A case-matched comparison of single-incision versus multiport laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer

Long-term Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Single-incision Versus Multi-port Laparoscopic Colectomy for Colon Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes that were the secondary endpoints of a RCT of multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MPC) versus SILC in colon cancer surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The actual long-term outcomes, such as the 5-year RFS, OS, and recurrence patterns after surgery, have not been evaluated by a RCT.

METHODS

Patients with histologically proven colon carcinoma located in the cecum, ascending, sigmoid or rectosigmoid colon clinically diagnosed as stage 0-III were eligible for this study. Patients were preoperatively randomized and underwent complete mesocolic excision. The 5-year RFS, OS, and recurrence patterns were analyzed (UMIN-CTR 000007220).

RESULTS

Between March 1, 2012, and March 31, 2015, a total of 200 patients were randomly assigned to either the MPC arm (n = 100) or SILC arm (n = 100). The median follow-up for all patients was 61.0 months. An intention-to-treat analysis showed that the 5-year RFS was 91.0% [95% confidence interval (CI) 85.1%-96.9%] in the MPC arm and 88.0% (95% CI 82.1%-93.9%) in the SILC arm (hazard ratio: 1.37; 95% CI 0.58-3.24; P = 0.479). The 5-year OS was 95.0% (95% CI 91.1%-98.9%) in the MPC arm and 93.0% (87.1%-98.9%) in the SILC arm (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI 0.44-4.39; P = 0.568). There were no significant differences in the recurrence patterns between the 2 arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though the results of the 5-year OS and RFS in this trial were exploratory and underpowered, there were no statistically significant differences between the SILC and MPC arms. SILC may be an acceptable treatment option for select patients with colon cancer.

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy for ascending colon tumor with relapsing polychondritis

A 69-year-old man underwent single-incision laparoscopic colectomy for a colon tumor. He had comorbid relapsing polychondritis, an uncommon and intractable chronic inflammatory disease that shows various symptoms and systemically invades the cartilaginous tissue throughout the body. In this case, the bronchial wall was edematous and the glottis was incompetent. Steroids were also administered. Although the patient had high-risk factors for surgical complications, none occurred during the perioperative period. Once the C-reactive protein value returned to within the normal range after surgery, we reduced the steroid dose. This is the first report of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy for a patient with relapsing polychondritis.

A Systematic Review of Comparing Single-incision Versus Traditional Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy For Right Colon Diseases

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILS) has been promoted in clinic since 2008, but a systematic review of comparing SILS and traditional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (TLS) with long-term follow-up is rare. Here, in this study, comparison of SILS and TLS with long-term follow-up was evaluated by a meta-analysis method.

METHODS

All studies about SILS and TLS for right hemicolectomy from 2010 to 2018 were searched from databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Wanfang. Operation index, recovery, and midterm follow-up data were evaluated by fixed-effects models, random-effects models, and Begg test.

RESULTS

We collected 22 studies with 2218 patients. SILS groups contained 1038 (46.7%) patients, and 1180 (53.3%) patients were observed in the TLS group. Patients' baseline data were similar in the 2 groups. Compared with TLS, SILS had shorter operation duration [standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.61 to -0.08, P<0.001, χ=49.40], shorter hospitalization time (SMD: -0.27, 95% CI: -0.37 to -0.16, P<0.001, χ=9.17), slightly less blood loss (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.36 to -0.10; P<0.001; χ=5.36), and smaller incision length (SMD: -2.19, 95% CI: -3.66 to -0.71, P<0.001; χ=316.1). No statistical differences were observed in other figures.

CONCLUSION

SILS is more convenient and has better efficacy than TLS and could provide a promising surgical approach for right colon diseases.

Hernia incidence following a randomized clinical trial of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic colectomy

BACKGROUND

The short-term results of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) showed the safety, feasibility, and effectiveness when performed by skilled laparoscopic surgeons. However, the long-term complications, such as SILC-associated incisional hernia, have not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of incisional hernia after SILC compared with multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MPC) for colon cancer.

METHODS

From March 2012, to March 2015, a total of 200 patients were enrolled in this study. The patients were randomized to the MPC arm and SILC arm. A total of 200 patients (MPC arm; 100 patients, SILC arm; 100 patients) were therefore analyzed. In all cases the specimen was extracted through the umbilical port, which was extended according to the size of the specimen. A diagnosis of incisional hernia was made either based on a physical examination or computed tomography.

RESULTS

The baseline factors were well balanced between the arms. The median follow-up period was 42.4 (range 9.4-70.0) months. Twenty-one patients were diagnosed with incisional hernia, giving an incidence rate of 12.1% in the MPC arm and 9.0% in the SILC arm at 36 months (P = 0.451). In the multivariate analysis, the body mass index (≥ 25 kg/m²) (hazard ratio [HR] 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-8.92; P = 0.044), umbilical incision (≥ 5.0 cm) (HR 3.22; 95% CI 1.16-8.93; P = 0.025), and history of umbilical hernia (HR 3.16; 95% CI 1.02-9.77; P = 0.045) were shown to be correlated with incisional hernia.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant difference in the incidence of incisional hernia after SILC arm versus MPC arm with a long-term follow-up. However, this result may be biased because all specimens were harvested through the umbilical port. The study was registered with the Japanese Clinical Trials Registry as UMIN000007220.

Systematic review of comparing single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer

Background

Single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILS) has long used in surgery for a long time. However, there is barely a systemic review related to the comparison between the SILS and the conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (CLS) for the right colon cancer in the long term follow-up. Herein, we used the most recent articles to compare these two techniques by meta-analysis.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Wanfang databases to compare SILS with CLS for right colon cancer up to May 2019. The operative, postoperative, pathological and mid-term follow-up outcomes of nine studies were extracted and compared.

Results

A total of 1356 patients participated in 9 studies, while 653 patients were assigned to the SILS group and 703 patients were assigned to the CLS group. The patients’ baselines in the SILS group were consistent with those in the CLS group. Compared to the CLS group, the SILS group had a shorter operation duration (SMD − 23.49, 95%CI − 36.71 to − 10.27, P < 0.001, chi-square = 24.11), shorter hospital stay (SMD − 0.76, 95% `CI − 1.07 to − 0.45, P < 0.001, chi-square = 9.85), less blood loss (SMD − 8.46, 95% CI − 14.59 to − 2.34; P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.26), smaller incision length (SMD − 1.60, 95% CI − 2.66 to − 0.55, P < 0.001; chi-square = 280.44), more lymph node harvested (SMD − 0.98, 95% CI − 1.79 to − 0.16, P < 0.05; chi-square = 4.61), and a longer proximal surgical edge (SMD − 0.51, 95% CI − 0.93 to − 0.09, P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.42). No significant difference was found in other indexes. After we removed a single large study, we performed another meta-analysis again. The operation duration in the SILS group was still better than that in the CLS group.

Conclusion

SILS could be a faster and more reliable approach than CLS for the right colon cancer and could accelerate patient recovery, especially for patients with a low BMI.

Single-incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic right colectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery has gained widespread attention because of its potential benefits such as less skin incision and faster recovery. Up to now, only one meta-analysis (performed in 2013; including 9 studies, a total of 585 cases) compared single-incision laparoscopic right colectomy (SILRC) with conventional laparoscopic right colectomy (CLRC). An updated meta-analysis was undertaken to explore more convinced comparative findings between SILRC and CLRC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The search for studies that compared SILRC with CLRC was done on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. A total of 17 studies (including 1778 cases) were identified, the data of appointed outcomes were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Patient demographics (age, gender, body mass index and previous abdominal operation) did not differ significantly. No significant differences were found between SILRC and CLRC in operative time, conversion, reoperation, perioperative complications, postoperative mortality, and 30-days readmission. Pathological outcomes, including lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, and distal resection margin, were similar. SILRC showed less estimated blood loss (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -15.67 ml; 95% confidence interval [CI], -24.36 to -6.98; p = 0.0004), less skin incisions (WMD: -1.56 cm; 95%CI, -2.63 to -0.49; p = 0.004) and shorter hospital stay (WMD: -0.73d; 95%CI, -1.04 to -0.41; p < 0.00001), without publication bias.

CONCLUSION

SILRC may provide a safe and feasible alternative to CLRC with similar short-term outcomes and aesthetic advantage of less skin incision. Well-designed randomized controlled trials, involving large cases and carrying long-term outcomes, are needed.

Conversion during laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer with a congenital solitary pelvic kidney: A case report

A 54-year-old female patient was hospitalized with a chief complaint of anal discomfort. Based on biopsy results, she was diagnosed with highly differentiated adenocarcinoma, and colonoscopy findings indicated a type 3 rectal tumor. We observed a right pelvic kidney on enhanced abdominal CT. We began a laparoscopic operation but converted to an open operation after resecting the right pelvic renal artery by mistake. After low anterior resection, urologists performed angioplasty of the right renal pelvic artery. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 16, after the preservation of right renal function had been confirmed. This case strongly suggests that it is important to understand the positional relationship of the inferior mesenteric and renal arteries by preoperative assessment using either 3-D CT angiography or magnetic resonance angiography.

Long-term Outcomes of Single-Site Laparoscopic Colectomy With Complete Mesocolic Excision for Colon Cancer: Comparison With Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Colectomy Using Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND

Complete mesocolic excision has been suggested to improve oncological outcomes for patients with colon cancer. However, the long-term outcomes of single-site laparoscopic colectomy with complete mesocolic excision remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the long-term outcomes of single-site laparoscopic colectomy with complete mesocolic excision compared with conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer, as well as the short-term outcomes.

DESIGN

This is a single-center, retrospective study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at Osaka University Hospital in Japan.

PATIENTS

A total of 971 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer between 2008 and 2014 were included. Of these patients, 517 were analyzed using propensity score matching (231 with single-site laparoscopic colectomy and 286 with conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Recurrence, survival, intraoperative morbidity, and postoperative complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

Before propensity score matching, the single-site laparoscopic colectomy group had greater proportions of women and of patients with right-sided and early stage tumors compared with the conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy group. After matching, the 2 groups each included 200 patients and did not significantly differ in any patient characteristics. The median follow-up period was 41.4 months. The 2 groups showed similar rates of intraoperative morbidity (p = 0.22) and postoperative complications (p = 0.87). Rates of 3-year disease-free and overall survival in single-site laparoscopic colectomy and conventional, multiport, laparoscopic colectomy groups were 95.5% and 91.3% (p = 0.44) and 100.0% and 98.7% (p = 0.24). The 3-year disease-free and overall survival rates in each stage did not significantly differ between the 2 groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective nature.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-site laparoscopic colectomy with complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer provided acceptable perioperative outcomes and oncological outcomes, similar to those achieved with conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy. Evidence accumulation from randomized controlled trials will be necessary to promote the wide acceptance of single-site laparoscopic colectomy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A326.

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via combined medial and cranial approaches for transverse colon cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via combined medial and cranial approaches with three-dimensional visualization around the gastrocolic trunk and middle colic vessels for transverse colon cancer.

METHODS

We evaluated prospectively collected data of 30 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision between January 2010 and December 2015, 6 of whom we excluded, leaving 24 for the analysis. We assessed the completeness of excision, operative data, pathological findings, length of large bowel resected, complications, length of hospital stay, and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Complete mesocolic excision completeness was graded as the mesocolic and intramesocolic planes in 21 and 3 patients, respectively. Eleven, two, eight, and three patients had T1, T2, T3, and T4a tumors, respectively; none had lymph node metastases. A mean of 18.3 lymph nodes was retrieved, and a mean of 5.4 lymph nodes was retrieved around the origin of the MCV. The mean large bowel length was 21.9 cm, operative time 274 min, intraoperative blood loss 41 mL, and length of hospital stay 15 days. There were no intraoperative and two postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Our procedure for laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via combined medial and cranial approaches is safe and feasible for transverse colon cancer.

Randomized clinical trial of single-incision versus multiport laparoscopic colectomy

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) for colonic cancer remain unclear. The aim of this study was to determine the outcomes of SILC compared with multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC) for colonic cancer.

METHODS

Patients with histologically proven colonic carcinoma located in the caecum, ascending, sigmoid or rectosigmoid colon, clinically diagnosed as stage 0-III by CT, were eligible for this study. Patients were randomized before surgery and underwent tumour dissection with complete mesocolic excision. Safety analyses were conducted according to randomization groups.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients were enrolled and randomized to the MPLC (100 patients) or SILC (100 patients) arm. Surgical outcomes were similar between the MPLC and SILC arms, including duration of operation (mean 162 versus 156 min respectively; P = 0·273), blood loss (mean 8·8 versus 21·4 ml; P = 0·102), conversion to open laparotomy (2·0 versus 1·0 per cent; P = 0·561), reoperation (3·0 versus 3·0 per cent; P = 1·000), time to first flatus (both median 1 day; P = 0·155) and postoperative hospital stay (both median 6; P = 0·372). The total skin incision length was significantly shorter in the SILC arm (mean 4·4 cm versus 6·8 cm in the MPLC arm; P < 0·001). The median duration of analgesia use was 5 days in the MPLC and 4 days in the SILC arm (P = 0·485). Overall complication rates were equivalent (15·0 versus 12·0 per cent respecitvely; P = 0·680).

CONCLUSION

SILC is not superior to MPLC.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000007220 (http://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm).

Impact of elemental diet on early recovery after laparoscopic colectomy: findings of a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

An amino acid-containing elemental diet (ED) does not require digestion for nutritional absorption, making it a good option for patients with gastrointestinal malabsorption. We conducted a randomized trial to confirm that perioperative ED enhanced the recovery of patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy.

METHODS

Patients in the intervention arm received commercially available ED from the day prior to surgery until postoperative day (POD) 3, whereas patients in the control group received a conventional perioperative diet program. To verify the endpoints, "estimated minimum length of stay in hospital after surgery" (emLOS) was defined as the number of days necessary to reach all the five criteria; namely, "sufficient oral intake", "sufficient pain control", "withdrawal of intravenous alimentation", "no abnormal findings in routine examinations", and "no rise in fever".

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients were randomized, 94 of whom were analyzed (ED 45, control 49). There was no morbidity or mortality. Shorter emLOS (POD 4 vs. POD 7; p = 0.018), earlier resumption of sufficient oral intake (POD 3 vs. POD 4; p = 0.034) and faster recovery to defecation (2.2 vs. 3.1 days; p = 0.005) were observed in the ED group vs. the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The perioperative ingestion of ED by patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy is safe and can reduce the postoperative hospital stay by supporting the acceleration of oral intake.