Barriers to laparoscopic colon resection for cancer: a national analysis

Utilization of minimally invasive colectomy at safety-net hospitals in the United States

BACKGROUND

Prior literature has reported inferior surgical outcomes and reduced access to minimally invasive procedures at safety-net hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been elucidated for elective colectomy. We sought to characterize the association between safety-net hospitals and likelihood of minimally invasive resection, perioperative outcomes, and costs.

METHODS

All adult (≥18 years) hospitalization records entailing elective colectomy were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Centers in the top quartile of safety-net burden were considered safety-net hospitals (others: non-safety-net hospitals). Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the impact of safety-net hospitals status on key outcomes.

RESULTS

Of ∼532,640 patients, 95,570 (17.9%) were treated at safety-net hospitals. The safety-net hospitals cohort was younger and more often of Black race or Hispanic ethnicity. After adjustment, care at safety-net hospitals remained independently associated with reduced odds of minimally invasive surgery (adjusted odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.87-0.97). The interaction between safety-net hospital status and race was significant, such that Black race remained linked with lower odds of minimally invasive surgery at safety-net hospitals (reference: White race). Additionally, safety-net hospitals was associated with greater likelihood of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.34, confidence interval 1.04-1.74) and any perioperative complication (adjusted odds ratio 1.15, confidence interval 1.08-1.22), as well as increased length of stay (β+0.26 days, confidence interval 0.17-0.35) and costs (β+$2,510, confidence interval 2,020-3,000).

CONCLUSION

Care at safety-net hospitals was linked with lower odds of minimally invasive colectomy, as well as greater complications and costs. Black patients treated at safety-net hospitals demonstrated reduced likelihood of minimally invasive surgery, relative to White patients. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the root causes of these disparities in care.

A prospective phase II clinical trial/IDEAL Stage 2a series of single-port robotic colorectal surgery for abdominal and transanal cases

AIM

Slow laparoscopy adoption accelerated the uptake of robotic surgery. However, the current robotic platforms have limitations in transanal applications and multiple port sites. The da Vinci single-port (SP) robot is currently used on trial for colorectal surgery, and broad assessment of outcomes is needed. We aimed to report findings of a phase II clinical trial of SP robotic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A sequentially reported prospective case series was performed on patients using SP robotics at a tertiary referral centre from 1 October 2018 to 31 August 2021. Cases were stratified into abdominal and transanal cohorts. Demographics, intra-operative variables and 30-day postoperative outcomes were evaluated. Univariate analysis was performed, with statistical process control for the docking process. Main outcomes were conversion rates, morbidity, mortality and point of standardization of docking.

RESULTS

In all, 133 patients were included: 93 (69.92%) abdominal and 40 (30.08%) transanal. The main diagnosis was rectal cancer (n = 59) and the procedure performed a robotic transanal abdominal transanal radical proctosigmoidectomy (n = 30). There were no conversions to open surgery. Two abdominal (2.15%) and three transanal cases (7.50%) were converted to laparoscopy. All colorectal adenocarcinomas had negative margins, proper lymph node harvest and complete mesorectal excision, as appropriate. Docking became a standardized process at cases 34 (abdominal) and 23 (anorectal). After surgery, bowel function returned on mean day 2 (abdominal) and 1 (transanal). The morbidity rate was 15.05% (abdominal) and 27.50% (transanal). There were two major morbidities in each cohort. Overall, there were three (2.65%) readmissions, one reoperation and no mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-port robotics is feasible for all types of colorectal procedures, with good clinical and oncological outcomes. With this development in colorectal surgery, further studies can develop best practices with this novel technology.

Factors contributing to the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Some studies have suggested disparities in access to robotic colorectal surgery, however, it is unclear which factors are most meaningful in the determination of approach relative to laparoscopic or open surgery. This study aimed to identify the most influential factors contributing to robotic colorectal surgery utilization.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of published studies that compared the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery versus laparoscopic or open surgery. Eligible studies were identified through PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertations in September 2021.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included in the analysis. Patients were less likely to undergo robotic versus laparoscopic surgery if they were female (OR = 0.91, 0.84-0.98), older (OR = 1.61, 1.38-1.88), had Medicare (OR = 0.84, 0.71-0.99), or had comorbidities (OR = 0.83, 0.77-0.91). Non-academic hospitals had lower odds of conducting robotic versus laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.73, 0.62-0.86). Additional disparities were observed when comparing robotic with open surgery for patients who were Black (OR = 0.78, 0.71-0.86), had lower income (OR = 0.67, 0.62-0.74), had Medicaid (OR = 0.58, 0.43-0.80), or were uninsured (OR = 0.29, 0.21-0.39).

CONCLUSION

When determining who undergoes robotic surgery, consideration of factors such as age and comorbid conditions may be clinically justified, while other factors seem less justifiable. Black patients and the underinsured were less likely to undergo robotic surgery. This study identifies nonclinical disparities in access to robotics that should be addressed to provide more equitable access to innovations in colorectal surgery.

Audit of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer in Morocco: A report of the results of a prospective multicentre cohort study

Background

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

•

Laparoscopy is the standard technique for colon cancer in rich countries. Little data exists about lower income countries.

•

We evaluated laparoscopy for colon cancer by comparing it to open colon resections in a low-mid income country.

•

We found that Laparoscopy is performed by few surgeons, who apply strict patient selection for laparoscopic cases.

•

Patients in the laparoscopy group also had lower quality resections compared to open surgery.

•

The challenges identified will require more focus on training, certification, centralization, and standardisation of care.

Early evaluation of a next-generation surgical system in robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy: A prospective clinical cohort study

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to demonstrate the safe and effective use of the Versius surgical system (CMR Surgical, Cambridge, UK) in robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomy. This surgical robot was developed iteratively with input from surgeons to improve surgical outcomes and end-user experience. We report data from the gynecology cohort of an early clinical trial designed in broad alignment with IDEAL-D (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term follow-up - Devices) stage 2b (Exploration).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study is registered in the Indian clinical trials register (CTRI/2019/02/017872). Adult women requiring total hysterectomy who provided informed consent and met the eligibility criteria underwent procedures at one of three hospitals in India. Five surgeons performed robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomies using the device from March 2019 to September 2020. The primary endpoint was rate of unplanned conversion to conventional laparoscopic or open surgery. Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee using endoscope video recordings and clinical notes.

RESULTS

In total, 144 women underwent surgery (median age: 44 years [range: 28-78]; median body mass index 25.8 kg/m² [range: 14.3-47.8]). The rate of unplanned conversion to conventional laparoscopy was 2/144 (1.4%); neither conversion was device related. No surgery was converted to open. In total, 13 adverse events occurred among seven (4.9%) patients, comprising seven serious adverse events and six adverse events. One serious adverse event was deemed device-related. Two patients were readmitted to hospital within 30 days; both made a full recovery. No patients died within 90 days of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The device provides a safe and effective option for total laparoscopic hysterectomy; these findings support its continued implementation in larger patient cohorts and expansion in other major minimal access indications.

Association of hospital factors and socioeconomic status with the utilization of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer over a decade

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is a mainstay of treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC). Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been shown to have improved outcomes compared to open procedures for colorectal malignancy. While use of MIS has been increasing, there remains large variability in its implementation at the hospital and patient level.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify disparities in sex, race, location, patient income status, insurance status, hospital region, bed size and teaching status for the use of MIS in the treatment of CRC.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample Database. Between 2008 and 2017, there were 412,292 hospitalizations of adult patients undergoing elective colectomy for CRC. The primary outcome was use of MIS during hospitalization.

RESULTS

Overall, the frequency of open colectomies was higher than MIS (56.56% vs. 43.44%). Black patients were associated with decreased odds of MIS use during hospitalization compared to White patients (OR 0.921, p = 0.0011). As the county population where patients resided decreased, odds of MIS also significantly decreased as compared to central counties of metropolitan areas. As income decreased below the reference of $71,000, odds of MIS also significantly decreased. Medicaid and uninsured patients had decreased odds of MIS use during hospitalization compared to private insurance (OR 0.751, p < 0.0001 and OR 0.629, p < 0.0001 respectively). Rural and urban non-teaching hospitals were associated with decreased odds of MIS as compared to urban teaching hospitals (OR 0.523, p < 0.0001 and OR 0.837, p < 0.0001 respectively). Hospitals with a small bed size were also associated with decreased MIS during hospitalizations (OR 0.888, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Marked hospital level and socioeconomic disparities exist for utilization of MIS for colorectal cancer. Strategies targeted at reducing these gaps have the potential to improve surgical outcomes and cancer survival.

The impact of robotic surgery on a tertiary care colorectal surgery program, an assessment of costs and short term outcomes: A Canadian perspective

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery for colorectal pathology has gained interest as it can overcome technical challenges and limitations of traditional laparoscopic surgery. A lack of training and costs have been cited as reasons for limiting its use in Canada. The objective of this paper was to assess the impact of robotic surgery on outcomes and costs in a Canadian setting.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients undergoing left sided colorectal surgery ("Pre-Robotic Phase" n = 145 vs. "Post Robotic Phase" n = 150) and a single tertiary care centre in Ontario, Canada. Utilization and success of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), length of stay, complications and hospital costs were compared. Univariate and Multivariate analysis was used for these comparisons.

RESULTS

Characteristics, diagnosis and type of resection were similar between groups. Robotic Implementation resulted in higher rates of successful MIS (i.e. attempt at MIS without conversion) (85% vs. 47%, P < 0.001), shorter mean length of stay (4.7 days vs. 8.4 days, P < 0.001), and similar mean operative times (3.9 h vs. 3.9 h, P = 0.93). Emergency Department visits were fewer in the Robotic Phase (24% vs. 34%, P = 0.04), with no difference in readmission, anastomotic leak or unplanned reoperation. After robotic implementation, the mean total hospital costs decreased, but this was not statistically significant (-$1453, 95% CI -$3974 to +$1068, P = 0.25). Regression analysis, adjusting for age, gender, obesity, ASA and procedure showed similar findings (Robotic Phase -$657, 95% CI -$3038 to +$1724, vs Pre Robotic Phase [Reference], P = 0.59).

INTERPRETATION

Implementation of a robotic colorectal surgery program in a Canadian tertiary care centre showed improved clinical outcomes, without a significant increase in the cost of care. Although this study is from a single institution, we have demonstrated that robotic colorectal surgery is feasible and can be cost effective in the right setting.

Colorectal cancer disparities across the continuum of cancer care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Disparate colorectal cancer outcomes persist in vulnerable populations. We aimed to examine the distribution of research across the colorectal cancer care continuum, and to determine disparities in the utilization of Surgery among Black patients.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of colorectal cancer disparities studies was performed. The meta-analysis assessed three utilization measures in Surgery.

RESULTS

Of 1,199 publications, 60% focused on Prevention, Screening, or Diagnosis, 20% on Survivorship, 15% on Treatment, and 1% on End-of-Life Care. A total of 16 studies, including 1,110,674 patients, were applied to three meta-analyses regarding utilization of Surgery. Black patients were less likely to receive surgery, twice as likely to refuse surgery, and less likely to receive laparoscopic surgery, when compared to White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 2011, the majority of research focused on prevention, screening, or diagnosis. Given the observed treatment disparities among Black patients, future efforts to reduce colorectal cancer disparities should include interventions within Surgery.

Ultrasound-guided bilateral erector spinae plane block in laparoscopic colon cancer surgery : A randomized controlled prospective trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) for pain control in other surgeries remains an interesting topic of discussion. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy and quality of recovery of ultrasound-guided bilateral ESPB in laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this study 50 patients were included and randomly divided into the intervention group (E group, n = 25) and the control group (C group, n = 25). Patients in the E group received general anesthesia with preoperative bilateral ultrasound-guided ESPB, whereas patients in the C group received general anesthesia with saline injection in the erector spinae plane preoperatively. Data on intraoperative and postoperative anesthetic effects and the effect on enhanced recovery after surgery were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Rocuronium consumption in the intervention group was 82.80 ± 21.70 mg, which was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). Visual analog scale scores at 2, 6, and 24 h after surgery in the intervention group were lower than those in the control group (F_between = 34.034, P = 0.000). The time to ambulation, consumption of ketorolac tromethamine, time to oral intake and hospital stay after operation in the intervention group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05). The block area at the different baselines was significant (F_between = 3.211, P = 0.009). The association between baseline and time was significant (F_{baseline * time} = 3.268, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed that ultrasound-guided ESPB technology is safe and beneficial for patients with colon cancer undergoing laparoscopic colon surgery.

Racial Disparities in the Management of Locoregional Colorectal Cancer

Racial disparities pervade nearly all aspects of management of locoregional colorectal cancer, including time to treatment, receipt of resection, adequacy of resection, postoperative complications, and receipt of neoadjuvant and adjuvant multimodality therapies. Disparate gaps in treatment translate into enduring effects on survivorship, recurrence, and mortality. Efforts to reduce these gaps in care must be undertaken on a multilevel basis and focus on modifiable factors that underlie racial disparity.

National disparities in use of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is safe and improves outcomes in older persons with rectal cancer but may be underutilized. As older persons are the largest surgical population, investigation of the current use and factors impacting MIS use is warranted. Our goal is to investigate the trends and disparities that affect utilization of MIS in older persons with rectal cancer.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was reviewed for persons 65 years and older who underwent curative resection for rectal adenocarcinoma from 2010 to 2017. Cases were stratified by surgical approach (open or MIS [laparoscopic or robotic]). Univariate analysis compared patient and provider demographics across approaches. Multivariate analysis investigated variables associated with MIS use. Main outcome measures were trends and factors associated with MIS use in older persons.

RESULTS

Of 31,910 patients analyzed, 51.9% (n = 16,555) were open and 48.1% (n = 15,355) MIS. The MIS cohort was 66.7% (n = 10,236) laparoscopic and 33.3% (n = 5119) robotic. MIS increased from 29% in 2010 (n = 1197; 25% laparoscopic, 4% robotic) to 65% in 2017 (n = 2382; 35% laparoscopic, 30% robotic), likely from annual increases in robotics (OR 1.24/year, p < 0.0001). In the unadjusted analysis, there were significant differences in MIS use by age, race, comorbidity, socioeconomic status, and facility type. In multivariate analysis, patients with advancing age (OR 0.93, p < 0.001), major comorbidity (OR 0.75, p < 0.001), total proctectomy (OR0.78, p < 0.001), and advanced pathologic stage (OR 0.51, p < 0.001) were less likely to undergo MIS.

CONCLUSION

Nationwide, less than half of rectal cancer cases in older persons were performed with MIS, despite steady robotic growth. Patient and facility factors impacted MIS use. Further work on regionalizing rectal cancer care and ensuring equitable MIS access and training could improve utilization.

Interim safety analysis of the first-in-human clinical trial of the Versius surgical system, a new robot-assisted device for use in minimal access surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide an interim safety analysis of the first 30 surgical procedures performed using the Versius Surgical System.

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted laparoscopy has been developed to overcome some of the important limitations of conventional laparoscopy. The new system is currently undergoing a first-in-human prospective clinical trial to confirm the safety and effectiveness of the device when performing minimal access surgery (MAS).

METHODS

Procedures were performed using Versius by a lead surgeon supported by an operating room (OR) team. Male or female patients aged between 18 and 65 years old and requiring elective minor or intermediate gynaecological or general surgical procedures were enrolled. The primary endpoint was the rate of unplanned conversion of procedures to other MAS or open surgery.

RESULTS

The procedures included nine cholecystectomies, six robot-assisted total laparoscopic hysterectomies, four appendectomies, five diagnostic laparoscopy cases, two oophorectomies, two fallopian tube recanalisation procedures, an ovarian cystectomy and a salpingo-oophorectomy procedure. All procedures were completed successfully without the need for conversion to MAS or open surgery. No patient returned to the OR within 24 h of surgery and readmittance rate at 30 and 90 days post-surgery was 1/30 (3.3%) and 2/30 (6.7%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-in-human interim safety analysis demonstrates that the Versius Surgical System is safe and can be used to successfully perform minor or intermediate gynaecological and general surgery procedures. The cases presented here provide evidence that the Versius clinical trial can continue to extend recruitment and begin to include major procedures, in alignment with the IDEAL-D Framework Stage 2b: Exploration.

Impact of Socioeconomic Status on Presentation and Outcomes in Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Following Cytoreduction and Chemoperfusion: Persistent Inequalities in Outcomes at a High-Volume Center

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemoperfusion (CRS HIPEC) can offer significant survival advantage for select patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CRPM). Low socioeconomic status (SES) is implicated in disparities in access to care. We analyze the impact of SES on postoperative outcomes and survival at a high-volume tertiary CRS HIPEC center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study examining patients who underwent CRS HIPEC for CRPM from 2000 to 2018. Patients were grouped according to SES. Baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival were examined between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 226 patients were analyzed, 107 (47%) low-SES and 119 (53%) high-SES patients. High-SES patients were younger (52 vs. 58 years, p = 0.01) and more likely to be White (95.0% vs. 91.6%, p = 0.06) and privately insured (83% vs. 57%, p < 0.001). They traveled significantly further for treatment and had lower burden of comorbidities and frailty (p = 0.01). Low-SES patients more often presented with synchronous peritoneal metastases (48% vs. 35%, p = 0.05). Following CRS HIPEC, low-SES patients had longer length of stay and higher burden of postoperative complications, 90-day readmission, and 30-day mortality. Median overall survival following CRS HIPEC was worse for low-SES patients (17.8 vs. 32.4 months, p = 0.02). This disparity persisted on multivariate survival analysis (low SES: HR = 1.46, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite improving therapies for CRPM, low-SES patients remain at a significant disadvantage. Even patients who overcome barriers to care experience worse short- and long-term outcomes. Improving access and addressing these disparities is crucial to ensure equitable outcomes and improve patient care.

The Trends in Adoption, Outcomes, and Costs of Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer in the Elderly Population

BACKGROUND

The elderly constitute the majority of both colorectal cancer and surgical volume. Despite established safety and feasibility, laparoscopy may remain underutilized for colorectal cancer resections in the elderly. With proven benefits, increasing laparoscopy in elderly colorectal cancer patients could substantially improve outcomes. Our goal was to evaluate utilization and outcomes for laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in the elderly.

METHODS

A national inpatient database was reviewed for elective inpatient resections for colorectal cancer from 2010 to 2015. Patients were stratified into elderly (≥ 65 years) and non-elderly cohorts (< 65 years), then grouped into open or laparoscopic procedures. The main outcomes were trends in utilization by approach and total costs, length of stay (LOS), readmission, and complications by approach in the elderly. Multivariable regression models were used to control for differences across platforms, adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic adoption for colorectal cancer in the elderly increased gradually until 2013, then declined, with simultaneously increasing rates of open surgery. Laparoscopy significantly improved all primary outcomes compared to open surgery (all p < 0.01). From the adjusted analysis, laparoscopy reduced complications by 30%, length of stay by 1.99 days, and total costs by $3276/admission. Laparoscopic patients were 34% less likely to be readmitted; when readmitted, the episodes were less expensive when index procedure was laparoscopic.

CONCLUSION

The adoption of laparoscopy for colorectal cancer surgery in the elderly is slow and even declining recently. In addition to the clinical benefits, there are reduced overall costs, creating a tremendous value proposition if use can be expanded.

PRECIS

This national contemporary study shows the slow uptake and recent decline in adaption of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly, despite the benefits in clinical outcomes and costs found. This data can be used to target education, regionalization, and quality improvement efforts in this expanding population.

Variation in Hospital Utilization of Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy for Localized Pancreatic Neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) for localized neoplasms has been demonstrated to be feasible and safe. However, national adoption of the technique is poorly understood. Objectives of this study were to identify factors associated with use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy for localized neoplasms and assess hospital variation in MIDP utilization.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients with pancreatic cysts, stage I pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and stage I pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors undergoing distal pancreatectomy from the ACS NSQIP Pancreas Targeted Dataset. Factors associated with use of MIDP were identified using multivariable logistic regression and hospital-level variation was assessed.

RESULTS

Analysis included 3,059 patients at 139 hospitals. Overall, 64.5% of patients underwent minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy. Patients were more likely to undergo MIDP if they had lower ASA classification (P = 0.004) or BMI ≥ 30 (P < 0.001) and less likely if they had pancreatic adenocarcinoma (P < 0.001). There was notable hospital variability in utilization (range 0 to 100% of cases). Hospital-level utilization of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy did not appear to be driven by patient selection, as hierarchical analysis demonstrated that only 1.8% of observed hospital variation was attributable to measured patient selection factors.

CONCLUSION

Utilization of MIDP for localized pancreatic neoplasms is highly variable. While some patient-level factors are associated with MIDP use, hospital adoption of MIDP appears to be the primary driver of utilization. Monitoring hospital-level use of MIDP may be a useful quality measure to monitor uptake of emerging techniques in pancreatic surgery.

An international comparison of the utilisation of and outcomes from minimal access surgery for the treatment of common abdominal surgical emergencies

BACKGROUND

Minimal access surgery (MAS) has suggested improvements in clinical outcomes compared to open surgery in several abdominal elective and emergency surgeries. The aims of this study were to compare England with the United States in the utilisation of MAS and mortality from four common abdominal surgical emergencies.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2012, the rate of MAS and in-hospital mortality for appendicitis, incarcerated or strangulated abdominal hernia, small or large bowel and peptic ulcer perforation were compared between England and the United States. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to adjust for differences in baseline patient demographics.

RESULTS

132,364 admissions in England were compared to an estimated 1,811,136 admissions in the United States. Minimal access surgery was used less commonly in England for appendicitis (odds ratio (OR) 0.27, 95% CI 0.267-0.278), abdominal hernia (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.15-0.17), small or large bowel perforation (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.32-0.35) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99). In-hospital mortality was increased in England compared to the United States for all four conditions: appendicitis (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.66-2.68), abdominal hernia (OR 3.25, 95% CI 3.10-3.40), small or large bowel perforation (OR 3.88, 95% CI 3.76-3.99) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 3.09, 95% CI 2.94-3.25). In England, after adjustment for patient demographics, open surgery was associated with increased in-hospital mortality for abdominal hernia (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.26-2.71), small or large bowel perforation (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.37-1.87) and peptic ulcer perforation (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.91-2.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimal access surgery was performed less commonly and in-hospital mortality was increased in England compared to the United States for common abdominal surgical conditions. Therefore, strategies to enhance adoption of MAS in emergency conditions in England need to be optimised and include appropriate patient selection and improved surgeon MAS training.

Role of Emergency Laparoscopic Colectomy for Colorectal Cancer: A Population-based Study in England

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate factors associated with the use of laparoscopic surgery and the associated postoperative outcomes for urgent or emergency resection of colorectal cancer in the English National Health Service.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Laparoscopy is increasingly used for elective colorectal cancer surgery, but uptake has been limited in the emergency setting.

METHODS

Patients recorded in the National Bowel Cancer Audit who underwent urgent or emergency colorectal cancer resection between April 2010 and March 2016 were included. A multivariable multilevel logistic regression model was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) of undergoing laparoscopic resection and postoperative outcome according to approach.

RESULTS

There were 15,516 patients included. Laparoscopy use doubled from 15.1% in 2010 to 30.2% in 2016. Laparoscopy was less common in patients with poorer physical status [American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) 4/5 vs 1, OR 0.29 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.23-0.37), P < 0.001] and more advanced T-stage [T4 vs T0-T2, OR 0.28 (0.23-0.34), P < 0.001] and M-stage [M1 vs M0, OR 0.85 (0.75-0.96), P < 0.001]. Age, socioeconomic deprivation, nodal stage, hospital volume, and a dedicated colorectal emergency service were not associated with laparoscopy. Laparoscopic patients had a shorter length of stay [median 8 days (interquartile range (IQR) 5 to 15) vs 12 (IQR 8 to 21), adjusted mean difference -3.67 (-4.60 to 2.74), P < 0.001], and lower 90-day mortality [8.1% vs 13.0%; adjusted OR 0.78 (0.66-0.91), P = 0.004] than patients undergoing open resection. There was no significant difference in rates of readmission or reoperation by approach.

CONCLUSION

The use of laparoscopic approach in the emergency resection of colorectal cancer is linked to a shorter length of hospital stay and reduced postoperative mortality.

Using end-user feedback to optimize the design of the Versius Surgical System, a new robot-assisted device for use in minimal access surgery

Background

Robot-assisted minimal access surgery (MAS) reduces blood loss, recovery time, intraoperative and postoperative complications and pain. However, uptake of robotic MAS remains low, suggesting there are barriers to its use. To overcome these barriers, a new surgical robot system, Versius, was developed based on the needs and feedback of surgeons and surgical teams.

Methods

The surgical robot prototype was designed based on observations in the operating room (OR) and previous interviews with surgeons. Formative studies with surgeons and surgical teams were used to refine the prototype design, resulting in modifications to all components, including the arms, instruments, handgrips and surgeon console. Proof-of-concept cadaver studies were used to further optimize its design by assessing its usability during surgical procedures.

Results

Feedback led to the development of a novel, mobile design with independent arm carts and surgical console, linked by supported serial or parallel connections, providing maximum flexibility in the OR. Instrument tips were developed based on surgeons’ preferred designs and wristed at the tip providing seven degrees of freedom within the patient. Multiple handgrip designs were assessed by surgeons; of these, a ‘game controller’ design was rated most popular and usable. An open surgical console design allowing multiple working positions was rated highest by surgeons and the surgical teams.

Conclusions

This surgical robot system has been developed using feedback from end users throughout the design process and aims to minimize barriers to robotic MAS uptake. Additionally, these studies demonstrate system success in the surgical procedures it was designed for. The studies reported here, and further studies of the Versius Surgical System, are intended to align with IDEAL (Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term study) Framework guidance.

Utilization of Laparoscopic Colon Surgery in the Texas Inpatient Public Use Data File (PUDF)

Background:

Laparoscopic surgery has become the standard of care for the most common surgical procedures performed. However, laparoscopic techniques have not reached this same penetrance in colorectal surgery. We wanted to determine the percentage of colon operations performed in Texas that were done via laparoscopic, robotic and open techniques.

Methods:

The Texas Inpatient Public Use Data File (PUDF) was queried using ICD-9-CM diagnostic and procedure codes to determine overall utilization of laparoscopic colectomies (LC) in Texas between 2013-14 for reporting facilities. We specifically looked at cost and the length of stay for LC, open colectomy (OC) and robotic assisted colectomy (RAC).

Results:

In the state of Texas between 2013-14 there were 20,454 colectomies performed. Of these 12,328 (60.3%) were OC, 7,536 (36.8%) were LC, and 590 (3.9%) were RAC. Average total cost was $117,113 for OC, $75,741.9 for LC, and $81,996.2 for RAC. Average length of stay for each technique was 10.6 days for OC, 6.1 days for LC, and 5.1 days for RAC. The risk of a postoperative complication occurring was higher in the open procedure than a laparoscopic procedure.

Conclusions:

LC accounted for only 36.8% of all colectomies performed in Texas between 2013-14. OC costs twice as much as LC and increased the length of stay by nearly 4 d. LC and RAC are both associated with significantly less cost and length of stay for patients undergoing surgery, while lowering perioperative complications.

Disclosures:

None of the authors have any relevant disclosures.

The Current Role of Robotics in Colorectal Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite the growth in laparoscopic surgery, comparable oncological outcomes, and reduced complication rates, the majority of colorectal surgery is still performed via an open approach. Reasons for this may include technical difficulties associated with operating in narrow spaces such as in the pelvis and inadequate experience. Robotic surgery provides potential solutions to some of these challenges. This review will summarize the state of the literature regarding robotic colorectal surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

The most consistent benefit of robotic surgery is decreasing operative conversions, specifically in rectal cancer. In partial colectomies, there is evidence to support quicker return to bowel function. Oncologic outcomes compared to the laparoscopic approach are equivalent. Robotic surgery provides solutions to the challenges posed by laparoscopy, including wristed instruments, ease of intracorporeal suturing, and ergonomic advantages. Randomized trials to evaluate peri-operative outcomes will be important. If robotics is able to facilitate conversion of open colectomies to their minimally invasive equivalent, robotics may end up proving to be advantageous in the peri-operative and post-operative period. Continued studies are warranted.

Disparities in minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer in Florida

BACKGROUND

The cost of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) raises potential for racial and social disparities. The aim of this study was to identify the racial, socioeconomic and geographic disparities associated with MIS for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Florida.

METHODS

Using the Florida Inpatient Discharge Dataset, we examined the clinical data of patients who underwent elective resections for CRC during 2013-2015. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify differences in gender, age, race, urbanization, region, insurance and clinical characteristics associated with the surgical approach.

RESULTS

Of the 10,224 patients identified, 5308 (52%) had open surgery and 4916 (48%) had MIS. Females (p = 0.012), Medicare-insured patients (p = 0.001) and residents of South Florida were more likely to undergo MIS. Patients with Medicaid (p = 0.008), metastasis (p < 0.001) or 3-5 comorbidities (p = 0.004) had reduced likelihood of MIS. Hispanic patients in Southwest Florida had reduced likelihood of receiving MIS than whites (p < 0.017). Patients who underwent MIS had significantly reduced LOS (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with national studies, MIS for CRC in Florida is associated with insurance status and geographic location. There are patient-level regional differences for racial disparities in MIS for CRC in Florida.

Effects of laparoscopic surgery on survival, quality of care and utilization in patients with colon cancer: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopy is a safe and effective treatment for colon cancer. However, its effects on short- and long-term health outcomes and medical utilization are not fully elucidated. This study aimed to compare short- and long-term utilization and health outcomes of colon cancer patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open surgery in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

This study was conducted by linking data from Taiwan Cancer Registry, National Health Insurance claims and Death Registry. Patients aged 18 and older with colon cancer between 2009 and 2012 were included in the study. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias between laparoscopic and open surgery groups. Cox proportional hazard regression and generalized linear mixed logistic regression were used to test hypotheses.

RESULTS

Among the 11,269 colon cancer patients who underwent colectomy, 3236 (28.72%) received laparoscopy and 8033 (71.28%) underwent open surgery. Patients who received laparoscopic surgery had better overall survival (HR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70-0.97). These patients also had lower 30 day mortality (0.44% vs. 0.91%), lower 1 year mortality (2.83% vs. 4.68%), lower overall occurrence of complications (6.16% vs. 8.77%), shorter mean length of stay (12.53 vs. 14.93 days) and lower cost for index hospitalization (US$4325.34 vs. US$4453.90). No significant differences were observed in medical utilization over a period of 365 days after the surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that, in both the short- and long-term post-operation periods, laparoscopic surgery reduced the likelihood of postoperative complications, 30 day, and 1 year mortality while being no more expensive than open surgery for colon cancer.