269; 95% CI, 1.193-23.262; P = 0.028) were independent risk factors for postoperative ileus.

Conclusion

The postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent LRC with ICA or ECA were comparable, and ICA could reduce the incidence of postoperative ileus after LRC compared with ECA.

Definition and reporting of lymphadenectomy and complete mesocolic excision for radical right colectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several procedures have been proposed to reduce the rates of recurrence in patients with right-sided colon cancer. Different procedures for a radical right colectomy (RRC), including extended D3 lymphadenectomy, complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been associated with survival benefits by some authors, but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the variability in definition and reporting of RRC, which might be responsible for significant differences in outcome evaluation.

METHODS

PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review to identify the definitions of RRC. Primary aims were to identify surgical steps and different nomenclature for RRC. Secondary aims were description of heterogeneity and overlap among different RRC techniques.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Eight surgical steps were identified and recorded as specific to RRC: Central arterial ligation was described in 100% of the included studies; preservation of mesocolic integrity in 73% and dissection along the SMV plane in 67%. Other surgical steps were inconstantly reported. Six differently named techniques for RRC have been identified. There were 35 definitions for the 6 techniques and 40% of these were used to identify more than one technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The only universally adopted surgical step for RRC is central arterial ligation. There is great heterogeneity and consistent overlap among definitions of all RRC techniques. This is likely to jeopardise the interpretation of the outcomes of studies on the topic. Consistent use of definitions and reporting of procedures are needed to obtain reliable conclusions in future trials. PROSPERO CRD42021241650.

Risk of Local Recurrence After Complete Mesocolic Excision for Right-Sided Colon Cancer: Post-Hoc Sensitivity Analysis of a Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

A causal treatment effect of complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer on the risk of recurrence has been shown, but it is still unclear whether this is caused solely by a risk reduction of local recurrence.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to assess to what extent complete mesocolic excision contributes to the risk of local recurrence.

DESIGN

This study was a posthoc analyses of data from a population-based cohort. Inverse probability of treatment weighting and competing risk analyses were used to estimate the possible causal effects of complete mesocolic excision.

SETTING

Data were collected from the 4 public colorectal cancer centers in the Capital Region of Denmark.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing elective colon resections for right-sided colon cancer without distant metastases during the period 2010-2013 were included. One center performed complete mesocolic excision and the remaining 3 centers performed conventional resections.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of solely local recurrence 5.2 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were solely distant recurrence and both local and distant recurrence diagnosed within 180 days.

RESULTS

A total of 807 patients were included with 186 undergoing complete mesocolic excision and 621 conventional resections. The 5.2-year cumulative incidence of a solely local recurrence was 3.7% (95% CI, 0.5-6.1) after complete mesocolic excision compared with 7.0% (5.0-8.9) in the control group, and the absolute risk reduction of complete mesocolic excision was 3.7% (2.5-7.1; p = 0.035). The absolute risk reduction on local and distant recurrence was 3.4% (1.3-5.6; p = 0.002) and on solely distant recurrence was 3.1% (0.0-6.2; p = 0.052).

LIMITATIONS

The recurrence risk after conventional resection might be underestimated by the use of inappropriate modalities to diagnose local recurrence for some patients and the shorter duration in this group.

CONCLUSION

This study shows a causal treatment effect of complete mesocolic excision on the risk of a solely local recurrence and of distant recurrence with or without local recurrence. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B832 .RIESGO DE RECURRENCIA LOCAL DESPUÉS DE LA ESCISIÓN MESOCÓLICA COMPLETA PARA EL CÁNCER DE COLON DEL LADO DERECHO: ANÁLISIS DE SENSIBILIDAD POST-HOC DE UN ESTUDIO POBLACIONALANTECEDENTES:Se ha demostrado un efecto del tratamiento causal de la escisión mesocólica completa para el cáncer de colon del lado derecho sobre el riesgo de recurrencia, pero aún no está claro si esto se debe únicamente a una reducción del riesgo de recurrencia local.OBJETIVO:Evaluar en qué medida la escisión mesocólica completa se atribuye al riesgo de recurrencia local.DISEÑO:Análisis posthoc de datos de una cohorte poblacional. Se utilizaron análisis de probabilidad inversa de ponderación del tratamiento y de riesgo competitivo para estimar los posibles efectos causales de la escisión mesocólica completa.AJUSTE:Datos de los cuatro centros públicos de cáncer colorrectal en la Región Capital de Dinamarca.PACIENTES:Pacientes sometidos a resecciones de colon electivas por cáncer de colon derecho sin metástasis a distancia durante el período 2010-2013. Un centro realizó escisión mesocólica completa, el resto resecciones convencionales.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la incidencia acumulada de la recidiva local únicamente, 5,2 años después de la cirugía. Los resultados secundarios fueron únicamente la recidiva a distancia y ambas,la recidiva local y a distancia diagnosticada dentro de los 180 días.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 807 pacientes, 186 sometidos a escisión mesocólica completa y 621 resecciones convencionales. La incidencia acumulada de 5,2 años de una recidiva únicamente local fue del 3,7% (IC del 95%: 0,5 a 6,1) después de la escisión mesocólica completa en comparación con el 7,0% (5,0 a 8,9) en el grupo de control, y la reducción del riesgo absoluto de la escisión mesocólica completa fue del 3,7% (2,5-7,1; p = 0,035). La reducción del riesgo absoluto de recidiva local y distante fue del 3,4% (1,3-5,6; p = 0,0019) y de recidiva únicamente a distancia 3,1% (0,0-6,2; p = 0,052).LIMITANTES:El riesgo de recurrencia después de la resección convencional podría subestimarse por el uso de modalidades inapropiadas para el diagnostico de la recurrencia local en algunos pacientes y la duración más corta en este grupo.CONCLUSIÓN:Este estudio muestra un efecto del tratamiento causal de la escisión mesocólica completa sobre el riesgo de una recidiva únicamente local y de recidiva a distancia con o sin recidiva local. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B832 . (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

Robotic-assisted Surgery: Expanding Indication to Colon Cancer in Japan

In recent years, robotic-assisted surgery has demonstrated remarkable progress as a minimally invasive procedure for colorectal cancer. While there have been fewer studies investigating robotic-assisted surgery for the treatment of colon cancer than rectal cancer, evidence regarding robotic-assisted colectomy has been accumulating due to increasing use of the procedure. Robotic-assisted colectomy generally requires a long operative time and involves high costs. However, as evidence is increasingly supportive of its higher accuracy and less invasive nature compared to laparoscopic colectomy, the procedure is anticipated to improve the ratio of conversion to laparotomy and accelerate postoperative recovery. Robotic-assisted surgery has also been suggested for a specific level of effectiveness in manipulative procedures, such as intracorporeal anastomosis, and is increasingly indicated as a less problematic procedure compared to conventional laparoscopy and open surgery in terms of long-term oncological outcomes. Although robotic-assisted colectomy has been widely adopted abroad, only a limited number of institutions have been using this procedure in Japan. Further accumulation of experience and studies investigating surgical outcomes using this approach are required in Japan.

Updates on Robotic CME for Right Colon Cancer: A Qualitative Systematic Review

Background. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is a surgical technique introduced with the aim of ameliorating the oncologic results of colectomy. Various experiences have demonstrated favorable oncologic results of CME in comparison with standard colectomy, in which the principles of CME are not respected. The majority of the literature refers to open or laparoscopic CME. This review analyses current evidence regarding robotic CME for right colectomy. Methods. An extensive Medline (Pub Med) search for relevant case series, restricted to papers published in English, was performed, censoring video vignettes and case reports. Results. Fourteen studies (ten retrospective, four comparative series of robotic versus laparoscopic CME) were included, with patient numbers ranging from 20 to 202. Four different approaches to CME are described, which also depend on the robotic platform utilized. Intraoperative and early clinical results were good, with a low conversion and anastomotic leak rate and a majority of Clavien–Dindo complications being Grades I and II. Oncologic adequacy of the surgical specimens was found to be good, although a homogeneous histopathologic evaluation was not provided. Conclusions. Further large studies are warranted to define long-term oncologic results of robotic right colectomy with CME and its eventual benefits in comparison to laparoscopy.

Complete mesocolic excision and D3 lymphadenectomy with central vascular ligation in right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review of postoperative outcomes, tumor recurrence and overall survival

BACKGROUND

In right-sided colon cancer surgery, currently there is a great deal of discussion and debate regarding complete mesocolic excision (CME) versus conventional right hemicolectomy (CRH) on postoperative outcomes and oncological results. Our aim was to perform a systematic review of the short- and long-term outcomes of CME to standardize surgical approach in patients with right-sided colon cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed examining available data on randomized and non-randomized studies evaluating the role of CME and D3 lymphadenectomy in the treatment of right-sided colon cancer, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards.

RESULTS

After literature search, 919 studies have been recorded, 110 studies underwent full-text reviews and 30 studies met inclusion criteria. The total number of CME procedures was 5931. Postoperative complications was reported in 28 studies with pooled overall complications of 1.88% for CME surgery. Six studies reported 0% of overall postoperative complications and they demonstrated a low incidence of complications following CME procedure. Anastomotic leak was reported in 27 studies with pooled proportion of 0.92% after CME resections. There were 16 papers reporting overall survival following CME procedure, with a mean of 85% of patients survived at 5 years. Mean 5-year overall survival was 93.05% in stage I patients, 89.76% in stage II patients and 79.65% in stage III patients. Local and distant recurrence were included in 21 studies, reporting tumor recurrence rate of 12.25% following CME. 5-year tumor recurrence was 5.8% in stage I patients, 7.68% in stage II patients and 15.69% in stage III patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CME does not increase the risk of postoperative complications and significantly improves the long-term oncological impact. Prospective multicentre studies results are needed to verify if CME could be considered standard surgery for right colon cancer.

Comparison of Short-term Results after Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision and Standard Colectomy for Right-Sided Colon Cancer: Analysis of a Western Center Cohort

Purpose

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) right colectomy is a technically demanding procedure infrequently employed in Western centers. This retrospective cohort study aims to analyze the safety of laparoscopic CME colectomy compared to standard colectomy for right-sided colon cancer in a Western series.

Methods

Prospectively collected data from 60 patients who underwent laparoscopic CME right colectomy were compared to the ones of 55 patients who underwent laparoscopic standard right colectomy.

Results

No differences in clinical characteristics were observed between the CME and standard right colectomy groups. No differences were demonstrated in terms of blood loss (P = 0.060), intraoperative complications (P = 1), conversion rate (P = 0.102), and operative time (P = 0.473). No deaths were observed in either group, while complication rate was 40.0% in the CME and 49.1% in the standard group (P = 0.353). Severe complications occurred in 10.0% vs. 9.1% (P = 0.842), redo surgery in 5.0% vs. 7.3% (P = 0.708), and unplanned readmission in 5.0% vs. 5.5% (P = 1) after CME and standard colectomy, respectively. A significant difference in favor of CME was observed in the total length of specimen (P < 0.001), proximal (P = 0.018), and distal margins (P = 0.037). The number of lymph nodes harvested was significantly higher in the CME group (27 vs. 22, P = 0.037).

Conclusion

In Western series, where patients have less favorable clinical characteristics, laparoscopic CME allows to obtain better quality surgical specimens and comparable short-term outcomes compared to standard right colectomy.

Robotic Complete Mesocolic Excision (CME) is a safe and feasible option for right colonic cancers: short and midterm results from a single-centre experience

BACKGROUND

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right colon cancers has traditionally been an open procedure. Surgical adoption of minimal access CME remains limited due to the technical challenges, training gaps and lack of level-1 data for proven benefits. Currently there is limited published data regarding the clinical results with the use of robotic CME surgery. Aim To report our experience, results and techniques, highlighting a clinical and oncological results and midterm oncological outcomes for robotic CME.

AIM

To report our experience, results and techniques, highlighting a clinical and oncological results and midterm oncological outcomes for robotic CME.

METHODS

All patients undergoing standardised robotic CME technique with SMV first approach between January 2015 and September 2019 were included in this retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. Patient demographics, operative data and clinical and oncological outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven robotic CME resections for right colonic cancers were performed over a 4-year period. Median operative time was 180 (128-454) min and perioperative blood loss was 10 (10-50) ml. There were 25 patients who had previous abdominal surgery. Median postoperative hospital stay was 5 (3-18) days. There was no conversion to open surgery in this series. Median lymph node count was 30 (10-60). Three (4%) patients had R1 resection. There was one (1%) local recurrence in stage III disease and 4(5%) distal recurrence in stage II and stage III. There was no 30- or 90-day mortality. Three-year disease-free survival was 100%, 91.7% and 92% for stages I, II and III, respectively. Overall survival was 94%.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic CME is feasible, effective and safe. Good oncological results and improved survival are seen in this cohort of patients with a standardised approach to robotic CME.

Ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis during robotic right colectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of different techniques

PURPOSE

Robotic assistance could increase the rate of ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis (ICA) during robotic right colectomy (RRC). However, although robotic ICA can be accomplished with several different technical variants, it is not clear whether some of these technical details should be preferred. An evaluation of the possible advantage of one respect to another would be useful.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of literature on technical details of robotic ileo-colic ICA, from which we performed a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes. The extracted data allowed a comparative analysis regarding the outcome of overall complication (OC), bleeding rate (BR) and leakage rate (LR), between (1) mechanical anastomosis with robotic stapler, versus laparoscopic stapler, versus totally hand-sewn anastomosis and (2) closure of enterocolotomy with manual double layer, versus single layer, versus stapled.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies including 2066 patients were selected. Globally, the side-to-side, isoperistaltic anastomosis, realized with laparoscopic staplers, and double-layer closure for enterocolotomy, is the most common technique used. According to the meta-analysis, the use of robotic stapler was significantly associated with a reduction of the BR with respect to mechanical anastomosis with laparoscopic stapler or totally hand-sewn anastomosis. None of the other technical aspects significantly influenced the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

ICA fashioning during RRC can be accomplished with several technical variants without evidence of a clear superiority of anyone of these techniques. Although the use of robotic staplers could be associated with some benefits, further studies are necessary to draw conclusions.

A global systematic review and meta-analysis on laparoscopic vs open right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of right hemicolectomy with CME performed with laparoscopic and open surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, Google Scholar and the ClinicalTrials.gov register were searched. Primary outcome was the overall number of harvested lymph nodes. Secondary outcomes were short and long-term course variables. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate risk ratios.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were identified with 5038 patients enrolled. The difference in number of harvested lymph nodes was not statistically significant (MD 0.68, - 0.41-1.76, P = 0.22). The only RCT shows a significant advantage in favour of laparoscopy (MD 3.30, 95% CI - 0.20-6.40, P = 0.04). The analysis of CCTs showed an advantage in favour of the laparoscopic group, but the result was not statically significantly (MD - 0.55, 95% CI - 0.57-1.67, P = 0.33). The overall incidence of local recurrence was not different between the groups, while systemic recurrence at 5 years was lower in laparoscopic group. Laparoscopy showed better short-term outcomes including overall complications, lower estimated blood loss, lower wound infections and shorter hospital stay, despite a longer operative time. The rate of anastomotic and chyle leak was similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the several limitations of this study, we found that the median number of lymph node harvested in the laparoscopic group is not different compared to open surgery. Laparoscopy was associated with a lower incidence of systemic recurrence.

Robotic Complete Mesocolic Excision with Central Vascular Ligation for Right Colon Cancer: Surgical Technique and Short-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive colorectal surgery has demonstrated to have the same oncological results as open surgery, with better clinical outcomes. Robotic assistance is an evolution of minimally invasive technique.

PURPOSE

The study aims to present technical details and short-term oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL) for right colon cancer.

METHODOLOGY

Fifty-two consecutive patients affected by right colon cancer were operated between May 2016 and February 2020 with da Vinci Xi platform. Data regarding surgical and short-term oncological outcomes were systematically collected in a colorectal specific database for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven (71.15%) and 15 (28.85%) patients underwent right and extended right hemicoletomy with an extracorporeal anastomosis. Median age was 55 years. Mean operative time was 182 ± 36 min. Mean blood loss was 110 ± 90 ml. Conversion rate was 3.84% (two cases). 78.84% (41 cases) were pT3 and mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 28 ± 4. 1/52 (1.92%) had a documented anastomotic leak requiring exploratory laparotomy and diversion proximal ileostomy. Surgery-related grade IIIa-IIIb Calvien Dindo morbidity were noted in 9.61% and 1.92%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Robotic assistance allows performance of oncological adequate dissection of the right colon with radical lymphadenectomy as in open surgery, confirming the safety and oncological adequacy of this technique, with acceptable results and short-term outcomes.

Robotic simultaneous resection for colorectal liver metastasis: feasibility for all types of liver resection

BACKGROUND

A laparoscopic approach is increasingly being utilized in simultaneous colorectal and liver resection (SCLR) for colorectal cancer with liver metastasis. However, this approach is technically challenging and hence has not been widely adopted. Robotic surgical systems could potentially overcome this problem. We aim to describe the feasibility and outcomes of robotic SCLR for colorectal carcinoma with liver metastasis.

METHODS

The medical records of 12 patients who underwent robotic SCLR for colorectal cancer with liver metastasis between January 2008 and September 2018 were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The mean age was 59 years (range, 37-77 years). The liver resections were comprised of two right hepatectomies, one left hepatectomy, one left lateral sectionectomy, one segmentectomy of S3 and wedge resection (segment 7), one caudate lobectomy, one associated liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy, and five wedge resections involving segments 4, 5, 6, 7, or 8. The colorectal procedures involved seven low-anterior resections, two anterior resections, two right hemicolectomies, and one left hemicolectomy. The mean operative time was 449 min (range, 135-682 min) with a mean estimated blood loss of 274.3 mL (range, 40-780 mL). The mean length of hospital stay was 12 days (range, 5-28 days). No patients required conversion to laparotomy. Liver resection-related complications were two liver abscesses (Clavien-Dindo classification, one grade II and one grade III) and one case of ascites (grade I), whereas colorectal resection-related complications included one anastomosis leak (grade III) and one superficial wound infection (grade II). There were no deaths reported within 30 days of the procedure. With a mean follow-up duration of 31.5 ± 26.1 months, the overall survival and disease-free survival values were 75.2 and 47.1 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Robotic SCLR for colorectal neoplasm with liver metastasis can be performed safely even in cases requiring major liver resections, especially in a specialized center with a well-trained team.