Totally laparoscopic colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis achieved using a laparoscopic linear stapler: experience of a single institute

Usefulness of the one-step technique in functional end-to-end anastomosis for colonic surgery: results of a prospective multicentre cohort study from the Japanese KYCC group

BACKGROUND

Although functional end-to-end anastomosis (FEEA) using a stapler in the colorectal field has been recognised worldwide, the technique varies by surgeon, and the safety of anastomosis using different techniques is unknown.

METHODS

This multicentre prospective observational cohort study was conducted by the KYCC Study Group in Yokohama, Japan, and included patients who underwent colonic resection at seven centres between April 2020 and March 2022. This study compared the incidence of surgery-related abdominal complications (SAC: anastomotic leakage [AL], anastomotic bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess, enteritis, ileus, surgical site infection, and other abdominal complications) between two different methods of FEEA (one-step [OS] method: simultaneous anastomosis and bowel resection; two-step [TS] method: anastomosis after bowel resection). Complications of Clavien-Dindo classification grade 2 or higher were assessed.

RESULTS

Among 293 eligible cases, the OS and TS methods were used in 194 (66.2%) and 99 (33.8%) patients, respectively. The baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. The OS method used fewer staplers (three vs. four staplers, p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences in SAC rate between the OS (19.1%) and the TS (16.2%) groups (p = 0.44). The OS group had four cases (2.1%) of AL (two patients; grade 3, two patients; grade 2) while the TS group had one case (1.0%) of grade 2 AL (p = 0.67). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that male sex (odds ratio [OR] 3.95; p < 0.00001), an open surgical approach (OR 2.36; p = 0.03), and longer operative duration (OR,2.79; p = 0.002) were independent predictors of complications, whereas the OS method was not an independent predictor (OR 1.17; p = 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

The OS and the TS technique for stapled colonic anastomosis in a FEEA had a similar postoperative complication rate.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000039902 (registration date 23 March 2020).

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to compare intracorporeal (IA) versus extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer.

METHODS

The meta-analysis was conducted following all aspects of the Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement. Studies published from 2009 to 2012 that compare IA and EA after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy were identified. The included non-randomized studies were assessed for their methodological quality using the revised and modified grading system of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Intraoperative, early postoperative, and postoperative recovery outcomes were compared using weighted mean differences and odds ratios.

RESULTS

Five non-randomized controlled trials published between 2009 and 2011, comprising 425 patients, were included in this analysis. IA was associated with significant faster bowel movement, faster first flatus, shorter time to solid diet, decreased use of analgesics, and shorter duration of the hospital stay. No differences were observed for nasogastric tube reintroduction rate, operative time, incision length, number of nodes harvested, intraoperative complications, mortality, non-surgical site complications, surgical site complications (anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, wound infection, ileus), reintervention, and readmission rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Even when the limitations are taken into account due to the observational nature of the included studies, the results suggest that the IA after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer results in better postoperative recovery outcomes, such as shorter hospital stay, faster bowel movement recovery, faster first flatus, faster time to solid diet, and lesser analgesic usage.