Multicentre propensity score-matched analysis of laparoscopic versus open surgery for T4 rectal cancer

Minimally invasive versus open multivisceral resection for rectal cancer clinically invading adjacent organs: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), such as laparoscopic and robotic surgery for rectal cancer, is performed worldwide. However, limited information is available on the advantages of MIS over open surgery for multivisceral resection for cases clinically invading adjacent organs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective propensity score-matching study of consecutive clinical T4b rectal cancer patients who underwent curative intent surgery between 2006 and 2021 at the University of Tokyo Hospital.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients who underwent multivisceral resection were analyzed. Thirty-three patients underwent MIS (the MIS group), while 36 underwent open surgery (the open group). Twenty-three patients were matched to each group. Conversion was required in 2 patients who underwent MIS (8.7%). R0 resection was achieved in 87.0% and 91.3% of patients in the MIS and open groups, respectively. The MIS group had significantly less blood loss (170 vs. 1130 mL; p < 0.0001), fewer Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2 postoperative complications (30.4% vs. 65.2%; p = 0.0170), and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (20 vs. 26 days; p = 0.0269) than the open group. The 3-year cancer-specific survival rate, relapse-free survival rate, and cumulative incidence of local recurrence were 75.7, 35.9, and 13.9%, respectively, in the MIS group and 84.5, 45.4, and 27.1%, respectively, in the open group, which were not significantly different (p = 0.8462, 0.4344, and 0.2976, respectively).

CONCLUSION

MIS had several short-term advantages over open surgery, such as lower complication rates, faster recovery, and a shorter hospital stay, in rectal cancer patients who underwent multivisceral resection.

Robotic beyond total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancers: Perioperative and oncological outcomes from a multicentre case series

BACKGROUND

Around 20% of rectal tumors are locally advanced with invasion into adjacent structures at presentation. These may require surgical resections beyond boundaries of total mesorectal excision (bTME) for radicality. Robotic bTME is under investigation. This study reports perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic bTME for locally advanced rectal cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicentre, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected robotic bTME resections (July 2015-November 2020). Demographics, clinicopathological features, short-term outcomes, recurrences, and survival were investigated.

RESULTS

One-hundred-sixty-eight patients (eight centres) were included. Median age and BMI were 60.0 (50.0-68.7) years and 24.0 (24.4-27.7) kg/m2. Female sex was prevalent (n = 95, 56.8%). Fifty patients (29.6%) were ASA III-IV. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was given to 125 (74.4%) patients. Median operative time was 314.0 (260.0-450.0) minutes. Median estimated blood loss was 150.0 (27.5-500.0) ml. Conversion to laparotomy was seen in 4.8%. Postoperative complications occurred in 77 (45.8%) patients; 27.3% and 3.9% were Clavien-Dindo III and IV, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 1.2% (n = 2). R0 rate was 92.9%. Adjuvant chemotherapy was offered to 72 (42.9%) patients. Median follow-up was 34.0 (10.0-65.7) months. Distant and local recurrences were seen in 35 (20.8%) and 15 patients (8.9%), respectively. Overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 91.7, 82.1, and 76.8%. Disease-free survival (DFS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 84.0, 74.5, and 69.2%.

CONCLUSION

Robotic bTME is technically safe with relatively low conversion rate, good OS, and acceptable DFS in the hands of experienced surgeons in high volume centres. In selected cases robotic approach allows for high R0 rates during bTME.

Robotic, transanal, and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for locally advanced mid/low rectal cancer: European multicentre, propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard surgery for low/mid locally advanced rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare three minimally invasive surgical approaches for TME with primary anastomosis (laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, and transanal TME).

METHODS

Records of patients undergoing laparoscopic TME, robotic TME, or transanal TME between 2013 and 2022 according to standardized techniques in expert centres contributing to the European MRI and Rectal Cancer Surgery III (EuMaRCS-III) database were analysed. Propensity score matching was applied to compare the three groups with respect to the complication rate (primary outcome), conversion rate, postoperative recovery, and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 468 patients (mean(s.d.) age of 64.1(11) years) were included; 190 (40.6%) patients underwent laparoscopic TME, 141 (30.1%) patients underwent robotic TME, and 137 (29.3%) patients underwent transanal TME. Comparative analyses after propensity score matching demonstrated a higher rate of postoperative complications for laparoscopic TME compared with both robotic TME (OR 1.80, 95% c.i. 1.11-2.91) and transanal TME (OR 2.87, 95% c.i. 1.72-4.80). Robotic TME was associated with a lower rate of grade A anastomotic leakage (2%) compared with both laparoscopic TME (8.8%) and transanal TME (8.1%) (P = 0.031). Robotic TME (1.4%) and transanal TME (0.7%) were both associated with a lower conversion rate to open surgery compared with laparoscopic TME (8.8%) (P < 0.001). Time to flatus and duration of hospital stay were shorter for patients treated with transanal TME (P = 0.003 and 0.001 respectively). There were no differences in operating time, intraoperative complications, blood loss, mortality, readmission, R0 resection, or survival.

CONCLUSION

In this multicentre, retrospective, propensity score-matched, cohort study of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer, newer minimally invasive approaches (robotic TME and transanal TME) demonstrated improved outcomes compared with laparoscopic TME.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive versus conventional open proctectomy for locally advanced colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced colon cancer is considered a relative contraindication for minimally invasive proctectomy (MIP), and minimally invasive versus conventional open proctectomy (COP) for locally advanced colon cancer has not been studied.

METHODS

We have searched the Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, and Web of Science for articles on minimally invasive (robotic and laparoscopic) and COP. We calculated pooled standard mean difference (SMD), relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The protocol for this review has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023407029).

RESULTS

There are 10132 participants including 21 articles. Compared with COP, patients who underwent MIP had less operation time (SMD 0.48; CI 0.32 to 0.65; I2 = 0%, P = .000), estimated blood loss (MD -1.23; CI -1.90 to -0.56; I2 = 95%, P < .0001), the median time to semi-liquid diet (SMD -0.43; CI -0.70 to -0.15; I2 = 0%, P = .002), time to the first flatus (SMD -0.97; CI -1.30 to -0.63; I2 = 7%, P < .0001), intraoperative blood transfusion (RR 0.33; CI 0.24 to 0.46; I2 = 0%, P < .0001) in perioperative outcomes. Compared with COP, patients who underwent MIP had fewer overall complications (RR 0.85; CI 0.73 to 0.98; I2 = 22.4%, P = .023), postoperative complications (RR 0.79; CI 0.69 to 0.90; I2 = 0%, P = .001), and urinary retention (RR 0.63; CI 0.44 to 0.90; I2 = 0%, P = .011) in perioperative outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This study comprehensively and systematically evaluated the difference between the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive and open treatment of locally advanced colon cancer through meta-analysis. Minimally invasive proctectomy is better than COP in postoperative and perioperative outcomes. However, there is no difference in oncological outcomes. This also provides an evidence-based reference for clinical practice. Of course, multi-center RCT research is also needed to draw more scientific and rigorous conclusions in the future.

2023 WSES guidelines for the prevention, detection, and management of iatrogenic urinary tract injuries (IUTIs) during emergency digestive surgery

Iatrogenic urinary tract injury (IUTI) is a severe complication of emergency digestive surgery. It can lead to increased postoperative morbidity and mortality and have a long-term impact on the quality of life. The reported incidence of IUTIs varies greatly among the studies, ranging from 0.3 to 1.5%. Given the high volume of emergency digestive surgery performed worldwide, there is a need for well-defined and effective strategies to prevent and manage IUTIs. Currently, there is a lack of consensus regarding the prevention, detection, and management of IUTIs in the emergency setting. The present guidelines, promoted by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), were developed following a systematic review of the literature and an international expert panel discussion. The primary aim of these WSES guidelines is to provide evidence-based recommendations to support clinicians and surgeons in the prevention, detection, and management of IUTIs during emergency digestive surgery. The following key aspects were considered: (1) effectiveness of preventive interventions for IUTIs during emergency digestive surgery; (2) intra-operative detection of IUTIs and appropriate management strategies; (3) postoperative detection of IUTIs and appropriate management strategies and timing; and (4) effectiveness of antibiotic therapy (including type and duration) in case of IUTIs.

Resection of sigmoid cancer with bladder invasion using laparoscopic combined with a cystoscopic holmium laser: an innovative surgical procedure

The aim of this study was to introduce a new surgical procedure for the resection of sigmoid colon tumours invading the bladder by combining laparoscopy and cystoscopy, and the feasibility and safety of the method were verified. The data of 6 patients with sigmoid colon cancer invading the bladder in a tertiary hospital in Chongqing from January 2020 to October 2022 were collected, sigmoid colon tumour resection was performed by this procedure, and the data related to the surgery were recorded. All six patients successfully underwent sigmoid colon tumour resection, and all sigmoid colon and bladder resections had negative margins. The mean total operative time was 211.66 ± 27.33 min, and the mean resection time of the bladder tumour was 22.16 ± 4.63 min. The median blood loss was 100 ml, and the mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was nineteen. There were no serious intraoperative complications in any of the cases. After operation, the first flatus and defecation were 4 and 4.5 days, respectively. The mean time of drainage tube retention and the time of bladder flushing were 3 and 1.5 days, respectively. The mean time of urinary tube retention was 7.5 days. There were no intestinal obstructions, dysuria, or other complications. For patients with sigmoid colon tumours invading the bladder, this method can effectively resect sigmoid colon tumours and minimize the loss of bladder tissue at the same time, which helps to prolong the survival of these patients. The surgical method is safe, reliable, and feasible.

Robotic surgery for locally advanced T4 rectal cancer: feasibility and oncological quality

For T4 rectal tumours and local recurrences (LR) of rectal cancer, a radical resection beyond TME, sometimes by multi-visceral resection, is important to obtain safe margins and improve survival. The use of the laparoscopic approach (LA) for these cases is still controversial and associated with a high rate of conversion. However, robotic surgery might offer some advantages that can overcome some of the limitations of LA. Therefore, we aimed to analyse the postoperative outcomes and medium-term oncological results of robotic surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer (pathological T4) and LR. A retrospective analysis was performed including patients who had undergone robotic rectal resection in a single institution over an 11-year period, and had a T4 tumour confirmed in the pathological report. Primary endpoint was to analyse postoperative complications (30-day) and the rate of conversion. Secondary endpoints include pathological assessment of the quality of the specimen, local recurrence and survival [2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS)]. A total of 41 patients were analysed, including a total of 24 patients (60%) that required a multivisceral resection. The median distance from the tumour to the anorectal junction was 7 (4-12) cm. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 2 cases (5%). The overall morbidity rate was 78% (n = 32), with 37% of major complications, most of them urinary (n = 7). Median length of hospital stay (LOS) was 13 (7-27) days. The 30-day mortality rate was 7% (n = 3). An R0 resection was achieved in 85.4% of the cases (n = 35) due to 6 cases of the positive circumferential resection margin. 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for the T4 tumours were 72% and 85%, respectively. There were 8 cases of local recurrence (22.2%); 6 of them met the selection criteria for salvage surgery. Robotic surgery for locally advanced T4 rectal cancer and multi-visceral resections is safe and feasible, with a low rate of conversion and an acceptable rate of postoperative morbidity in this subgroup of patients. Oncological results have shown to be comparable with the laparoscopic series published, preserving a good quality of the resected specimen. However, comparative studies and a longer follow-up period is needed to confirm the oncologic findings and to support the general adoption of the robotic system for these complex interventions.

Minimally invasive surgery for maximally invasive tumors: pelvic exenterations for rectal cancers

Purpose

Trials comparing minimally invasive rectal surgery have uniformly excluded T4 tumors. The present study aimed to determine the safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for locally-advanced rectal cancers requiring pelvic exenterations based on benchmarked outcomes from the international PelvEx database.

Methods

Consecutive patients of T4 rectal cancers with urogenital organ invasion that underwent MIS exenterations between November 2015 and June 2022 were analyzed from a single center. A safety threshold was set at 20% for R1 resections and 40% for major complications (≥grade IIIA) for the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

The study included 124 MIS exenterations. A majority had a total pelvic exenteration (74 patients, 59.7%). Laparoscopic surgery was performed in 95 (76.6%) and 29 (23.4%) had the robotic operation. Major complications were observed in 35 patients (28.2%; 95% CI, 20.5%-37.0%). R1 resections were found pathologically in nine patients (7.3%; 95% CI, 3.4%-13.4%). The set safety thresholds were not crossed. At a median follow-up of 15 months, 44 patients (35.5%) recurred with 8.1% local recurrence rate. The 2-year overall and disease-free survivals were 85.2% and 53.7%, respectively.

Conclusion

MIS exenterations for locally-advanced rectal cancers demonstrated acceptable morbidity and safety in term of R0 resections at experienced centers. Longer follow-up is required to demonstrate cancer survival outcomes.

Laparoscopic vs. open colectomy for T4 colon cancer: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of prospective observational studies

Background

To evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy (LC) vs. open colectomy (OC) in patients with T4 colon cancer.

Methods

Three authors independently searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov for articles before June 3, 2022 to compare the clinical outcomes of T4 colon cancer patients undergoing LC or OC.

Results

This meta-analysis included 7 articles with 1,635 cases. Compared with OC, LC had lesser blood loss, lesser perioperative transfusion, lesser complications, lesser wound infection, and shorter length of hospital stay. Moreover, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of 5-year overall survival (5y OS), and 5-year disease-free survival (5y DFS), R0 resection rate, positive resection margin, lymph nodes harvested ≥12, and recurrence. Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) results suggested that the potential advantages of LC on perioperative transfusion and the comparable oncological outcomes in terms of 5y OS, 5y DFS, lymph nodes harvested ≥12, and R0 resection rate was reliable and no need of further study.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgery is safe and feasible in T4 colon cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. TSA results suggested that future studies were not required to evaluate the 5y OS, 5y DFS, R0 resection rate, positive resection margin status, lymph nodes harvested ≥12 and perioperative transfusion differences between LC and OC.

Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022297792.

The Multidisciplinary Approach of Rectal Cancer: The Experience of "COMRE Group" Model

Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard to treat locally advanced rectal cancer. This monocentric retrospective study evaluates the results of laparotomic, laparoscopic and robotic surgery in “COMRE GROUP” (REctalCOMmittee). Methods: 327 selected stage I-II-III patients (pts) underwent TME between November 2005 and April 2020 for low or middle rectal cancer; 91 pts underwent open, 200 laparoscopic and 36 robotic TME. Of these, we analyzed the anthropomorphic, intraoperative, anatomopathological parameters and outcome during the follow up. Results: The length of hospital stay was significantly different between robotic TME and the other two groups (8.47 ± 3.54 days robotic vs. 11.93 ± 5.71 laparotomic, p < 0.001; 8.47 ± 3.54 robotic vs. 11.10 ± 7.99 laparoscopic, p < 0.05). The mean number of harvested nodes was higher in the laparotomic group compared to the other two groups (19 ± 9 laparotomic vs. 15 ± 8 laparoscopic, p < 0.001; 19 ± 9 laparotomic vs. 15 ± 7 robotic, p < 0.05). Median follow-up was 52 months (range: 1−169). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the open TME group compared with the laparoscopic one (Chi2 = 13.36, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In the experience of the “COMRE” group, laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer is a better choice than laparotomy in a multidisciplinary context. Robotic TME has a significant difference in terms of hospital stay compared to the other two groups.

Fluorescence ureteral navigation during laparoscopic surgery for clinically suspected stage T4 colorectal cancer: A cohort study

BACKGROUND

Approximately 15% of patients with colorectal cancer present with locally advanced tumors (T4 stage). Laparoscopic surgery for stage T4 disease has not yet been established. The near-infrared ray catheter fluorescent ureteral catheter (NIRFUC) is a new device that uses near-infrared fluorescence resin. We examined the utility of fluorescence ureteral navigation (FUN) with the NIRFUC during laparoscopic surgery for stage T4 colorectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with stage T4 colorectal cancer (n = 143, from January 2017 to March 2021) were divided into a T4FUN + group, in which the NIRFUC was used (n = 21), and a T4FUN- group, in which the NIRFUC was not used (n = 122). Short-term outcomes were compared between the groups. Next, the laparoscopic surgery rate and incidence of ureteral injury from January 2017 to March 2021 were compared between the T4FUN- group and the non-stage T4FUN- group (n = 434, from January 2017 to March 2021), in which fluorescence ureter navigation was not used.

RESULTS

Rectal cancer, stage T4b disease, and invasion into the urinary tract were observed more often in the T4FUN + group than in the T4FUN- group. In the comparisons of the T4FUN + versus T4FUN- groups, the operative time was 398 (161-1090) vs. 256 (93-839) minutes, the blood loss was 10 (1-710) vs. 25 (0-1360) ml, and the ratio of laparoscopic surgery to open surgery was 21:0 vs. 79:43. Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III) were present in 2 (10%; 0 ureteral injury) patients in the T4FUN + group and 13 (11%; 2 ureteral injury) patients in the T4FUN- group. In the T4FUN + group, the operative time was longer (p < 0.0001), but the laparoscopic ratio was higher (p = 0.0002), and the blood loss volume and incidence of ureteral injury tended to be lower. In the comparisons of the T4FUN- versus non-stage T4FUN- groups, the ratio of laparoscopic surgery to open surgery was 79:43 vs. 384:50, the incidence of open conversion was 8 (6.6%) vs. 15 (3.5%), and the incidence of ureteral injury was 2 (1.6%) vs. 0 (0%). In the T4FUN- group, the open surgery rate (<0.0001), open conversion rate (p = 0.0205) and incidence of ureteral injury (p = 0.0478) were high, with a significant difference observed between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients with stage T4 disease have an increased risk of ureteral injury and are more likely to be converted to open surgery. FUN can help to safely increase the laparoscopic surgery rate while safely visualizing the ureter. FUN is recommended for laparoscopic surgery in patients with stage T4 colorectal cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Examination of fluorescence navigation for laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery; Research Ethics Committee of the Kawaguchi Municipal Medical Center (Saitama, Japan) approval number: 2020-3. https://kawaguchi-mmc.org/wp-content/uploads/clinical research-r02.pdf.

Minimally invasive versus open pelvic exenterations for rectal cancer: a comparative analysis of perioperative and 3-year oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

This study compared the surgical and oncological outcomes of open and minimally invasive pelvic exenteration.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pelvic exenterations for primary locally advanced rectal cancers with invasion of the urogenital organs (central and anterior disease) between August 2013 and September 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were categorized as undergoing open or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and these groups were compared for perioperative outcomes and 3-year survival (overall, recurrence-free and local relapse-free survival). Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the independent influence of approach of surgery and cancer features on recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

Of the 158 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration, 97 (61.4 per cent) had open exenterations and 61 (38.6 per cent) patients had an MIS resection (44 patients (72 per cent) using laparoscopy and 17 (28 per cent) using robotic surgery). There were 96 (60.8 per cent) total pelvic exenterations and 62 (39.2 per cent) posterior pelvic exenterations. MIS exenterations had significantly longer operative times (MIS versus open: 640 mins versus 450 mins; P < 0.001) but reduced blood loss (MIS versus open: 900 ml versus 1600 ml; P < 0.001) and abdominal wound infections (MIS versus open: 8.2 versus 17.5 per cent; P = 0.020) without a difference in hospital stay (MIS versus open: 11 versus 12 days; P = 0.620). R0 resection rates and involvement of circumferential resection margins were similar (MIS versus open: 88.5 versus 91.8 per cent, P = 0.490 and 13.1 versus 8.2 per cent, P = 0.342 respectively). At a median follow-up of 29 months, there were no differences in 3-year overall survival (MIS versus open: 79.4 versus 60.2 per cent; P = 0.251), RFS (MIS versus open: 51.9 versus 47.8 per cent; P = 0.922) or local relapse-free survival (MIS versus open: 89.7 versus 75.2 per cent; P = 0.491. On multivariable analysis, approach to surgery had no bearing on RFS, and only known distant metastasis, aggressive histology and inadequate response to neoadjuvant radiation (pathological tumour regression grade greater than 3) predicted worse RFS.

CONCLUSION

MIS exenterations documented longer procedures but resulted in less blood loss and fewer wound infections compared with open surgeries. In the setting of an experienced centre, the hospital stay, R0 resection rates and oncological outcomes at 3 years were similar to those of open exenterations.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Partial Mesorectal Excision for Cancer of the High Rectum: A Single-Center Study with Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of robotic surgery for partial mesorectal excision (PME) in patients with high rectal cancer (RC) remains unexplored. This study aimed to compare the operative and postoperative outcomes of robotic (R-PME) versus laparoscopic (L-PME) PME for high RC.

METHODS

This was a single-center propensity score cohort study of consecutive patients diagnosed with RC in the high rectum (>10 to 15 cm from the anal verge) who underwent surgery between September 2012 and May 2019.

RESULTS

Of 131 selected patients (50 R-PME and 81 L-PME), 88 were matched using propensity score (44 per group). Operative and postoperative variables were similar between R-PME and L-PME patients, except for operative time (220 min and 190 min, respectively; p < 0.0001). No conversion was needed. Overall morbidity was 15.9%; 4 patients (4.5%) developed anastomotic leakage. The mean hospital stay was 7.25 days for R-PME vs. 7.64 days for L-PME (p = 0.597). R0 resection was achieved in 100% of R-PME and 90.9% of L-PME (p = 0.116). Only 3 patients (1 R-PME, 2 L-PME) received a permanent stoma (p = 1). No group differences were observed for overall or disease-free survival rates at 5 years. The costs of R-PME were significantly higher than those of L-PME.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgery can be performed safely for PME in high RC. No difference can be detected between R-PME and L-PME for both short- and long-term outcomes, leaving the choice of the surgical approach to the surgeon's experience. Specific health economic studies are needed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery for RC.

Similarities and differences between study designs in short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open low anterior resection for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, case-matched, and cohort studies

AIM

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) are the gold standard in surgical research, and case-matched studies, such as studies with propensity score matching, are expected to serve as an alternative to RCT. Both study designs have been used to investigate the potential superiority of laparoscopic surgery to open surgery for rectal cancer, but it remains unclear whether there are any differences in the findings obtained using these study designs. We aimed to examine similarities and differences between findings from different study designs regarding laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analyses. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane. RCT, case-matched studies, and cohort studies comparing laparoscopic low anterior resection and open low anterior resection for rectal cancer were included. In total, 8 short-term outcomes and 3 long-term outcomes were assessed. Meta-analysis was conducted stratified by study design using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies were included in this review. Findings did not differ between RCT and case-matched studies for most outcomes. However, the estimated treatment effect was largest in cohort studies, intermediate in case-matched studies, and smallest in RCT for overall postoperative complications and 3-year local recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Findings from case-matched studies were similar to those from RCT in laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. However, findings from case-matched studies were sometimes intermediate between those of RCT and unadjusted cohort studies, and case-matched studies and cohort studies have a potential to overestimate the treatment effect compared with RCT.

Robotic surgery for clinical T4 rectal cancer: short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical approach for clinical T4 (cT4) rectal cancer is unknown. This study was conducted to clarify short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer.

METHODS

In our retrospective cohort study, we enrolled patients who underwent robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer within 15 cm from the anal verge between 2011 and 2018. The short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of a total of 122 eligible patients, 70 (57%) had cT4a tumors and 52 (43%) had cT4b tumors. Thirty-five patients (29%) had distant metastasis and 21 (17%) underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Thirty-four patients (28%) underwent combined resection of adjacent organs and 43 (35%) underwent lateral lymph node dissection. The median operative time was 288 min and the median blood loss was 11 ml. No patients required conversion to open surgery. The incidences of postoperative complications of grades II, III, and IV or more according to the Clavien-Dindo classification were 17.2%, 3.5%, and 0%, respectively. Seventy-three patients (60%) had pathological T4 tumors, and the incidence of positive resection margins was 4.9%. The median follow-up time was 42.9 months. The 3-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and cumulative local recurrence rates were 87.5%, 70.4%, and 4.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer were favorable. Robotic surgery is considered to be a useful approach for cT4 rectal cancer.

Robotic-assisted resection for beyond TME rectal cancer: a novel classification and analysis from a specialized center

Locally advanced rectal cancer often requires an extended resection beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (bTME) to obtain clear resection margins. We classified three types of bTME rectal cancer following local disease diffusion: radial (adjacent pelvic organs), lateral (pelvic lateral lymph nodes) and longitudinal (below 3.5 cm from the anal verge, submitted to intersphincteric resection). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the application of robotic surgery to the three types of bTME regarding the short and long-term oncological outcomes. Secondary aim was to identify survival prognostic factors for bTME rectal cancers. A total of 137 patients who underwent robotic-assisted bTME procedures between 2008 and 2018 were extracted from a prospectively collected database. Patient-related, operative and pathological factors were assessed. Morbidity was moderately high with 66% of patients reporting postoperative complications. Median follow up was 47 months (IQR, 31.5-66.5). Local recurrence rate was 15.3% with a statistical difference between the three types of bTME (p = 0.041). Disease progression/distant metastasis rate was 33.6%. Overall survival was significantly different (p = 0.023) with 1- and 3-years rates of: 77.8% and 55.0% (radial; n = 19); 96.6% and 84.8% (lateral; n = 30); 97.7% and 86.9% (longitudinal; n = 88). No statistical difference was observed for disease-free survival (p = 0.897). Local recurrence-free survival was significantly different between the groups (p = 0.031). Multivariate analysis showed that (y)pT (p = 0.028; HR (95% CI) 5.133 (1.192-22.097)), (y)pN (p = 0.014; HR (95% CI) 2.835 (1.240-6.482)) and type of bTME were associated to OS whilst (y)pT (p = 0.072) and type of bTME were not associated to LRFS.

Laparoscopic vs open colorectal surgery: Economic and clinical outcomes in the Brazilian healthcare

Laparoscopic surgery has become the preferred surgical approach of several colorectal conditions. However, the economic results of this are quite controversial. The degree of adoption of laparoscopic technology, as well as the aptitude of the surgeons, can have an influence not only in the clinical outcomes but also in the total procedure cost. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgeries, compared to open procedures in Brazil.All patients who underwent elective colorectal surgeries between January 2012 and December 2013 were eligible to the retrospective cohort. The considered follow-up period was within 30 days from the index procedure. The outcomes evaluated were the length of stay, blood transfusion, intensive care unit admission, in-hospital mortality, use of antibiotics, the development of anastomotic leakage, readmission, and the total hospital costs including re-admissions.Two hundred eighty patients, who met the eligibility criteria, were included in the analysis. Patients in the laparoscopic group had a shorter length of stay in comparison with the open group (6.02 ± 3.86 vs 9.86 ± 16.27, P < .001). There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. The total costs were similar between the 2 groups, in the multivariate analysis (generalized linear model ratio of means 1.20, P = .074). The cost predictors were the cancer diagnosis and age.Laparoscopic colorectal surgery presents a 17% decrease in the duration of the hospital stay without increasing the total hospitalization costs. The factors associated with increased hospital costs were age and the diagnosis of cancer.

Feasibility of laparoscopic-assisted transanal pelvic exenteration in locally advanced rectal cancer with anterior invasion

BACKGROUND

Transanal (Ta) pelvic exenteration is a promising, minimally invasive method for treating locally advanced colorectal cancer. However, since it is technically difficult to perform, Ta pelvic exenteration is rarely reported in locally advanced T4 rectal cancer cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of transabdominal laparoscopy-assisted Ta pelvic exenteration.

METHODS

Six patients (4 males and 2 females) had laparoscopy-assisted Ta total or posterior pelvic exenteration for locally advanced or recurrent colorectal cancer cases at the Nagasaki University Hospital between September 2018 and August 2019. Clinical and pathological outcomes were measured and analyzed.

RESULTS

The median operation time and intraoperative blood loss were 481 (range 456-709) minutes and 352.5 (range 257-1660) ml, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in all cases, and no patient required open surgery. Two patients had grade 3 complications (Clavien-Dindo) or higher. There was no mortality, and no reoperation was required.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that laparoscopic-assisted Ta pelvic exenteration is an acceptable procedure, may help overcome the current technical difficulties, and may improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.

Evolution of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: update from the national cancer database

BACKGROUND

As the use of minimally invasive techniques in colorectal surgery has become increasingly prevalent, concerns remain about the oncologic effectiveness and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive low anterior resection (MI-LAR) for the treatment of rectal cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

The 2010-2015 National Cancer Database (NCDB) Participant Data Use File was queried for patients undergoing elective open LAR (OLAR) or MI-LAR for rectal adenocarcinoma. A 1:1 propensity match was performed on the basis of demographics, comorbidity, and tumor characteristics. Outcomes were compared between groups and Cox proportional hazard modeling was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality. A subset analysis was performed on high-volume academic centers.

RESULTS

35,809 patients undergoing LAR were identified of whom 18,265 (51.0%) underwent MI-LAR. After propensity matching, patients receiving MI-LAR were less likely to have a positive circumferential radial margin (CRM) (5.5% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.0094) or a positive distal margin (3.6% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.0022) and had decreased 90-day all-cause mortality (2.0% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.0238). MI-LAR resulted in decreased hospital length of stay (5 vs. 6 days, p < 0.0001) but a greater rate of 30-day readmission (7.6% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.0054). Long-term overall survival was improved with MI-LAR (79% vs. 76%, p < 0.0001). Cox proportional hazard modeling demonstrated a decreased risk of mortality with MI-LAR (HR 0.859, 95% CI 0.788-0.937).

CONCLUSION

MI-LAR is associated with improvement in CRM clearance and long-term survival. In the hands of experienced surgeons with advanced laparoscopy skills, MI-LAR appears safe and effective technique for the management of rectal cancer.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery after placing a self-expanding metallic stent for malignant rectal obstruction: a case report

BACKGROUND

Approximately 20% of colorectal cancer patients show complete or incomplete bowel obstruction as an early symptom. Preoperative nonsurgical decompression such as placing a self-expanding metallic stent for malignant colorectal obstruction has been shown to be effective for reducing perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, there is a lack of published studies reporting robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) after self-expanding metallic stent (SEMS) placement for malignant rectal obstruction (MRO). To our knowledge, this is the first report to do so.

CASE PRESENTATION

An 80-year-old man with incomplete paralysis of the lower limbs as well as bladder-rectal disorder due to a spine fracture sustained in a fall accident 26 years ago presented with lower abdominal pain and vomiting. Abdominal multi-detector computed tomography revealed an obstructive rectal tumor with distended bowel on the oral side. Emergency colonoscopy was performed, and an SEMS placed. The patency of SEMS and decompression of the distended bowel was confirmed, and elective RALS was performed 29 days after SEMS placement. To our knowledge, this is the first report of RALS after decompression with SEMS placement for MRO.

CONCLUSIONS

RALS after SEMS placement is a safe and feasible therapeutic strategy for MRO.

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer reveals comparable oncological outcome even in context of worse short-term results-long-term analysis of nearly 500 patients from two high-volume centers

PURPOSE

Large randomized controlled trials have investigated the oncological value of the laparoscopic approach to colorectal cancer. Mainly, non-inferiority for the laparoscopic approach regarding long-term survival could be shown. Nevertheless, some recent trials revealed inferiority especially due to histopathological quality of specimen or location of the tumor in the rectum. The main objective of this study was to compare two historical patient collectives of specialized centers for either the laparoscopic or the open resection approach, regarding long-term survival and disease progression of rectal cancer according to tumor localization in a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis, based on two prospectively maintained institutional colorectal cancer databases, was performed. The database of the reference center in Erlangen maintained almost exclusively open operations whereas the database in Lübeck maintained to a vast majority laparoscopic operations. To adjust risk profiles, a 1:1 propensity score matching was performed.

RESULTS

Seven hundred fifty-five patients of both centers (Erlangen, n = 507, Lübeck n = 248) were included. Propensity score matching resulted in two equalized groups with 248 patients. Regarding the postoperative complications, advantages for the open approach were seen. Analyzing the survival data, no differences in disease-free as well as overall survival were shown. Also, no differences in the overall loco-regional recurrence and distant metastasis rate were detected.

CONCLUSION

In centers with adequate expertise, open and laparoscopic procedures result in equivalent oncologic long-term outcomes. Advantages for the open resected group concerning short-term results and complications were detected, due to remarkably low rates of anastomotic leakage.

Outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for pathological T4 colon cancer

PURPOSE

The surgical indication of laparoscopic surgery for pT4 colon cancer remains to be established because only a few studies have investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for them to date. Therefore, we aimed to elucidate the validity of laparoscopic surgery for them.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 81 patients with pT4 colon cancer who underwent surgical resection with a curative intent at Kobe University Hospital from January 2007 to December 2015. The short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the propensity score-matched patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy (LAP group, n = 25) and those who underwent open colectomy (OP group, n = 25).

RESULTS

Intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in the LAP group than in the OP group (p = 0.029). Operative time, R0 resection rate, and morbidity did not significantly differ between the two groups. The 5-year overall survival (OS) and the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) did not significantly differ between the propensity score-matched groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses of the entire cohort showed the surgical approach (LAP vs OP) selected was not a significant prognostic factor for OS or RFS.

CONCLUSIONS

The short and the long-term outcomes were similar between the LAP and OP groups. Laparoscopic surgery might be a safe and feasible option for pT4 colon cancer patients.

Assessing surgical difficulty in locally advanced mid-low rectal cancer: the accuracy of two MRI-based predictive scores

AIM

Predicting surgical difficulty is a critical factor in the management of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). This study evaluates the accuracy and external validity of a recently published morphometric score to predict surgical difficulty and additionally proposes a new score to identify preoperatively LARC patients with a high risk of having a difficult surgery.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study based on the European MRI and Rectal Cancer Surgery (EuMaRCS) database, including patients with mid/low LARC who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (L-TME) with primary anastomosis. For all patients, pretreatment and restaging MRI were available. Surgical difficulty was graded as high and low based upon a composite outcome, including operative (e.g. duration of surgery) and postoperative variables (e.g. hospital stay). Score accuracy was assessed by estimating sensitivity, specificity and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AROC).

RESULTS

In a total of 136 LARC patients, 17 (12.5%) were graded as high surgical difficulty. The previously published score (calculated on body mass index, intertuberous distance, mesorectal fat area, type of anastomosis) showed low predictive value (sensitivity 11.8%; specificity 92.4%; AROC 0.612). The new EuMaRCS score was developed using the following significant predictors of surgical difficulty: body mass index > 30, interspinous distance < 96.4 mm, ymrT stage ≥ T3b and male sex. It demonstrated high accuracy (AROC 0.802).

CONCLUSION

The EuMaRCS score was found to be more sensitive and specific than the previous score in predicting surgical difficulty in LARC patients who are candidates for L-TME. However, this score has yet to be externally validated.

Laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery in T4 rectal cancer: A case-control study

Background:

Laparoscopic surgery (LAS) for T4 rectal cancer (RC) is still controversial. This study aims to compare LAS with conventional open surgery in patients with T4 RC.

Patients and Methods:

Patients undergoing laparoscopic or open curative resection for T4 RC from January 2010 to September 2014 in our hospital were enrolled. Patients’ clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes were collected and compared. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0.

Results:

A total of 125 patients (39 open, 86 LAS) were included in this study finally. The baseline information between the two groups were comparable except that LAS group had a more anterior resection (P = 0.012) and less combined resection (P = 0.003). The results demonstrated that patients in LAS group had less blood loss (P < 0.001), smaller incision length (P < 0.001), faster time to first soft diet (P = 0.010) and less incidence of post-operative complications, although it was not significantly different (P = 0.063). In addition, the operative time was also comparable (P = 0.140) and the conversion rate was low (2/86). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 71.8%, 79.1% in open, LAS group respectively and the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 66.7%, 68.6% in open, laparoscopic group, respectively. The Kaplan curves demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the two groups in OS (P = 0.981) or DFS (P = 0.900).

Conclusions:

LAS is safe and feasible in selected patients with T4 RC. It can achieve a better perioperative outcomes, and the long-time survival is not inferior to open surgery. Prospective studies should be conducted in the future to reduce the selection bias.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for low rectal cancer: a case-matched study comparing TaTME versus standard laparoscopic TME

Background

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is emerging as a novel alternative to laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME). The aim of this study was to compare clinical and pathological results from these two techniques in patients undergoing rectal resections because of low rectal cancer.

Materials and methods

Thirty-five patients undergoing TaTME were matched with 35 patients operated on using LaTME. Composite primary endpoint (complete TME, negative circumferential resection margin [pCRM], and distal resection margin [pDRM]) was used to assess pathological quality specimens. Secondary outcomes included operative and postoperative parameters (operative time, total blood loss, postoperative morbidity, length of stay, 30-day mortality).

Results

Composite primary endpoint was achieved by 85% of subjects in the TaTME group and 82% of subjects in the LaTME group (P=0.66). Mean pCRM was 1.1±1.29 vs 0.99±0.78 mm (P=0.25). Distal pDRM was 1.57±0.92 and 1.98±1.22 cm (P=0.15). In the TaTME and LaTME groups, respectively, complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 89% and 83% of subjects, while excision was nearly complete for the remaining 11% and 17% (P=0.23).

Conclusion

TaTME appears to be a noninferior alternative to laparoscopic surgery. TaTME allows for quality retrieval of surgical specimens with comparable clinical outcomes with LaTME.

Impact of postoperative complications on long-term survival following surgery for T4 colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Postoperative complications (POCs) after the resection of locally advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) may influence adjuvant treatment timing, outcomes, and survival. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of POCs on long-term outcomes in patients surgically treated for T4 CRC.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent the resection of T4 CRC at a single centre from 2004 to 2013 were retrospectively analysed from a prospectively maintained database. POCs were assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Patients who developed POCs were compared with those who did not in terms of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The study population comprised 106 patients, including 79 (74.5%) with synchronous distant metastases. Overall, 46 patients (43%) developed at least one POC during the hospital stay, and of those patients, 9 (20%) had severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade III). POCs were not associated with OS (65% with POCs vs. 69% without POCs; p = 0.72) or RFS (58% with POCs vs. 70% without POCs; p = 0.37). Similarly, POCs did not affect OS or RFS in patients who had synchronous metastases at diagnosis compared with those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

POCs do not affect the oncological course of patients subjected to the resection of T4 CRC, even in cases of synchronous metastases.

Surgical resection for rectal cancer. Is laparoscopic surgery as successful as open approach? A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recently, it has been questioned if minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer was surgically successful. We decided to perform a meta-analysis to determine if minimally invasive surgery is adequate to obtain a complete resection for curable rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search pertaining to evaluation between laparoscopic and open rectal resection for rectal cancer was performed until 30th November 2016 in the electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE), using the following search terms in all possible combinations: rectal cancer, laparoscopy, minimally invasive and open surgery. Outcomes analyzed were number of clear Distal Resection Margins (DRM or DM), complete Circumferential Resection Margins (CRM) and complete, nearly complete and incomplete Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) and of patients who received laparoscopic or open treatment for rectal cancer.

RESULTS

12 articles were included in the final analysis. The prevalence of successful surgical resection was similar between open and laparoscopic surgery. About distance from distal margin of the specimen, clear CRM and complete TME there were no statistically significant difference between the two groups (MD = -0.090 cm, p = 0.364, 95% CI -0.283, 0.104; OR = 1.032, p = 0.821, 95% CI 0.784, 1.360; OR = 0.933, p = 0.720, 95% CI 0.638, 1.364, respectively). The analysis of nearly complete TME showed a significant difference between the two groups (OR = 1.407, p = 0.006, 95% CI 1.103, 1.795), while the analysis of incomplete TME showed a non-significant difference (OR = 1.010, p = 0.964, 95% CI 0.664, 1.534).

CONCLUSIONS

By pooling together data from 5 RCTs and 7 nRCTs, we are able to provide evidence of safety and efficacy of minimally invasive surgery. Waiting for further randomized clinical trials, our results are encouraging to introduce laparoscopic rectal resection in daily practice.

Feasibility and Safety of Laparoscopic Right Colectomy in Oldest-Old Patients with Colon Cancer: Results of the CLIMHET Study Group

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy for colorectal cancer treatment is widely accepted. However, there is no consensus as to whether or not laparoscopy can be considered the preferred treatment strategy in octogenarian and nonagenarian patients with colon cancer. The aim of this study was to compare operative and postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic right colectomy between oldest-old (≥80 years) and younger (<80 years) patients with colon cancer.

METHODS

The study population was sampled from the CLIMHET Study Group cohort. Between January 2005 and December 2015, data were retrieved for all patients who had undergone elective laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer in five University Hospital centers in France (CHU of Clermont-Ferrand, Hôpital Civil of Strasbourg-IRCAD, Hôpital Henri-Mondor of Créteil, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou of Paris, and CHRU of Tours).

RESULTS

Overall, 473 cancer patients were selected and analyzed. There were 156 oldest-old patients (median age: 84.1 years, range: 80-96) and 317 younger patients (median age: 67 years, range: 25-79). After adjusting based on propensity score on gender, obesity, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, smoking, arteriopathy, coronaropathy, comorbidity, and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging, no significant difference was found in operative and postoperative outcomes, except for time to resume a regular diet (3.6 days versus 3.0 days, P = .008) and length of hospital stay (12.1 days versus 9.1 days, P = .03), which were longer for oldest-old patients. Overall and disease-free survival rates were also equivalent between groups.

CONCLUSION

These findings support that laparoscopic right colectomy can be safely performed in cancer patients aged 80 and older, and its outcomes are similar in oldest-old and younger patients.

Propensity score matching comparison of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer in a middle-income country: short-term outcomes and cost analysis

Background

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is associated with improved postoperative outcomes compared to open surgery; however, economic studies have yielded contradictory results. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for patients with rectal cancer.

Methods

Propensity score matching analysis was performed in a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent elective low anterior resection for rectal cancer treatment by laparoscopic and open surgery in a single Brazilian cancer center. Matched covariates included age, gender, body mass index, pTNM stage, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, type of anesthesia, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and index surgery. The clinical and economic outcomes were evaluated. The follow-up period was within 30 days of the index procedure. The clinical outcomes were reoperation, postoperative complications, operative time, length of stay in the intensive care unit, and postoperative hospital stay. For economic outcomes, a cost analysis was used to compare the costs.

Results

Initially, 220 patients were evaluated. After propensity score matching, 100 patients were included in the analysis (50 patients in the open surgery group and 50 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group). There were no differences in patients' baseline characteristics. Operative time was longer for laparoscopic surgery (247 minutes vs 285 minutes, P=0.006). There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes. The hospital costs were similar between the two groups (Brazilian reais 21,233.15 vs Brazilian reais 21,529.28, P=0.115), although the intraoperative costs were higher for laparoscopic surgery, mainly owing to the surgical devices and the theater-related costs. The postoperative costs were lower for laparoscopic surgery, owing to lower intensive care unit, ward, and reoperation costs.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is not costlier than open surgery from the health care provider's perspective, since the intraoperative costs were offset by lower postoperative costs. Open surgery tends to have a longer length of stay.

Outcomes of trans-anal natural orifice specimen extraction combined with laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid and rectal carcinoma: An observational study

Colorectal carcinoma is currently the third most frequent cancer worldwide. Conventional open surgery was replaced by laparoscopic anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for the treatment of sigmoid and rectal carcinomas; however, it needed an incision to harvest the specimen, which contributed to complications. In 2013, trans-anal natural orifice specimen extraction laparoscopic anterior resection (Ta-NOSE-LAR) to treat sigmoid and rectal carcinoma was performed in our hospital for the first time. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of Ta-NOSE-LAR in sigmoid and rectal carcinoma.Seventy-three patients diagnosed with sigmoid and rectal carcinoma were enrolled between September 2013 and June 2016. Thirty-five patients underwent Ta-NOSE-LAR, whereas the others underwent traditional laparoscopic anterior resection (LAR). We compared the operative data, postoperative complications, pathological evaluation results, and incision-related complications between the 2 groups.Our result showed that the operative time, specimen length, tumor size, amount of total lymph nodes, and lymph node metastasis between the 2 groups were not statistically different. Further, without abdominal scaring for harvesting the specimen, the operative blood loss (49.29 ± 14.63 vs 69.29 ± 13.54 mL, P < .001) and post-operation hospital stay (5.77 ± 0.94 vs 6.76 ± 0.75 days, P < .001) of the Ta-NOSE-LAR group were less than those of the LAR group. Besides, the follow-up data showed that 2 patients were lost to follow-up, and 1 patient had liver metastasis 2 years after surgery in the LAR group, whereas the others showed no regional recurrence, distant metastases, or critical complications.Ta-NOSE-LAR is a valuable and alternative surgical method to treat sigmoid and rectal carcinoma, with the advantages of being a scarless procedure and having a lower post-operation hospital stay duration.

Predictors of surgical outcomes and survival in rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic total mesorectal excision after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: the interest of pelvimetry and restaging magnetic resonance imaging studies

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) requires a multimodal therapy tailored to the patient and tumor characteristics. Pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is necessary to stage the primary tumor, while restaging MRI, which is not systematically performed, may be of interest to identify poor responders to neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NCRT), and redefine therapeutic approach. The EuMaRCS study group aimed to investigate the role and accuracy of pretreatment (including pelvimetry) and restaging MRIs in predicting surgical difficulties and surgical outcomes in LARC therapy.

METHODS

Patients with mid or low LARC who were administered NCRT, who underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision, and for whom pretreatment and restaging MRIs were available, were included.

RESULTS

MRIs of 170 patients (median age: 61 years) were reanalyzed by the same radiologist. Pelvimetry differed significantly between males and females, but no gender difference was noted in the clinical and tumor characteristics. Tumor volume and tumor height assessed on the restaging MRI were associated, respectively, with operative time and estimated blood loss. Conversion was predicted by tumor volume, interischial distance and pubic tubercle height. The quality of the surgical resection was found to be a predictor of overall and disease-free survival. The sensitivity and specificity of tumor regression grade 1 to identify a pathologic complete response were 76.9% and 89.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In LARC management, pelvimetry and restaging MRI may be useful to predict surgical difficulties and surgical outcomes. However, the main independent predictor of patient survival appears to be the achievement of a successful surgical resection.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic resection of clinical T4b tumours of distal sigmoid and rectum: initial results

BACKGROUND

Radical resection by multivisceral resection of colorectal T4 tumours is important to reduce local recurrence and improve survival. Oncological safety of laparoscopic resection of T4 tumours is controversial. However, robot-assisted resections might have advantages, such as 3D view and greater range of motion of instruments. The aim of this study is to evaluate the initial results of robot-assisted resection of T4 rectal and distal sigmoid tumours.

METHODS

This is a cohort study of a prospectively kept database of all robot-assisted rectal and sigmoid resections between 2012 and 2017. Patients who underwent a multivisceral resection for tumours appearing as T4 cancer during surgery were included. Rectal and sigmoid resections are routinely performed with the DaVinci robot, unless an indication for intra-operative radiotherapy exists.

RESULTS

28 patients with suspected T4 rectal or sigmoid cancer were included. Most patients (78%) were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (n = 19), short course radiotherapy with long waiting interval (n = 2) or chemotherapy (n = 1). En bloc resection was performed with the complete or part of the invaded organ (prostate, vesicles, bladder, abdominal wall, presacral fascia, vagina, uterus, adnex). In 3 patients (11%), the procedure was converted to laparotomy. Twenty-four R0-resections were performed (86%) and four R1-resections (14%). Median length of surgery was 274 min (IQR 222-354). Median length of stay was 6 days (IQR 5-11). Twelve patients (43%) had postoperative complications: eight (29%) minor complications and four (14%) major complications. There was no postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted laparoscopy seems to be a feasible option for the resection of clinical T4 cancer of the distal sigmoid and rectum in selected cases. Radical resections can be achieved in the majority of cases. Therefore, T4 tumours should not be regarded as a strict contraindication for robot-assisted surgery.

Long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic vs. open colon cancer resection: a high-quality population-based analysis in a Southern German district

Background

Over 20 years after the introduction of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer, many surgeons still prefer the open approach. Whereas randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have proven the oncologic safety of laparoscopy, long-term data depicting daily clinical routine are scarce.

Methods

This population-based cohort study compares 5-year overall, relative, and recurrence-free survival rates after laparoscopic and open colon carcinoma surgery. Data derive from an independent German cancer registry encompassing all tumor patients within a political district of 1.1 million inhabitants. The final analysis included 2669 patients with major elective resection of primary non-metastatic colonic adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2013. Survival rates were compared using Kaplan–Meier analyses, relative survival models, and multivariate Cox regression. Sensitivity analysis quantified selection bias.

Results

The proportion of laparoscopic procedures increased from 9.7 to 25.8% in 2011 and dropped again to 15.8% at the end of observation period. Laparoscopy patients were younger, had a lower tumor stage, and were more likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy. Overall, relative, and recurrence-free survival was significantly superior or equivalent in Kaplan–Meier analysis (5-year overall survival rate open vs. laparoscopic: 69.0 vs. 80.2%, p < 0.001). The superiority of laparoscopy mostly remained stable after adjusting for confounders, although significance was only reached in T1-3 patients without lymph node metastases (overall survival: hazard ratio (HR) 0.654; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.446–0.958; p = 0.029).

Conclusion

Laparoscopy is a safe and promising alternative to the open approach in daily clinic practice. These favorable outcomes require future confirmation by high-quality studies outside the setting of RTCs.

Conversion is a risk factor for postoperative anastomotic leak in rectal cancer patients - A retrospective cohort study

AIM

The impact of conversion from laparoscopic surgery to laparotomy on the development of anastomotic leak (AL) in rectal cancer patients following laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR) with total mesorectal excision (TME) has not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of conversion on the risk of AL and develop a prediction nomogram for postoperative AL.

METHODS

All rectal cancer patients following laparoscopic LAR with TME from January 2010 to October 2014 were enrolled in the primary cohort. Comparisons of the postoperative anastomotic leak incidence rate between converted patients and non-converted patients were performed using both univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The result of multivariable analysis was used to develop the predicting model and the performance of nomogram was assessed with respect to its calibration, discrimination, and clinical usefulness. An independent validation cohort containing 200 patients from November 2014 to October 2015 was assessed.

RESULTS

Of all patients enrolled (n=646), 592 (91.6%) patients underwent totally laparoscopic surgery, and 54 (8.4%) were converted from laparoscopic surgery to laparotomy. Converted group patients were more likely to have a higher body mass index (BMI), prolonged length of stay (LOS), increased overall postoperative complication rates and advanced clinical T stage (T3 or T4), pathological N stage (N1 or N2) and pathological TNM stage (III or IV). The percentage of patients who had preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer was higher in non-converted patients. Patients who underwent conversion to laparotomy (n=10, 18.5%) were more likely to suffer from postoperative AL than those undergoing totally laparoscopic surgery (n=38, 6.4%) (P=0.004). Multivariate logistic regression analyses confirmed the association between conversion and postoperative AL (Odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.71 [1.31-5.63], P=0.007). Conversion, gender, and clinical N stage incorporated in the individualized prediction nomogram showed good discrimination, with a C-index of 0.697 (C-index, 0.621 and 0.772 through internal validation), and good calibration. In the validation cohort, the main results were consistent with the findings of the primary cohort, with a C-index of 0.670 (C-index, 0.562 and 0.777 through internal validation). Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the prediction nomogram was clinically useful.

CONCLUSION

Conversion during laparoscopic LAR was found to be associated with an increased risk for the postoperative AL in RC patients. A nomogram model incorporating conversion, gender and patient's clinical N stage seems to offers a useful tool for predicting postoperative AL in these patients.

Short- and long-term outcomes following laparoscopic vs open surgery for pathological T4 colorectal cancer: 10 years of experience in a single center

AIM

To evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes following laparoscopic vs open surgery for pathological T4 (pT4) colorectal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the short- and long-term outcomes of proven pT4 colorectal cancer patients who underwent complete resection by laparoscopic or open surgery from 2006 to 2015 at Guangdong General Hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 211 pT4 colorectal cancer patients were included in this analysis, including 101 cases in the laparoscopy (LAP) group and 110 cases in the open surgery (OPEN) group [including 15 (12.9%) cases of conversion to open surgery]. Clinical information (age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, etc.) did not differ between the two groups. In terms of blood loss, postoperative complications and rate of recovery, the LAP group performed significantly more favorably (P < 0.05). With regard to pT4a/b and combined organ resection, there were significantly more cases in the OPEN group (P < 0.05). The 3- and 5-year overall survival rates were 74.9% and 60.5%, respectively, for the LAP group and 62.4% and 46.5%, respectively, for the OPEN group (P = 0.060). The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 68.0% and 57.3%, respectively, for the LAP group and 55.8% and 39.8%, respectively, for the OPEN group (P = 0.053). Multivariate analysis showed that IIIB/IIIC stage, lymph node status, and CA19-9 were significant predictors of overall survival. PT4a/b, IIIC stage, histological subtypes, CA19-9, and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent factors affecting disease-free survival.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is safely used in the treatment of pT4 colorectal cancer while offering advantages of minimal invasiveness and faster recovery. Laparoscopy is able to achieve good oncologic outcomes similar to those of open surgery. We recommend that laparoscopy be carried out in experienced centers. It is still required to screen the appropriate cases for laparoscopic surgery, optimize the preoperative diagnosis process, and reduce the conversion rate. Multi-center, prospective, and large-sample studies are required to assess these issues.

Short-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic vs open rectal excision for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To review evidence on the short-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic (LRR) vs open rectal resection (ORR) for rectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using Cochrane Central Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, OpenGrey and ClinicalTrials.gov register for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing LRR vs ORR for rectal cancer and reporting short-term clinical outcomes. Articles published in English from January 1, 1995 to June, 30 2016 that met the selection criteria were retrieved and reviewed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statements checklist for reporting a systematic review was followed. Random-effect models were used to estimate mean differences and risk ratios. The robustness and heterogeneity of the results were explored by performing sensitivity analyses. The pooled effect was considered significant when P < 0.05.

RESULTS

Overall, 14 RCTs were included. No differences were found in postoperative mortality (P = 0.19) and morbidity (P = 0.75) rates. The mean operative time was 36.67 min longer (95%CI: 27.22-46.11, P < 0.00001), the mean estimated blood loss was 88.80 ml lower (95%CI: -117.25 to -60.34, P < 0.00001), and the mean incision length was 11.17 cm smaller (95%CI: -13.88 to -8.47, P < 0.00001) for LRR than ORR. These results were confirmed by sensitivity analyses that focused on the four major RCTs. The mean length of hospital stay was 1.71 d shorter (95%CI: -2.84 to -0.58, P < 0.003) for LRR than ORR. Similarly, bowel recovery (i.e., day of the first bowel movement) was 0.68 d shorter (95%CI: -1.00 to -0.36, P < 0.00001) for LRR. The sensitivity analysis did not confirm a significant difference between LRR and ORR for these latter two parameters. The overall quality of the evidence was rated as high.

CONCLUSION

LRR is associated with lesser blood loss, smaller incision length, and longer operative times compared to ORR. No differences are observed for postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for rectal cancer: short-term outcomes at a single center

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for locally advanced rectal cancer remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the short-term outcomes of this procedure at our institution.

METHODS

From December 2011 to December 2016, patients who underwent robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for rectal cancer were investigated. Patient demographics, treatment characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and pathological results were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

There were 31 patients; 17 men (54.8%) and 14 women (45.2%), with a median age of 65 years (range 40-82 years). Twenty-one patients (67.7%) had a cT4 tumor, 9 patients (29.0%) had a pT4b tumor, and all patients except one (96.8%) underwent complete resection of the primary tumor with negative resection margins. Eleven patients (35.5%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The most commonly resected organ was the vaginal wall (n = 12, 38.7%), followed by the prostate (n = 10, 32.3%). Lateral lymph node dissection was performed in 20 patients (64.5%). The median operative time was 394 min (range 189-549 min), and the median blood loss was 41 mL (range 0-502 mL). None of the patients received intraoperative blood transfusions or required conversion to open. Overall, postoperative complications occurred in 11 patients (35.5%). The most frequent complication was urinary retention (n = 5, 16.1%), and none of the patients developed serious complications classified as Clavien-Dindo grades III-V.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for rectal cancer is safe and technically feasible.