Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for neoplasm. A large series by a single surgeon

The learning curve of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excisions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of rectal carcinoma is surgical resection according to the total mesorectal excision principle, either by open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal technique. No clear consensus exists regarding the length of the learning curve for the minimal invasive techniques. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the current literature regarding the learning curve of minimal invasive TME.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for studies with the primary or secondary aim to assess the learning curve of either laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal TME for rectal cancer. The primary outcome was length of the learning curve per minimal invasive technique. Descriptive statistics were used to present results and the MINORS tool was used to assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

45 studies, with 7562 patients, were included in this systematic review. Length of the learning curve based on intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, pathological outcomes, or a composite endpoint using a risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis was 50 procedures for the laparoscopic technique, 32-75 procedures for the robot-assisted technique and 36-54 procedures for the transanal technique. Due to the low quality of studies and a high level of heterogeneity a meta-analysis could not be performed. Heterogeneity was caused by patient-related factors, surgeon-related factors and differences in statistical methods.

CONCLUSION

Current high-quality literature regarding length of the learning curve of minimal invasive TME techniques is scarce. Available literature suggests equal lengths of the learning curves of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal TME. Well-designed studies, using adequate statistical methods are required to properly assess the learning curve, while taking into account patient-related and surgeon-related factors.

Management of intraoperative complications during laparoscopic right colectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive right colectomy is increasingly performed as standard treatment for diseases of right colon. Complete mesocolic excision has been introduced for cancer treatment to improve oncological results. Both standard and complete mesocolic excision techniques are associated with intraoperative complications. The purpose of this study was to analyse incidence and management of intraoperative complications in patients who underwent laparoscopic right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision in a single institution.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study conducted in a single Italian centre from April 2017 to October 2020. Data of non-metastatic cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic right colectomy were collected to analyse onset of intraoperative complications, their management and rate of conversion to open surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients were included in this study. The 1.09% of patients were converted to open surgery due to adhesions and bowel occlusion. The 5.43% of patients had intraoperative complications: bleeding from Henle's trunk, pre-pancreatic plane and ileocolic artery stump account for 3.26%, gonadal vessel injury for 1.09% and bowel lesion for 1.09%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limits of this study, it shows that bleeding is one of the most frequent complications in laparoscopic right colectomy. Bleeding, occlusion and adhesions are most common reasons for conversion to open surgery.

Long-term outcomes of needlescopic surgery in patients with colon cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is a minimally invasive and frequently performed surgical procedure that has become the standard surgery for colorectal cancer. Needlescopic surgery (NS) for colon cancer has also been performed and reported as a less invasive technique. In this study, we investigated the long-term outcomes of NS in comparison with those of conventional surgery (CS).

METHODS

The data of 1122 patients without distant metastasis who underwent laparoscopic surgery between 2011 and 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. In this study, NS was defined as a laparoscopic procedure performed with the use of 3-mm ports and forceps with one 5-mm port for an energy device, as well as with clips. One 12-mm port was placed in the umbilicus for specimen extraction from the abdominal cavity.

RESULTS

A total of 241 patients underwent NS. There was no significant difference between the 5-year recurrence rate and the 5-year total mortality rate (NS: 10.0% and 5.4% vs. CS: 10.3% and 3.5%, p = 0.86/0.23). In the multivariate analysis, NS was not found to be an independent prognostic factor. In terms of the distribution of recurrence sites, there was no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

NS for colon cancer was not inferior to CS in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes.

Intraoperative air leak test reduces the rate of postoperative anastomotic leak: analysis of 777 laparoscopic left-sided colon resections

BACKGROUND

The evidence supporting the use of the air leak test (ALT) after laparoscopic left-sided colon resection (LLCR) to test the colorectal anastomosis (CA) integrity aiming at reducing the rate of postoperative CA leakage (CAL) is not conclusive. The aim of this study was to challenge the use of ALT after elective LLCR.

METHODS

It is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database including all patients undergoing elective LLCR with primary CA and no proximal bowel diversion between January 1996 and June 2017. The decision to perform the ALT was based on the individual surgeon routine practice. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent risk factors for CAL.

RESULTS

A total of 777 LLCR without proximal diversion were included in the analysis: the CA was tested in 398 patients (ALT group), while intraoperative ALT was not performed in 379 patients (No-ALT group). The two groups were similar in demographic characteristics, indication, and type of procedure. Intraoperative ALT was positive in 20 (5%) patients: a stoma was created in 14 (70%) patients, while 6 (30%) patients had a suture repair alone. Overall, postoperative CAL occurred in 32 patients (4.1%): the postoperative CAL rate was lower in ALT patients (2.5% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.025). A reoperation was needed in 87.5% of cases. No CAL occurred in the 20 patients with intraoperative positive ALT. Multivariate analysis showed that ASA score 3-4 (OR 5.39, 95% CI 2.53-11.51, p < 0.001) and male sex (OR 3.96, 95% CI 1.66-9.43, p = 0.002) were independent risk factors for postoperative CAL, while intraoperative ALT independently reduced the postoperative CAL rate (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18-0.88, p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative ALT allows to detect AL defects after LLCR that can be effectively managed intraoperatively, leading to a significant lower risk of postoperative CAL.

Attaining surgical competency and its implications in surgical clinical trial design: a systematic review of the learning curve in laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is increasingly used in the treatment of colorectal cancer and more recently robotic assistance has been advocated. However, the learning curve to achieve surgical proficiency in laparoscopic surgery is ill-defined and subject to many influences. The aim of this review was to comprehensively appraise the literature on the learning curve for laparoscopic and robotic colorectal cancer surgery, and to quantify attainment of surgical proficiency and its implications in surgical clinical trial design.

METHODS

A systematic review using a defined search strategy was performed. Included studies had to state an explicit numerical value of the learning curve evaluated by a single parameter or multiple parameters.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies were included, 28 laparoscopic and 6 robot assisted. Of the laparoscopic studies, nine defined the learning curve on the basis of a single parameter. Nine studies used more than one parameter to define learning, and 11 used a cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. One study used both a multiparameter and CUSUM analysis. The definition of proficiency was subjective, and the number of operations to achieve it ranged from 5 to 310 cases for laparoscopic and 15-30 cases for robotic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery is multifaceted and often ill-defined, with poor descriptions of mentorship/supervision. Further, the quantification to attain proficiency is variable. The use of a single parameter to quantify this is simplistic. Multidimensional assessment is recommended; as part of this, the CUSUM model, which assesses trends in multiple surgical outcomes, is useful and appropriate when assessing the learning curve in a clinical setting.

Measuring the surgical 'learning curve': methods, variables and competency

OBJECTIVES

To describe how learning curves are measured and what procedural variables are used to establish a 'learning curve' (LC). To assess whether LCs are a valuable measure of competency.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A review of the surgical literature pertaining to LCs was conducted using the Medline and OVID databases.

RESULTS

Variables should be fully defined and when possible, patient-specific variables should be used. Trainee's prior experience and level of supervision should be quantified; the case mix and complexity should ideally be constant. Logistic regression may be used to control for confounding variables. Ideally, a learning plateau should reach a predefined/expert-derived competency level, which should be fully defined. When the group splitting method is used, smaller cohorts should be used in order to narrow the range of the LC. Simulation technology and competence-based objective assessments may be used in training and assessment in LC studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Measuring the surgical LC has potential benefits for patient safety and surgical education. However, standardisation in the methods and variables used to measure LCs is required. Confounding variables, such as participant's prior experience, case mix, difficulty of procedures and level of supervision, should be controlled. Competency and expert performance should be fully defined.

Safe laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed by trainees

OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is safe, but there have been hesitations to implement the technique in all departments. One of the reasons for this may be suboptimal learning possibilities since supervised trainees have not been allowed to do the operations to an adequate extent for the technique to spread. We routinely plan all operations as laparoscopic procedures and most cases are done by supervised trainees. The present study therefore presents the results of operations performed by trainees compared with results obtained by experienced laparoscopic surgeons.

DESIGN

Data for all patients who underwent elective colorectal cancer surgery in 2009 were recorded. Surgeries performed by laparoscopic inexperienced surgeons were compared with the outcome of surgery performed by laparoscopic experienced surgeons. These results were also compared with nationwide data extracted from the national database.

SETTING

A university teaching department of surgery.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 131 patients underwent colorectal elective surgery in 2009 in the department.

RESULTS

Of the 131 operations, 60% were performed by trainees supervised by experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeons. The trainees performed a total of 70% of all colonic procedures and 43% of all rectal resections. There were no statistically significant differences between the inexperienced and experienced laparoscopic surgeons with regards to short-term outcome other than increased duration of surgery for colonic resections (198 vs 140 min, p = 0.005). Thus, we found no difference regarding length of stay, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative bleeding or complications, postoperative complications, or 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer can be performed safely by supervised trainees with good short term results. Therefore, a high volume of operations with an educational potential can easily be maintained when going from open to laparoscopic surgery as the standard operative technique for colorectal cancer in a university department of surgery.

Learning curve and case selection in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: systematic review and international multicenter analysis of 4852 cases

BACKGROUND

The learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery has not been conclusively analyzed. No reliable framework for case selection during training is available.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the length of the learning curve of laparoscopic colorectal surgeons and to recommend a case selection framework at the early stage of independent practice.

DATA SOURCES

Medline (1988-2010, October week 4) and Embase (1988-2010) were used for the literature review, databases were retrieved from the authors, and expert opinion was surveyed.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies describing the learning curve of laparoscopic or laparoscopically assisted colorectal surgery were selected.

INTERVENTION

No interventions were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Learning curves were analyzed by using risk-adjusted, bootstrapped cumulative sum curves. Conversions and complications were independent variables in a multilevel random-effects regression model. Recommendations are based on analysis of ORs and a structured expert opinion gauging process.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were identified, showing great disparity on the length of the learning curve. Seven studies, representing 4852 cases (19 surgeons), were analyzed. Risk-adjusted cumulative sum charts demonstrated the length of the learning curves to be 152 cases for conversions, 143 for complications, 96 for operating time, 87 for blood loss, and 103 for length of stay. Body mass index and pelvic dissection (rectum), especially in male patients, independently increased the risk of complication and conversion. The expert survey revealed that increasing T stage and complicated inflammatory disease are likely to increase the complexity of the case. Based on this evidence, a framework for case selection in training was proposed.

LIMITATIONS

The generalizability of the study results maybe reduced because of inconsistent data quality and individual variations in the length of the learning curve

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter database suggests a length of the learning curve of 88 to 152 cases. The use of the suggested framework may prevent high conversion and complication rates during the learning curve.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery - why would you not want to have it and, more importantly, not be trained in it? A consecutive series of 500 elective resections with anastomoses

AIM

We analysed the outcome of a consecutive series of 500 unselected patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resection with anastomosis (ELCRA) under the care of a single surgeon.

METHOD

A prospectively collected electronic database of all laparoscopic procedures conducted from April 2001 to September 2008 was analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 500 ELCRAs were performed [230 male and 270 female patients; mean age 65.6 years (range 19-93 years; American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I (103), II (246), III (145) and IV (6)]. Of these, 217 patients underwent high anterior resection. A total of 131 total mesorectal excisions (55 covering ileostomies), 152 right/extended right resections and 240 operations were performed by trainees under supervision. The indications for surgery included cancer (340), diverticular disease (96), Crohn's disease (40) and polyps (24). Mean operating time was 115 min (range 35-550 min). There were eight (1.6%) conversions. The mean length of hospital stay was 5.2 days (median 4 days). A total of 93 (18.6%) patients had an inpatient complication, including ileus (22), wound infection (14), anastomotic leakage (12), enterotomy (2), 'off-screen' enterotomy (2), abscess (3), ureteric injury (1), cardiac arrhythmia (12), myocardial infarction (5), pulmonary embolus (4), pneumonia (1), Clostridium difficile (3) and retention of urine (9). There were 20 (4%) readmissions for complications, including ileus (4), urinary retention (3), abscess formation (2) and leakage (2). The 30-day mortality was nine of 500 (1.8%) following anastomotic leakage (3), duodenal enterotomy (1), bleeding duodenal ulcer (1), C. difficile infection (1) and cardiac complications (3).

CONCLUSION

This unselected cohort of patients (the largest single surgeon series in the UK) demonstrates that in trained hands low conversion and complication rates can be consistently achieved.

Accelerated learning curve for colorectal resection, open versus laparoscopic approach, can be attained with expert supervision

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCR) is gaining popularity. Nonetheless, open surgery remains an important technique. Thus, surgeons should be technically proficient in both open and laparoscopic surgery. One question however remains unanswered: Can training for open and LCR occur simultaneously? The objective of this paper is to review the learning curve for open and laparoscopic colon resection of one surgeon who underwent a rigorous training program.

METHODS

A review of consecutive patients who underwent surgery for colon and rectosigmoid junction cancers by one trainee surgeon was performed. This surgeon had completed his basic surgical residency but had limited experience in colorectal cancer surgery. In total, 75 patients were included in this study. All operations were supervised by at least one staff surgeon with experience of more than 300 LCR cases. The trainee surgeon was allowed to train in both laparoscopic and open colorectal resection simultaneously.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients underwent laparoscopic resection, while 32 patients underwent open surgery. Age, gender, mean body mass index (BMI), preoperative risk, and history of past abdominal surgery showed no significant difference between laparoscopic and open groups. There were no differences in tumor stage [International Union against Cancer (UICC)] or tumor size (p = 0.068 and 0.228, respectively). The morbidity rate for open and laparoscopic surgery was 3.1% (1/32) and 4.7% (2/43), respectively (p = 0.484). Operation time decreased with increasing experience, and plateaued after 25 cases in the laparoscopic group and 22 cases in the open group. The learning curve for open cases was 11 cases, and 7 for laparoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons who have completed a basic surgical residency but have limited colorectal surgery experience can learn both open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery simultaneously in an effective manner under supervision by well-experienced surgeons.

Outcomes of endoscopic resection of large colorectal neoplasms: an Australian experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic resection of large colorectal neoplasms is increasingly being used as an alternative to surgery. However data on failure rates, safety and long-term outcomes remain limited. The aim of the study was to report short- and long-term outcomes from endoscopic resection of large colorectal neoplasms from a single centre and use a model to predict mortality had surgery been performed.

METHODS

Consecutive patients referred for endoscopic resection of large (> or = 20 mm) colorectal neoplasms from January 2001 to February 2008 were included. Resection details were recorded in a prospectively maintained database. Data was collected on 30-day complication rates, and follow-up colonoscopy findings. The Colorectal-POSSUM score was used to estimate mortality from open surgery.

RESULTS

There were 154 large neoplasms in 140 patients. Mean age was 68 years (range 22-94). Mean neoplasm size was 26 mm (range 20-80 mm, 24 > or = 40 mm). Complete endoscopic removal was achieved in 95% of cases. Twenty patients were referred for surgery (14%). In the endoscopy group, there were no deaths within 30 days. Twelve patients had a complication including two perforations. Endoscopic follow-up data was available in 90% of cases and five patients (4%) were found to have residual adenoma that was treated endoscopically with subsequent clearance. If surgery had been performed, the mean predicted mortality was 2.2% (range 0.5-10%). There were two deaths (10%) in patients who underwent elective surgery within 30 days.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic resection of large colorectal neoplasms is safe and effective even for very large benign neoplasms. When the lesion is endoscopically resectable this should be the preferred treatment.

Laparoscopic surgery for stage IV colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic surgery in the management of stage IV colorectal cancer remains uncertain.

METHODS

Sixty-five patients with stage IV disease from among 578 colorectal cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery since 2001 were compared with 513 patients who had stage 0-III disease. The criteria for excluding stage IV patients from laparoscopic surgery were huge tumors, low rectal cancer, massive ascites due to peritoneal seeding, bowel perforation and/or obstruction, and poor general condition and/or cachexia. Data were analyzed by chi-square test or Student's t-test, with P < 0.05 being considered significant.

RESULTS

The two groups of patients had similar demographic features. The open conversion rate was 4.6% (3/65 patients) in the stage IV group and 2.7% (14/513 patients) in the stage 0-III group, and the difference between the groups was not significant. In the stage IV group, depth of tumor invasion and tumor diameter were both significantly greater than in the stage 0-III group. However, operating time and blood loss were similar in the two groups (stage IV: 189.0 min and 95.0 g; stage 0-III: 182.5 min and 60.0 g), although blood loss was significantly greater in the stage IV group when patients undergoing rectal surgery were compared. The incidence of postoperative complications and the postoperative course of the two groups were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their larger and more invasive tumors, the short-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer was similar to that for stage 0-III patients. This result indicates that laparoscopic surgery can be successfully performed in selected stage IV colorectal cancer patients.