National differences in implementation of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer and the influence on short-term outcomes

Investigating the therapeutic promise of Drug-Repurposed-Loaded Nanocarriers: A pioneering strategy in advancing colorectal cancer treatment

Globally, colorectal cancer is a major health problem that ranks in third place in terms of occurrences and second in terms of mortality worldwide. New cases increase annually, with the absence of effective therapies, especially for metastatic colorectal cancer, emphasizing the need for novel therapeutic approaches. Although conventional treatments are commonly used in oncotherapy, their success rate is low, which leads to the exploration of novel technologies. Recent efforts have focused on developing safe and efficient cancer nanocarriers. With their nanoscale properties, nanocarriers have the potential to utilize internal metabolic modifications amid cancer cells and healthy cells. Drug repurposing is an emerging strategy in cancer management as it is a faster, cheaper, and safer method than conventional drug development. However, most repurposed drugs are characterized by low-key pharmacokinetic characteristics, such as poor aqueous solubility, permeability, retention, and bioavailability. Nanoparticle formulations and delivery have expanded over the past few decades, creating opportunities for drug repurposing and promises as an advanced cancer modality. This review provides a concise and updated overview of colorectal cancer treatment regimens and their therapeutic limitations. Furthermore, the chemotherapeutic effect of various FDA-approved medications, including statins, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antidiabetic and anthelmintic agents, and their significance in colorectal cancer management. Along with the role of various nanocarrier systems in achieving the desired therapeutic outcomes of employing these redefined drugs.

Comparative analysis of the short and medium-term efficacy of the Da Vinci robot versus laparoscopic total mesangectomy for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The Da Vinci robot-assisted surgery technique has been widely used in laparoscopic mesangectomy for rectal cancer. However, the short-term efficacy of these procedures compared to traditional laparoscopic surgery remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare and analyze the short- and medium-term efficacy of Da Vinci robot and laparoscopic surgery in total mesangectomy (TME) for rectal cancer, so as to provide guidance and reference for clinical practice.

AIM

To investigate the safety and long-term efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic total mesorectal resection for the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

The clinicopathologic data of 240 patients who underwent TME for rectal cancer in the Anorectal Department of People's Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region from August 2018 to March 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 112 patients underwent laparoscopic TME (L-TME) group, and 128 patients underwent robotic TME (R-TME) group. The intraoperative, postoperative, and follow-up conditions of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The conversion rate of the L-TME group was greater than that of the R-TME group (5.4% vs 0.8%, χ 2 = 4.417, P = 0.036). The complication rate of the L-TME group was greater than that of the R-TME group (32.1% vs 17.2%, χ 2 = 7.290, P = 0.007). The percentage of positive annular margins in the L-TME group was greater than that in the R-TME group (7.1% vs 1.6%, χ 2 = 4.658, P = 0.031). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate of the L-TME group were lower than those of the R-TME group (74.1% vs 85.2%, χ 2 = 4.962, P = 0.026; 81.3% vs 91.4%, χ 2 = 5.494, P = 0.019); in patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III DFS rate and OS rate in the L-TME group were significantly lower than those in the R-TME group (52.5% vs 76.1%, χ 2 = 5.799, P = 0.016; 65.0% vs 84.8%, χ 2 = 4.787, P = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the L-TME group, the R-TME group had a better tumor prognosis and was more favorable for patients with rectal cancer, especially for patients with stage III rectal cancer.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Benchmarking Uptake for a Regional Improvement Programme

BACKGROUND

The uptake of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for patients with colorectal cancer has progressed at differing rates, both across countries, and within countries. This study aimed to investigate uptake for a regional colorectal cancer improvement programme in England.

METHOD

We calculated the proportion of patients receiving elective laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery amongst those diagnosed with colorectal cancer over 3 time periods (2007-2011, 2012-2016 and 2017-2021) in hospitals participating in the Yorkshire Cancer Research Bowel Cancer Improvement Programme (YCR BCIP). These were benchmarked against national rates. Regression analysis and funnel plots were used to develop a data driven approach for analysing trends in the use of MIS at hospitals in the programme.

RESULTS

In England, resections performed by MIS increased from 34.9% to 72.9% for colon cancer and from 28.8% to 72.5% for rectal cancer. Robot-assisted surgery increased from 0.1% to 2.7% for colon cancer and from 0.2% to 7.9% for rectal cancer. Wide variation in the uptake of MIS was observed at a hospital level. Detailed analysis of the YCR BCIP region identified a decreasing number of surgical departments, since the start of the programme, as potential outliers for MIS when compared to the English national average.

CONCLUSION

Wide variation in use of MIS for colorectal cancer exists within the English National Health Service and a data-driven approach can help identify outlying hospitals. Addressing some of the challenges behind the uptake of MIS, such as ensuring adequate provision of surgical training and equipment, could help increase its use.

Long-term restoration of bowel continuity after rectal cancer resection and the influence of surgical technique: A nationwide cross-sectional study

AIM

Literature on nationwide long-term permanent stoma rates after rectal cancer resection in the minimally invasive era is scarce. The aim of this population-based study was to provide more insight into the permanent stoma rate with interhospital variability (IHV) depending on surgical technique, with pelvic sepsis, unplanned reinterventions and readmissions as secondary outcomes.

METHOD

Patients who underwent open or minimally invasive resection of rectal cancer (lower border below the sigmoid take-off) in 67 Dutch centres in 2016 were included in this cross-sectional cohort study.

RESULTS

Among 2530 patients, 1470 underwent a restorative resection (58%), 356 a Hartmann's procedure (14%, IHV 0%-42%) and 704 an abdominoperineal resection (28%, IHV 3%-60%). Median follow-up was 51 months. The overall permanent stoma rate at last follow-up was 50% (IHV 13%-79%) and the unintentional permanent stoma rate, permanent stoma after a restorative procedure or an unplanned Hartmann's procedure, was 11% (IHV 0%-29%). A total of 2165 patients (86%) underwent a minimally invasive resection: 1760 conventional (81%), 170 transanal (8%) and 235 robot-assisted (11%). An anastomosis was created in 59%, 80% and 66%, with corresponding unintentional permanent stoma rates of 12%, 24% and 14% (p = 0.001), respectively. When corrected for age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, cTNM, distance to the anorectal junction and neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, the minimally invasive technique was not associated with an unintended permanent stoma (p = 0.071) after a restorative procedure.

CONCLUSION

A remarkable IHV in the permanent stoma rate after rectal cancer resection was found. No beneficial influence of transanal or robot-assisted laparoscopy on the unintentional permanent stoma rate was found, although this might be caused by the surgical learning curve. A reduction in IHV and improving preoperative counselling for decision-making for restorative procedures are required.

Impact of shear stress on sacral pressure injury from table rotation during laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed in the lithotomy position

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of shear stress on surgery-related sacral pressure injury (PI) after laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed in the lithotomy position. We included 37 patients who underwent this procedure between November 2021 and October 2022. The primary outcome was average horizontal shear stress caused by the rotation of the operating table during the operation, and the secondary outcome was interface pressure over time. Sensors were used to measure shear stress and interface pressure in the sacral region. Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of PI. PI had an incidence of 32.4%, and the primary outcome, average horizontal shear stress, was significantly higher in the PI group than in the no-PI group. The interface pressure increased over time in both groups. At 120 min, the interface pressure was two times higher in the PI group than in the no-PI group (PI group, 221.5 mmHg; no-PI group, 86.0 mmHg; p < 0.01). This study suggested that shear stress resulting from rotation of the operating table in the sacral region by laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed in the lithotomy position is the cause of PI. These results should contribute to the prevention of PI.

Short-term results in a population based study indicate advantage for minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery versus open

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine if minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for rectal cancer is non-inferior to open surgery (OPEN) regarding adequacy of cancer resection in a population based setting.

METHODS

All 9,464 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer 2012-2018 who underwent curative surgery were included from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

Positive circumferential resection margin (CRM < 1 mm) and positive resection margin (R1). Non-inferiority margins used were 2.4% and 4%.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

30- and 90-day mortality, clinical anastomotic leak, re-operation < 30 days, 30- and 90-day re-admission, length of stay (LOS), distal resection margin < 1 mm and < 12 resected lymph nodes. Analyses were performed by intention-to-treat using unweighted and weighted multiple regression analyses.

RESULTS

The CRM was positive in 3.8% of the MIS group and 5.4% of the OPEN group, risk difference -1.6% (95% CI -1.623, -1.622). R1 was recorded in 2.8% of patients in the MIS group and in 4.4% of patients in the OPEN group, risk difference -1.6% (95% CI -1.649, -1.633). There were no differences between the groups in adjusted unweighted and weighted analyses. All analyses demonstrated decreased mortality and re-admissions at 30 and 90 days as well as shorter LOS following MIS.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population based setting MIS for rectal cancer was non-inferior to OPEN regarding adequacy of cancer resection with favorable short-term outcomes.

Evolution of surgical approach to rectal cancer resection: A multinational registry assessment

PURPOSE

Surgical approach to rectal cancer has evolved in recent decades, with introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and local excision. Since implementation might differ internationally, this study is aimed at evaluating trends in surgical approach to rectal cancer across different countries over the last 10 years and to gain insight into patient, tumour and treatment characteristics.

METHODS

Pseudo-anonymised data of patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer between 2010 and 2019 were extracted from clinical audits in the Netherlands (NL), Sweden (SE), England-Wales (EW) and Australia-New Zealand (AZ).

RESULTS

Ninety-nine thousand five hundred ninety-seven patients were included (38,413 open, 55,155 MIS and 5416 local excision). An overall increase in MIS was observed from 29.9% in 2010 to 72.1% in 2019, with decreasing conversion rates (17.5-9.0%). The MIS proportion was highly variable between countries in the period 2010-2014 (54.4% NL, 45.3% EW, 39.8% AZ, 14.1% SE, P < 0.001), but variation reduced over time (2015-2019 78.8% NL, 66.3% EW, 64.3% AZ, 53.2% SE, P < 0.001). The proportion of local excision for the two periods was highly variable between countries: 4.7% and 11.8% in NL, 3.9% and 7.4% in EW, 4.7% and 4.6% in AZ, 6.0% and 2.9% in SE.

CONCLUSIONS

Application and speed of implementation of MIS were highly variable between countries, but each registry demonstrated a significant increase over time. Local excision revealed inconsistent trends over time.

Uptake of robot-assisted colon cancer surgery in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The robot-assisted approach is now often used for rectal cancer surgery, but its use in colon cancer surgery is less well defined. This study aims to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted colon cancer surgery to conventional laparoscopy in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Data on all patients who underwent surgery for colon cancer from 2018 to 2020 were collected from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. All complications, readmissions, and deaths within 90 days after surgery were recorded along with conversion rate, margin and harvested nodes. Groups were stratified according to the robot-assisted and laparoscopic approach.

RESULTS

In total, 18,886 patients were included in the analyses. The operative approach was open in 15.2%, laparoscopic in 78.9% and robot-assisted in 5.9%. The proportion of robot-assisted surgery increased from 4.7% in 2018 to 6.9% in 2020. There were no notable differences in outcomes between the robot-assisted and laparoscopic approach for Elective cT1-3M0 right, left, and sigmoid colectomy. Only conversion rate was consistently lower in the robotic group. (4.6% versus 8.8%, 4.6% versus 11.6%, and 1.6 versus 5.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study on surgery for colon cancer shows there is a gradual but slow adoption of robotic surgery for colon cancer up to 6.9% in 2020. When comparing the outcomes of right, left, and sigmoid colectomy, clinical outcomes were similar between the robotic and laparoscopic approach. However, conversion rate is consistently lower in the robotic procedures.

Practice variation and outcomes of minimally invasive minor liver resections in patients with colorectal liver metastases: a population-based study

INTRODUCTION

In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHODS

This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018.

RESULTS

Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50-0.75, p < 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50-0.67, p < 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99-0.99, p < 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10-0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50-0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94-0.99, p < 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21.

CONCLUSION

Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery.