Efficacy of laparoscopic resection in elderly patients with colorectal cancer

Laparoscopic and robotic surgery for colorectal cancer in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

As life expectancy has been increasing, older patients are becoming more central to the healthcare system, leading to more intensive care use and longer hospital stays. Nevertheless, advancements in minimally invasive surgical techniques offer safe and effective options for older patients with colorectal diseases. This study aims to provide comprehensive evidence on the role of minimally invasive surgery in treating colorectal diseases in older patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All articles directly compared the minimally invasive approach with open surgery in patients aged ≥65 years. The present metanalysis took 30-day complications as primary outcomes. Length of hospital stay, readmission, and 30-day mortality were also assessed, as secondary outcomes. Further subgroup analyses were carried out based on surgery setting, lesion features, and location.

RESULTS

After searching the main databases, 84 articles were included. Evaluation of 30-day complications rate, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality significantly favored minimally invasive approaches. The outcome readmission did not show any significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

The current metanalysis demonstrates clear advantages of minimally invasive techniques over open surgery in colorectal procedures for older patients, particularly in reducing complications, mortality, and hospitalization. This suggests that prioritizing these techniques, based on available expertise and facilities, could improve outcomes and quality of care for older patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

EAES/SAGES evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus on optimization of perioperative care in older adults

BACKGROUND

As the population ages, more older adults are presenting for surgery. Age-related declines in physiological reserve and functional capacity can result in frailty and poor outcomes after surgery. Hence, optimizing perioperative care in older patients is imperative. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways and Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) may influence surgical outcomes, but current use and impact on older adults patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations on perioperative care of older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Expert consensus determined working definitions for key terms and metrics related to perioperative care. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases for 24 pre-defined key questions in the topic areas of prehabilitation, MIS, and ERAS in major abdominal surgery (colorectal, upper gastrointestinal (UGI), Hernia, and hepatopancreatic biliary (HPB)) to generate evidence-based recommendations following the GRADE methodology.

RESULT

Older adults were defined as 65 years and older. Over 20,000 articles were initially retrieved from search parameters. Evidence synthesis was performed across the three topic areas from 172 studies, with meta-analyses conducted for MIS and ERAS topics. The use of MIS and ERAS was recommended for older adult patients particularly when undergoing colorectal surgery. Expert opinion recommended prehabilitation, cessation of smoking and alcohol, and correction of anemia in all colorectal, UGI, Hernia, and HPB procedures in older adults. All recommendations were conditional, with low to very low certainty of evidence, with the exception of ERAS program in colorectal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS and ERAS are recommended in older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery, with evidence supporting use in colorectal surgery. Though expert opinion supported prehabilitation, there is insufficient evidence supporting use. This work has identified evidence gaps for further studies to optimize older adults undergoing major abdominal surgery.

Effect of screening colonoscopy frequency on colorectal cancer mortality in patients with a family history of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is a common malignant tumor in China, and its incidence in the elderly is increasing annually. Inflammatory bowel disease is a group of chronic non-specific intestinal inflammatory diseases, including ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease.

AIM

To assess the effect of screening colonoscopy frequency on colorectal cancer mortality.

METHODS

We included the clinicopathological and follow-up data of patients with colorectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic colectomy or open colectomy at our Gastrointestinal Department between January 2019 and December 2022. Surgical indicators, oncological indicators, and survival rates were compared between the groups. The results of 104 patients who met the above criteria were extracted from the database (laparoscopic colectomy group = 63, open colectomy group = 41), and there were no statistically significant differences in the baseline data or follow-up time between the two groups.

RESULTS

Intraoperative blood loss, time to first ambulation, and time to first fluid intake were significantly lower in the laparoscopic colectomy group than in the open colectomy group. The differences in overall mortality, tumor-related mortality, and recurrence rates between the two groups were not statistically significant, and survival analysis showed that the differences in the cumulative overall survival, tumor-related survival, and cumulative recurrence-free rates between the two groups were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

In elderly patients with colorectal cancer, laparoscopic colectomy has better short-term outcomes than open colectomy, and laparoscopic colectomy has superior long-term survival outcomes compared with open colectomy.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for elderly patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of matched studies

BACKGROUND

To compare clinical and survival outcomes between laparoscopic versus open surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases were systematically searched. The review included studies that were either randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational in design. STATA was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis was conducted with 24 studies. Compared with elderly subjects with open surgery, those undergoing laparoscopic surgery had a lower risk of mortality (within 3 months postoperatively) (RR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53, 0.94). The long-term overall survival (HR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.89, 1.04), disease-free survival (HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.93, 1.13), risk of recurrence (RR 1.44, 95% CI: 0.90, 2.30) and readmission (RR 1.11, 95% CI: 0.88, 1.40) rates were statistically similar in both the groups. The operative time (in minutes) was higher (WMD 30.37, 95% CI: 17.75, 43.0) and the blood loss (in ml) was lower (WMD -78.85, 95% CI: -101.96, -55.75) in those undergoing laparoscopic surgery. The length of hospital stay (in days) (WMD -2.53, 95% CI: -3.11, -1.95) and the time of return of bowel movements (in days) (WMD -1.06, 95% CI: -1.20, -0.93) was lower in those with laparoscopic surgery. The pooled risk of complications was lower in those with laparoscopic surgery (RR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.74), compared with open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that in elderly subjects with colorectal cancer, laparoscopic surgery appears to be more beneficial than open surgery and should be prioritized, subject to the availability of required technical skills and facilities.

Surgical Outcomes of Colorectal Cancer Surgery for ≥ 85-year-old Patients in Our Hospital: Retrospective Comparison of Short- and Long-term Outcomes with Younger Patients

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate future problems in colorectal cancer surgery for elderly patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients receiving colorectal cancer surgery in our hospital from January 2010 to December 2018. Patients were divided into the ≥ 85-year-old patient group and the younger patient group. We compared patient backgrounds, surgical outcomes (surgical procedure, reduction of lymph node dissection range, operative duration, and blood loss), postoperative short-term outcomes (mortality, morbidity, and postoperative length of stay) and prognosis.

RESULTS

We performed colorectal cancer surgery on 1,240 patients during the study period. Of them, 109 (8.7%) were ≥ 85 years old, and 1,131 (91.2%) were < 85 years old. The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA-PS) was significantly poorer in the elderly group than in the younger group and patients with a history of cardiac disease and anticoagulant use were significantly more in the elderly group. The rate of reduction of lymph node dissection range was significantly higher in the elderly group (16.8% vs. 3.8%, p < 0.05). Overall morbidity was significantly higher in the elderly group (42.2% vs. 21.9%, p < 0.05), as were the respective frequencies of pneumonia and thromboembolism (8.2% vs. 0.7%, p < 0.05 and 3.6% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.05, respectively). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the elderly group (17 vs. 12 days, p < 0.05). Overall survival was significantly lower in the elderly group (p < 0.05), but relapse-free survival and colorectal cancer-specific survival were not statistically different between the groups (p = 0.05 and p = 0.15, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Prevention of postoperative pneumonia and thromboembolism remains a problem. After proper assessment and careful management of peri-operative surgical risks, surgery can be indicated in elderly patients.

Short-Term Outcome of Laparoscopic Surgery in Elderly Colorectal Cancer Patients

We aimed to evaluate the short-term outcome of colorectal resection in very elderly patients, aged 85 years or older. As the population ages, the number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is increasing in Japan. At this time, it is unclear whether or not laparoscopic colorectal resection is safe for this very elderly patient population. From January 2005 to November 2014, a total of 20 patients aged 85 years or older underwent laparoscopic colorectal resection at Osaka University Hospital. Pre- and postoperative clinical data and outcomes were collected retrospectively. There were no intraoperative or postoperative deaths. In 2 cases, the laparoscopic procedure was converted to open surgery. Postoperative complications occurred in 6 patients. Two patients developed an infection at the surgical site. Among the 4 patients who underwent low anterior resection (LAR), 2 experienced postoperative anastomotic leakage. Two other patients developed a lung infection and urinary tract infection, respectively. Laparoscopic colectomy for very elderly patients with CRC appears to involve tolerable risk. However, special caution is advisable for patients who may undergo LAR.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery in Elderly Patients with Rectal Cancer

Background:

Laparoscopic colorectal resection has been gaining popularity over the past two decades-and the number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer treated with a surgical modality has gradually increased. However, studies about laparoscopic rectal surgery in elderly patients with long-term oncologic outcomes are limited. In this study, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic resection in patients with rectal cancer aged ≥80 y.

Methods:

From 2007-2015, a total of 84 consecutive patients with rectal cancer from a single institution were included, 45 patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal resection were compared with 39 patients undergoing open rectal resection.

Results:

The two groups were well balanced in terms of age, gender, body mass index, American society of anesthesiologists scores, previous abdominal surgery, neoadjuvant therapy, tumor stage, distance of tumor from the anal verge, and comorbidities. One (2.2%) patient in the laparoscopic group required conversion to open surgery. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly longer operating time (160.1±28.2 versus 148.2±41.3 min; P=0.031), less intraoperative blood loss (80.5±20.9 versus 160.3±42.4 mL; P=0.002), less need of blood transfusion (6.7% versus 20.5%; P=0.003), a shorter time to diet recovery (2.5±1.5 versus 4.9±1.1; P=0.015) and postoperative hospital stay (7.5±4.5 versus 10.8±4.2; P=0.035), lower overall postoperative complication rate (8.9% versus 20.5%; P=0.017), and wound-related complication rate (4.4% versus 10.2%; P=0.013) when compared with open surgery. Specimen length, no. of retrieced lymph nodes, positive distal and circumferential margin rate, mortality rate, and reoperation rate were not significantly different between two groups. The disease-free and overall 5-year survival rates were similar between two groups.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic rectal surgery is safe and feasible in patients aged≥80 y and is associated with similar long-term oncologic outcomes when compared with open surgery.

Surgical oncology in patients aged 80 years and older is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis of literature over 25 years

BACKGROUND

The study aim is to analyze the evolution over the last 25 years of the results reported after abdominal oncological surgery in patients aged 80 years of age and older. The primary endpoint was morbidity and mortality in this group of patients; the secondary endpoint was overall survival.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was used to browse through Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials using a combination of standardized index terms. Studies published between 1997 and 2017 were selected. Only those studies that showed morbidity and mortality after digestive and hepatobiliary tract oncological surgery in individuals aged 80 years and older were included. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42018087921. PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines were applied.

RESULTS

A total of 79 studies were included, categorized by origin of malignancy: esophageal (7), stomach (26), liver (4), pancreas (19), and colorectal (23). Compared with the non-elderly group, the elderly group had similar esophageal morbidity with higher mortality (RR 2.51, 1.50 to 4.21; P = 0.0005); higher gastric morbidity (RR 1.25, 1.09 to 1.43; P = 0.001), and mortality (RR 2.51, 1.81 to 3.49; P = 0.0001); similar liver morbidity and mortality; higher pancreatic morbidity (RR 1.17, 1.03 to 1.33; P = 0.02) and mortality (RR 2.37, 1.86 to 3.03; P < 0.00001); and similar colorectal morbidity with higher mortality (RR 4.44, 1.91 to 10.32; P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Oncological surgery of most abdominal visceral tumors is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients older than 80 years.

[Efficacy of video-assisted procedures in advanced age patients with colorectal cancer]

AIM

To assess advisability of video-assisted surgery in advanced age patients with colorectal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study involved 44 patients with large intestine tumors. There were 30 patients with colon cancer aged 78.0±1.1 years and 14 patients with rectal neoplasms aged 75.0±1.8 years. All of them underwent elective video-assisted resections without conversion of the approach.

RESULTS

Good and satisfactory results were achieved in 95.5% of patients. Postoperative complications occurred in 5 (11.4%) cases followed by redo surgery in 2 (4.5%) patients. Mortality was absent.

CONCLUSION

Video-assisted procedures are preferable in elective surgery of colorectal cancer in advanced age patients regardless stage and localization of the process.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopy vs. open surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients: A meta-analysis

The long-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery for geriatric patients with colorectal cancer remains unclear due to decreased functional reserves and increased medical comorbidities. A meta-analysis was performed in the present study to compare the long-term outcome between laparoscopy and laparotomy. Randomized controlled trials and comparative studies regarding laparoscopy vs. open surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients were searched in Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library between inception and April 20, 2017. The methodological quality of the cohort studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The meta-analysis was performed using Stata v12.0 software. Eight cohort studies were enrolled in the meta-analysis. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with a higher 3-year survival rate compared with open surgery [risk ratio (RR), 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61–0.90; P=0.003]. No significant difference was identified between laparoscopy and laparotomy regarding the 5-year survival rate (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78–1.11, P=0.424). The results of the meta-analysis indicated that the use of laparoscopic surgery on geriatric patients with colorectal cancer should be increased due to more improved long-term outcomes. All the studies included in the meta-analysis were case-control studies with selection bias and other confounding factors. Thus, larger sample sizes and multicenter randomized controlled trials are required to further validate the use of laparoscopic surgery as the preferred therapeutic option for elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

Short-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Along with an aging society, the number of elderly patients with colorectal cancer treated with a surgical modality has gradually increased. Our purpose is to verify the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer in elderly patients.

METHODS

We compared the short-term outcomes of open versus laparoscopic surgery in patients aged 80 years or older with colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2014.

RESULTS

Of 150 elderly colorectal patients, 62 patients received laparoscopic surgery, and 88 patients, open surgery. In the laparoscopic surgery group, two patients were converted to open surgery due to extensive adhesion. The amount of blood loss was smaller in patients treated with laparoscopic surgery than those with open surgery (44.0 ± 86.5 vs. 329.9 ± 482.1 ml, P < 0.01). In the laparoscopic surgery group, days until oral intake (5.3 ± 1.9 vs. 7.0 ± 3.0 days, P < 0.01) and hospital stay (17.2 ± 6.8 vs. 22.0 ± 14.0 days, P < 0.01) were shorter. Morbidity (30.6 vs. 42.0 %) and mortality (1.6 vs. 1.1 %) in laparoscopic and open surgery groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer was a safe and less invasive alternative to open surgery, with less blood loss and shorter hospital stay.

Outcome of Colorectal Surgery in Elderly Populations

Purpose

The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of age on short-term outcomes after colorectal surgery in terms of the 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality rates.

Methods

The subjects for the study were patients who had undergone colorectal surgery. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age; groups A and B patients were ≥80 and <80 years old of age, respectively. Both groups were manually matched for body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Charlson Comorbidity Index and procedure performed.

Results

A total of 200 patients, 91 men (45.5%) and 109 women (54.5%), were included in this retrospective study. These patients were equally divided into 2 groups. The mean ages were 85 years in group A (range, 80 to 104 years) and 55.3 years in group B (range, 13 to 79 years). The overall 30-day postoperative mortality rate was 1% of total 200 patients; both of these 2 patients were in group A. However, this observation had no statistical significance. No intraoperative complications were encountered in either group. The overall 30-day postoperative morbidity rate was 27% (54 of 200) for both groups. The 30-day postoperative morbidity rates in groups A and B were 28% (28 of 100) and 26% (26 of 100), respectively. However, these differences between the groups had no statistical significance importance.

Conclusion

Age alone should not be considered to be more of a contraindication or a worse predictor than other factors for the outcome after colorectal surgery on elderly patients.

Systematic review of laparoscopic vs open surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients

AIM: To verify the safety and validity of laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer in elderly patients.

METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed of a systematic search of studies on an electronic database. Studies that compared laparoscopic colectomy (LAC) in elderly colorectal cancer patients with open colectomy (OC) were retrieved, and their short and long-term outcomes compared. Elderly people were defined as 65 years old or more. Inclusion criteria were set at: Resection of colorectal cancer, comparison between laparoscopic and OC and no significant difference in backgrounds between groups.

RESULTS: Fifteen studies were identified for analysis. LAC was performed on 1436 patients, and OC performed on 1810 patients. In analyses of short-term outcomes, operation time for LAC was longer than for OC (mean difference = 34.4162, 95%CI: 17.8473-50.9851, P < 0.0001). The following clinical parameters were lower in LAC than in OC: Amount of estimated blood loss (mean difference = -93.3738, 95%CI: -132.3437 to -54.4039, P < 0.0001), overall morbidity (OR = 0.5427, 95%CI: 0.4425-0.6655, P < 0.0001), incisional surgical site infection (OR = 0.6262, 95%CI: 0.4310-0.9097, P = 0.0140), bowel obstruction and ileus (OR = 0.6248, 95%CI: 0.4519-0.8638, P = 0.0044) and cardiovascular complications (OR = 0.4767, 95%CI: 0.2805-0.8101, P = 0.0062). In analyses of long-term outcomes (median follow-up period: 36.4 mo in LAC, 34.3 mo in OC), there was no significant difference in overall survival (mean difference = 0.8321, 95%CI: 0.5331-1.2990, P = 0.4187) and disease specific survival (mean difference = 1.0254, 95%CI: 0.6707-1.5675, P = 0.9209). There was also no significant difference in the number of dissected lymph nodes (mean difference = -0.1360, 95%CI: -4.0553-3.7833, P = 0.9458).

CONCLUSION: LAC in elderly colorectal cancer patients had benefits in short-term outcomes compared with OC except operation time. The long-term outcomes and oncological clearance of LAC were similar to that of OC. These results support the assertion that LAC is an effective procedure for elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

Meta-analysis of the risk of small bowel obstruction following open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Background

One of the potential advantages of laparoscopic compared with open colorectal surgery is a reduction in postoperative bowel obstruction events. Early reports support this proposal, but accumulated evidence is lacking.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed of randomized clinical trials and observational studies by searching the PubMed and Cochrane Library databases from 1990 to August 2015. The primary outcomes were early and late postoperative bowel obstruction following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery. Both ileus and bowel obstruction were defined as a postoperative bowel obstruction. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed, and a random-effects model was used to account for the heterogeneity among the studies.

Results

Twenty-four randomized clinical trials and 88 observational studies were included in the meta-analysis; 106 studies reported early outcome and 12 late outcome. Collectively, these studies reported on the outcomes of 148 392 patients, of whom 58 133 had laparoscopic surgery and 90 259 open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery was associated with reduced rates of early (odds ratio 0·62, 95 per cent c.i. 0·54 to 0·72; P &lt; 0·001) and late (odds ratio 0·61, 0·41 to 0·92; P = 0·019) postoperative bowel obstruction. Weighted mean values for early postoperative bowel obstruction were 8 (95 per cent c.i. 6 to 10) and 5 (3 to 7) per cent for open and laparoscopic surgery respectively, and for late bowel obstruction were 4 (2 to 6) and 3 (1 to 5) per cent respectively.

Conclusion

The reduction in postoperative bowel obstruction demonstrates an advantage of laparoscopic surgery in patients with colorectal disease.

Is laparoscopic surgery really effective for the treatment of colon and rectal cancer in very elderly over 80 years old? A prospective multicentric case-control assessment

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery (LCS) for colon and rectal cancer in the very elderly over 80 years old.

METHODS

We performed a prospective multicentric analysis comparing patients over 80 years (Group A) and patients between 60 and 69 years (Group B) undergoing LCS for cancer from January 2008 to December 2013. Colon and rectal cancers were analyzed separately. Comorbidity and complications were classified using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the Clavien-Dindo system, respectively. Oncological parameters included tumor-free margins, number of lymph nodes harvested and circumferential resection margin.

RESULTS

Group A included 96 and 33 patients, and Group B 220 and 82 for colon and rectal cancers, respectively. Groups were similar except for ASA score and CCI, as expected. There was no significant difference in operative time [colon; rectum] (180[IQR 150-200] vs 180[150-210] min; NS-180[160-210] vs 180[165-240] min; NS), estimated blood loss (50[25-75] vs 50[25-120] mL; NS-50[0-150] vs 50[25-108.7] mL; NS) and conversion rate (2.1 vs 2.7 %; NS-3.0 vs 2.4 %; NS). Timing of first stool (3[2-3.25] vs 3[2-5] dd; NS-3[2-4] vs 3[2-5] dd; NS), length of stay (7[6-8] vs 7[6-8] dd; NS-8[8-9] vs 8[7-9] dd; NS) and readmission rate (1.0 vs 0.45 %; NS-6.1 vs 1.2 %; NS) were similar. Tumor-free margins were appropriate, and positivity of CRM is poor (6.1 vs 4.9; NS). We did not record significant differences in complications rate (47.9 vs 43.6 %; NS-63.6 vs 52.4 %; NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is effective for the treatment of colorectal cancer even in the very elderly. Age is not a risk factor or a limitation for LCS.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and validity of laparoscopic colorectal surgery for elderly patients. We compared the short and long-term postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients aged ≥75 years (elderly patients; EP) and <75 years (relatively younger patients; RP).

METHODS

Clinicopathological data and short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were compared between the EP (n = 53) and RP groups (n = 155).

RESULTS

In the EP group, patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists score II (p = 0.047) and medical comorbidity rate (EP vs RP: 83.0% vs 56.8%, p < 0.001), especially for cardiovascular disease (64.2% vs 37.5%, p < 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (20.8% vs 9.7%, p = 0.044), were significantly higher than those in the RP group. Regarding the clinical characteristics, the ratio of right colectomy (50.9% vs 25.3%, p < 0.001) and pathological tumor grade T4 (18.9% vs 7.7%, p = 0.044) were significantly higher in the EP group. There was no significant difference in the variation of pathological stage between the two groups. In the postoperative course, there were no significant differences regarding short-term postoperative outcomes between the EP and RP groups, including that for timing of oral diet tolerance (3.9 days vs 3.5 days, p = 0.073), first flatus (2.3 days vs 2.0 days, p = 0.636), first bowel movement (3.3 days vs 3.7 days, p = 0.153), ambulation after surgery (1.7 days vs 1.5 days, p = 0.081), postoperative hospital stay (10.5 days vs 10.8 days, p = 0.469), and incidence of postoperative complications (20.8% vs 15.5%, p = 0.385), respectively. Regarding the long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in recurrence-free survival (RFS) (5-year RFS, 74.0% vs 85.2%, p = 0.091) and overall survival (OS) (5-year OS, 81.8% vs 90.1%, p = 0.112) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly patients was safe and well-tolerated in comparison with the relatively younger patients.

Is laparoscopic colorectal surgery beneficial for elderly patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Elderly patients who undergo major abdominal surgery are potentially at a higher risk of perioperative mortality and postoperative complications. Although laparoscopic surgery has been widely accepted as a less invasive surgical procedure for colorectal diseases, the benefits for elderly patients have not been validated.

AIM

To compare postoperative outcomes and long-term survival between laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in the elderly population.

METHODS

A literature search was electronically performed to identify all studies comparing postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open colorectal resections in the elderly population. Primary outcomes were postoperative mortality and complications, and the secondary outcome was long-term survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 30 studies (70,946 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Laparoscopic surgery was significantly associated with a decreased risk of perioperative mortality [odds ratio (OR), 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45-0.68; P < 0.01] and postoperative complications (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.48-0.63; P < 0.01) compared with open surgery. There was no significant difference in long-term survival between the two procedures (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72-1.07; P = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the elderly population has significant advantages in terms of short-term outcomes. Aggressive application of laparoscopic colorectal surgery should be considered for the elderly population.

Preoperative functional health status may predict outcomes after elective colorectal surgery for malignancy

BACKGROUND

Several studies suggest that preoperative functional health status (FHS) affects postoperative outcomes after ventral hernia repair, hepatic resections, and infrainguinal by-pass surgery. However, little is known about the proficiency of FHS in terms of preoperative outcome prediction of patients who undergo elective resection for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

All patients who underwent elective colorectal resections for malignancy between 2005 and 2009 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. We classified patients into three groups according to their preoperative FHS: independent (IND), partially dependent (PDN), and totally dependent (TDN). Multivariable techniques were used to evaluate the impact of FHS on postoperative outcomes. Outcomes of laparoscopic and open procedures in patients with dependent FHS were also compared.

RESULTS

In total, 25,591 patients included (94.2% IND, 5.1% PDN, and 0.71% TDN). Surgical, infectious, pulmonary, cardiovascular, renal, neurological complications, and mortality rate showed a linear progression that paralleled a decline in preoperative FHS of the patients (p < 0.05). Laparoscopic technique was associated with better outcomes in terms of reduced length of total hospital stay, decreased infectious complication rate, and mortality with comparable operating time in patients with dependent (PDN and TDN) FHS (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Functional health status may predict postoperative outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. A detailed preoperative evaluation, providing an optimization period before surgery if necessary, and increased utilization of laparoscopic technique may improve outcomes after elective colorectal resections for malignancy in patients who are partially or TDN.