Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) surgery with rectal eversion and total extra-abdominal resection. Tech Coloproctol. 2019;23:899-902. [PMID: 31482393 DOI: 10.1007/s10151-019-02058-y]

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional robotic colorectal cancer resection: a propensity score matching study

Robotic resection is widely used to treat colorectal cancer. Although the novel natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) results in less trauma, its safety and effectiveness are relatively unknown. In the present study, we used propensity score matching to compare the effectiveness and safety of NOSES and robotic resection for treating colorectal cancer. Present retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent robotic colon and rectal cancer surgery between January 2016 and December 2019 at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, the Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University. The intraoperative time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative recovery, postoperative complications, and survival status of the conventional robotic colorectal cancer resection (CRR) (78 patients) and NOSES (89 patients) groups were compared. These results showed that no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of early postoperative complications, operation time, and the number of lymph nodes dissected. Compared with the CRR group, NOSES group had shorter postoperative exhaust time [3.06 (0.76) vs. 3.53 (0.92)], earlier eating time [4.12 (1.08) vs. 4.86 (1.73)], lesser intraoperative bleeding [51.23 (26.74) vs. 67.82 (43.44)], lesser degree of pain [80.8% vs. 55.1%], and shorter length of hospital stay [8.73 (2.02) vs. 9.50 (3.45)]. All these parameters were statistically significant (P < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed in the 3-year overall survival rate and disease-free survival rate between both groups (P > 0.05). Collectively, robotic NOSES is a safe and effective approach for treating rectal and sigmoid colon cancers, could decrease intraoperative bleeding and postoperative complications, and accelerate the speed of intestinal function recovery.

Comparison of short-term efficacy analysis of medium-rectal cancer surgery with robotic natural orifice specimen extraction and robotic transabdominal specimen extraction

BACKGROUND

With the development of minimally invasive technology, the trauma caused by surgery get smaller, At the same time, the specimen extraction surgery through the natural orifice is more favored by experts domestically and abroad, robotic surgery has further promoted the development of specimen extraction surgery through the natural orifice. The aim of current study is to compare the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSES ) and transabdominal specimen extraction(TRSE ) in median rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

From January 2020 to January 2023, 87 patients who underwent the NOSES or TRSE at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University were included in the study, 4 patients were excluded due to liver metastasis. Of these, 50 patients were in the TRSE and 33 patients in the NOSES. Short-term efficacy was compared in the two groups.

RESULTS

The NOSES group had less operation time (P < 0.001), faster recovery of gastrointestinal function (P < 0.001), shorter abdominal incisions (P < 0.001), lower pain scores(P < 0.001). lower Inflammatory indicators of the white blood cell count and C-reactive protein content at 1, 3, and 5 days after surgery (P < 0.001, P = 0.037). There were 9 complications in the NOSES group and 11 complications in the TRSE group(P = 0.583). However, there were no wound complications in the NOSES group. The number of postoperative hospital stays seems to be same in the two groups. And there was no significant difference in postoperative anus function (P = 0.591).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that NOSES and TRSE can achieve similar radical treatment effects, NOSES is a feasible and safe way to take specimens for rectal cancer surgery in accordance with the indication for NOSES.

Robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery I-type F method vs conventional robotic resection for lower rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Robotic resection using the natural orifice specimen extraction surgery I-type F method (R-NOSES I-F) is a novel minimally invasive surgical strategy for the treatment of lower rectal cancer. However, the current literature on this method is limited to case reports, and further investigation into its safety and feasibility is warranted.

AIM

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of R-NOSES I-F for the treatment of low rectal cancer.

METHODS

From September 2018 to February 2022, 206 patients diagnosed with low rectal cancer at First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University were included in this retrospective analysis. Of these patients, 22 underwent R-NOSES I-F surgery (R-NOSES I-F group) and 76 underwent conventional robotic-assisted low rectal cancer resection (RLRC group). Clinicopathological data of all patients were collected and analyzed. Postoperative outcomes and prognoses were compared between the two groups. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.

RESULTS

Patients in the R-NOSES I-F group had a significantly lower visual analog score for pain on postoperative day 1 (1.7 ± 0.7 vs 2.2 ± 0.6, P = 0.003) and shorter postoperative anal venting time (2.7 ± 0.6 vs 3.5 ± 0.7, P < 0.001) than those in the RLRC group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of sex, age, body mass index, tumor size, TNM stage, operative time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative complications, or inflammatory response (P > 0.05). Postoperative anal and urinary functions, as assessed by Wexner, low anterior resection syndrome, and International Prostate Symptom Scale scores, were similar in both groups (P > 0.05). Long-term follow-up revealed no significant differences in the rates of local recurrence and distant metastasis between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

R-NOSES I-F is a safe and effective minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of lower rectal cancer. It improves pain relief, promotes gastrointestinal function recovery, and helps avoid incision-related complications.

Integration of prolapsing technique and one-stitch method of ileostomy during laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a retrospective study

Background

Prolapsing technique is a type of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery that can overcome the difficulty of precise transection of the distal rectum and subsequent anastomosis in a narrow pelvic space. Currently, protective ileostomy is widely utilized in low anterior resection for low rectal cancer, which may reduce the severe consequences caused by anastomotic leakage. The study aimed to combine the prolapsing technique with a one-stitch method of ileostomy and evaluate the surgical outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with low rectal cancer who underwent protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior resection between January 2019 and December 2022. The patients were divided into prolapsing technique combined with the one-stitch method of ileostomy (PO) group and traditional method (TM) group, and the intraoperative details and early postoperative outcomes of the two groups were measured.

Results

A total of 70 patients met the inclusion criteria, including 30 patients who underwent PO and 40 patients who underwent the traditional procedure. The PO group had a shorter total operative time than the TM group (197.8 ± 43.4 vs. 218.3 ± 40.6 min, P = 0.047). The time of intestine function recovery in the PO group was shorter than that in the TM group (24.6 ± 3.8 vs. 32.7 ± 5.4 h, P < 0.001). Compared with the TM group, the average VAS score was significantly lower in the PO group (P < 0.001). The incidence of anastomotic leakage in the PO group was significantly lower than that in the TM group (P = 0.034). The operative time of loop ileostomy was 2.0 ± 0.6 min in the PO group, which was significantly less than 15.1 ± 2.9 min in the TM group. Skin irritation was observed in 2 patients in the PO group and 10 patients in the TM group; therefore, there was a significant difference (P = 0.044).

Conclusion

This method is safe and feasible, which reduces the technical difficulty and achieves rapid postoperative recovery with few complications.

Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment

Background

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), as a new star of minimally invasive techniques, has been increasingly favored and promoted in the field of surgery around the world. Most previous studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic NOSES and conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, there is little research on comparing robotic colorectal cancer NOSES with conventional robotic-assisted colorectal cancer resection surgery.

Participant and methods

This study is a retrospective study of propensity score matching (PSM). This study included Ninety-one propensity score-matched pairs of the participant who had undergone robotic colorectal cancer resection surgery at our center between January 2017 and December 2020. The covariates used in the propensity score included gender, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumor diameter, the tumor's height from the anal verge, histological differentiation, AJCC stage, T stage, N stage, and history of previous abdominal surgery. The outcome measurement criteria included postoperative complications, inflammatory response, pelvic floor function, anal function, cosmetic outcome, quality of life, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).

Results

The robotic NOSES group had faster recovery time from gastrointestinal function (P = 0.014), shorter abdominal incision length (P < 0.001), less pain (P < 0.001), less additional analgesia required (P < 0.001), and lower postoperative indicators of white blood cell count (P < 0.001) and C-reactive protein content compared to the robotic-assisted resection surgery (RARS) group (P = 0.035). Additionally, the robotic NOSES group had significantly better body imagery (P < 0.001), cosmetic scores (P < 0.001), somatic function (P = 0.003), role function (P = 0.039), emotional function (P = 0.001), social function (P = 0.004), and overall function (P < 0.001) than the RARS group. The two groups demonstrated no significant difference between DFS and OS.

Conclusion

Robotic colorectal cancer NOSES is a safe and feasible minimally invasive procedure and offers shorter abdominal incisions, less pain, less surgical stress response, and better postoperative quality of life. Therefore, this technique can be further promoted for colorectal cancer patients eligible for NOSES.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment of rectal cancer: a propensity-score matching study

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has been increasingly applied in radical surgery of abdominal and pelvic organs, but it is still in the exploratory stage. There is insufficient evidence to prove its efficacy.

METHODS

From January 2013 to June 2017, a total of 351 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer were eventually included in this study. Patients who underwent NOSES were assigned to the NOSES group, while patients undergoing conventional laparoscopic assisted resection were assigned as to the LAP group. Propensity score matching was used to align clinicopathological features between the two groups.

RESULTS

From the perioperative data and postoperative follow-up results of both groups, patients in the NOSES group had less intraoperative bleeding (47.0 ± 60.4 ml vs 87.1 ± 101.2 ml, P = 0.011), shorter postoperative gastrointestinal recovery (50.7 ± 27.3 h vs 58.6 ± 28.5 h, P = 0.040), less postoperative analgesic use (36.8% vs 52.8%, P = 0.019), lower postoperative pain scores (P < 0.001), lower rate of postoperative complications (5.7% vs 15.5%, P = 0.020), more satisfaction with body image (P = 0.001) and cosmesis (P < 0.001) postoperatively. The NOSES group had a higher quality of life. Moreover, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

NOSES could be a safe and reliable technique for radical resection of rectal cancer, with better short-term outcomes than conventional laparoscopy, while long-term survival is not significantly different from that of conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Does temporary ileostomy via specimen extraction site affect the short outcomes and complications after laparoscopic low anterior resection in rectal cancer patients? A propensity score matching analysis

Purpose

The purpose of the current study was to compare the outcomes of temporary stoma through the specimen extraction site (SSES) and stoma through a new site (SNS) after laparoscopic low anterior resection.

Methods

The rectal cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection plus temporary ileostomy were recruited in a single clinical database from Jun 2013 to Jun 2020. The SSES group and the SNS group were compared using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

Results

A total of 257 rectal cancer patients were included in this study, there were 162 patients in the SSES group and 95 patients in the SNS group. After 1:1 ratio PSM, there was no difference in baseline information (p > 0.05). The SSES group had smaller intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.016 < 0.05), shorter operation time (p < 0.01) and shorter post-operative hospital stay (p = 0.021 < 0.05) than the SNS group before PSM. However, the SSES group shorter operation time (p = 0.006 < 0.05) than the SNS group after PSM, moreover, there was no significant difference in stoma-related complications (p > 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, longer operation time was an independent factor (p = 0.019 < 0.05, OR = 1.006, 95% CI = 1.001–1.011) for the stoma-related complications.

Conclusion

Based on the current evidence, the SSES group had smaller intraoperative blood loss, shorter operation time and shorter post-operative hospital stay before PSM, and shorter operation time after PSM. Therefore, SSES might be superior than SNS after laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer patients.

Preservation of the left colic artery in modified laparoscopic anterior rectal resections without auxiliary abdominal incisions for transanal specimen retrieval

Background

Laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection is the most widely used surgical procedure for middle and low rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility and safety of the extracorporeal placement of the anvil in preserving the left colic artery in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection without auxiliary incisions for transanal specimen retrieval in this research.

Methods

Clinical data and follow-up data of patients undergoing laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection from January 2017 to October 2020 were collected. The resections were modified such that the resisting nail holder was extracorporeally placed for the transanal exenteration of the specimen without using auxiliary abdominal incisions while preserving the left colic artery. By analyzing the data of anastomotic stenosis, anastomotic bleeding and anastomotic fistulas after surgery, the advantages and disadvantages of this surgical method for patients were clarified.

Results

A total of 22 patients were enrolled. Five of 22 patients simultaneously underwent double-barrel terminal ileostomy. The postoperative exhaust time was 2–7 (median, 3) days. Postoperative anastomotic bleeding occurred in one patient, postoperative anastomotic fistula occurred in four patients, and postoperative anastomotic stenosis occurred in six patients. There were four patients with postoperative distant metastasis, of which three had concomitant local recurrence. Seventeen patients had no obvious symptoms or signs of recurrent metastases during follow-up appointments, and one died of liver failure.

Conclusions

Modified laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection, which resects the specimen through anus eversion by inserting the anvil extracorporeally while preserving the left colic artery, is safe and feasible for patients with low rectal cancer.

Safety and oncological outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for right hemicolectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is a new technique and uses natural orifice as the delivery route for specimen extraction to avoid supererogatory incision, and the safety and oncological outcomes of NOSES for right hemicolectomy are still inconclusive, so a meta-analysis was performed to compare these to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). Related literature comparing NOSES with CLS for right hemicolectomy, whether randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or retrospective studies, were systematically searched. A random-effect model or fixed-effect model was used based on the I² value. A total of six studies (all retrospective trials) involving 609 participants were included. Compared with CLS, NOSES was more preponderant than CLS in terms of surgical morbidity [odds ratio (OR) = 0.31; P = 0.0002], length of hospital stay [weighted mean difference (WMD) =  - 1.52; P = 0.006], time to first flatus (WMD =  - 0.82; P = 0.0008) and liquid intake (WMD =  - 1.40; P < 0.00001), pain score of POD1 (WMD =  - 1.99; P < 0.00001) and POD3 (WMD =  - 1.15; P = 0.02), and cosmetic result (WMD = 1.84; P < 0.00001), while operative time of NOSES was prolonged (WMD = 18.29; P = 0.04). The number of dissected lymph nodes, recurrence, and 3-year overall survival (3-year OS) in NOSES group were comparable to the CLS group. Despite the lack of enough evidence, NOSES for right hemicolectomy has demonstrated comparable safety and oncological outcomes as CLS with less postoperative morbidity and pain, better cosmetic effect, and rapider recovery.

Laparoscopic-Assisted Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Gastrectomy Using an Auxiliary Incision-free Tube for Gastric Cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction (LA-NOSE) gastrectomy effectively avoids the need for an abdominal incision, unlike conventional laparoscopic gastrectomy. In this study, we documented our experience with LA-NOSE gastrectomy using an auxiliary incision-free tube (Cai tube, a homemade invention: ZL201410168748.2) in 9 gastric cancer patients and summarized the clinical results.

METHODS

From July 2018 to June 2020, a total of 9 patients with gastric cancer were recruited for this study. LA-NOSE gastrectomy (subtotal or total) using the auxiliary incision-free tube and D₂ lymph node dissection were performed. Specimens were extracted through the anterior wall of the upper rectum in 4 male patients and the posterior fornix of the vagina in 5 female patients using the auxiliary incision-free tube.

RESULTS

All 9 patients underwent successful laparoscopic gastrectomy with NOSE using the auxiliary incision-free tube. No perioperative death, re-admission within 60 days post operation, natural orifice wound infection or tumor implantation was observed. The mean operating time was 365.3±41.7 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 87.8±39.3 ml. The mean duration of hospital stay was 11.3±1.2 days, while the mean maximum pain score (visual analogue score, VAS) was 2.3±0.9 on postoperative day (POD) 1, and the mean time to ambulation was 1.3±0.5 days. The 60-day postoperative morbidity rate was 11.1% (1/9). After a mean follow-up of 14.7±9.6 months, there was no transrectal or transvaginal access-site recurrence, no anterior rectectomy or posterior fornix colpotomy-related complications, and no local recurrence or distant metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary experience indicates that this new technique, LA-NOSE gastrectomy using the auxiliary incision-free tube, is feasible for selected patients with gastric cancer.

Transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in 3D laparoscopic partial or radical nephrectomy: a preliminary study

Background

With the development of minimally invasive technology, more and more people pay attention to aesthetics of the wound after operation. This study is aim to introduce a new surgical technique of transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in 3D laparoscopic partial or radical nephrectomy and evaluate the safety, feasibility and clinical effect.

Methods

Eleven patients who underwent 3D laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (n = 7) or radical nephrectomy (n = 4) and NOSES were included in this study. The surgical procedures and techniques, especially the NOSES operation, are reported in detail. In addition, the basic clinical data, perioperative related data, perioperative complications were analyzed.

Results

All 11 patients were performed successfully without conversion to open surgery. The mean total operative time was 133 (84, 150) min. NOSES time was 15 (13, 16) min, and the postoperative hospital stay was 5 (5, 5) d. The mean visual analogue score (VAS) was 3 (2, 4) point and 1 (0, 1) point at 24 h and 48 h after operation, respectively. No patient had recurrence, metastasis and death during the follow-up period of 3 to 17 months. The median Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) was 1 (1, 1) point. The mean of Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) was 21.60 (20.20, 21.60), 21.80 (19.80, 21.80) respectively between preoperative and postoperative 3 months, which has no statistical difference (P = 0.179). There was no statistical difference in the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-short form 20 (PFDI-20) score between preoperative and postoperative 3 months (P = 0.142).

Conclusions

Transvaginal NOSES is safe and feasible in 3D laparoscopic partial or radical nephrectomy. Furthermore, it results in low incision-related pain without affecting the pelvic floor and sexual function.

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection for colorectal cancer in elderly patients: a propensity-score matching study

Whether natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) could provide beneficial effects in treating elderly patients is still under debate. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical outcomes of transanal NOSES with conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection (LA) in elderly colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. A retrospective analysis from the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University between 2013 and 2017 was performed. Outcomes related to surgery, body image, quality of life, anal function and long-term survival were compared between the two groups with the propensity-score matching (PSM) method. After PSM, 78 patients were successfully compared. Patients with NOSES had faster gastrointestinal function recovery (P = 0.028), less postoperative complications (P = 0.025), lower pain scores on days 1, 3 and 5 after surgery (P < 0.001). The body image score (P < 0.001) and cosmetic score (P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the NOSES group than the LA group at 1 month after surgery. Patients with NOSES posed better global health status (P < 0.001), role function (P = 0.009), emotional function (P = 0.011) and social function (P = 0.011) at 3 months after surgery. Moreover, NOSES showed non inferiority in anal function 6 months after surgery. No significant difference could be found regarding to overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence (LR) and distant metastasis (DM). In elderly CRC patients, NOSES harbored favorable postoperative outcomes, excellent cosmetic properties and better quality of life. Besides, anal function and long-term outcomes of NOSES can be sure for elderly patients.

Role of robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in colorectal neoplasms

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is especially suitable for colorectal surgery. Until now, most of the reports published were about laparoscopic NOSES, the reports about robotic NOSES are extremely rare. This study aims to explore the safety and feasibility of robotic NOSES for colorectal neoplasms. All patients underwent robotic NOSES from March 2016 to October 2019 in our hospital were enrolled for retrospective analysis. Clinicopathological data including patient characteristics, perioperative information and pathological information were collected and analyzed. According to the distance between tumor and anus or whether neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nRCT) is performed, we grouped the cases and studied its influence on robotic NOSES. Also, we compared the previous reports on laparoscopic NOSES with our study and revealed advantages of robotic NOSES in terms of safety and feasibility. A total of 180 patients were enrolled. The average distance from the lower edge of the tumor to the anus was (8.64 ± 3.64) cm and maximum circumferential diameter (CDmax) of specimen was (3.5 ± 1.6) cm. In terms of safety, the average operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay were (187.5 ± 78.3) min, (47.4 ± 34) mL, and (11.3 ± 7.5) days, respectively. In terms of feasibility, the average number of lymph node harvested was (14.8 ± 5). Robotic NOSES shows advantages in terms of safety and feasibility compared with laparoscopic NOSES. This procedure could not only be a safe procedure but also could achieve good oncological outcomes.

Natural orifice specimen extraction for colorectal surgery: Early adoption in a Western population

AIM

Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) challenges the limits of minimally invasive colorectal surgery by exploiting a natural opening for specimen delivery. Technically challenging, it is less painful, requires smaller wounds and abolishes the possibility of incisional hernia. These advantages of NOSE are seen in the obese (body mass index [BMI] >30 kg/m² ). This audit aims to demonstrate the feasibility of NOSE colectomy in an Australian population.

METHOD

Prospective data collected from 2007 to the present were retrospectively analysed. Only patients with mucosally benign colorectal conditions were included: complex diverticulosis, post-malignant polypectomy and volvulus. Left sided mucosal malignancies were excluded. Study end-points included postoperative length of stay, anastomotic leak rate and wound complications.

RESULTS

In total, 159 patients underwent NOSE, mean age 59 years (19-88), mean BMI 28.2 kg/m² (17-45). Ten (6.2%) patients developed retroperitoneal small bowel herniation; seven required further surgery. There were five (3.1%) anastomotic leaks, seven (4.4%) postoperative ileus and three (1.9%) anastomotic bleeds. One (0.6%) patient had a superficial wound infection. There were no port site hernias. Patients with BMI <30 kg/m² (98 patients) and BMI >30 kg/m² (59 patients) were compared; there was no difference in anastomotic leak rate (P = 0.60), complication rate (P = 0.71) and length of stay (P = 0.63). However, duration of operation increased with BMI (P = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

This large series of NOSE colectomy from Australia suggests that NOSE is comparable to conventional laparoscopic colectomy in terms of postoperative outcome. Given that obesity has not featured in the NOSE literature, our study suggests that NOSE, for benign disease, is safe in obese patients, without added morbidity.

Safety and Feasibility of Robotic Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery in Colorectal Neoplasms During the Initial Learning Curve

Aim: To analyze the learning curve (LC) for robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) for colorectal neoplasms and evaluate safety and feasibility during the initial LC.

Method: Patients who consecutively underwent robotic NOSES performed by two surgeons between March 2016 and October 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. The operation time was evaluated using the cumulative sum method to analyze the LC. The clinicopathological data before and after the completion of LC were extracted and compared to evaluate safety and feasibility.

Results: In total, 99 and 66 cases were scheduled for robotic NOSES by Prof. Yao and Prof. Li, respectively. The peak points of LC were observed at the 42nd and 15th cases of Yao and Li, respectively, then operation time began to decrease. Only the operation time for Yao before the completion of LC (213.3 ± 67.0 min) was longer than that after the completion of LC (143.8 ± 33.3 min). For Yao nor for Li, other indices, such as postoperative hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, conversion to laparotomy, incidence of anastomotic leakage, reoperation rate, and 90-day mortality rate lacked significant statistical differences(P > 0.05). In terms of feasibility, the number of lymph nodes harvested, positive resection margin rate, and total cost before and after the completion of LC had no significant statistical difference (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: The cases before the completion of LC for robotic NOSES in colorectal neoplasms varied from 15 cases to 42 cases. Robotic NOSES is safe and feasible during the initial LC.

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone versus robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction: a matched analysis

Robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction is a recently developed minimally invasive surgery used in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. However, its safety and feasibility remain undiscussed and controversial. This study reported the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors pertaining to traditional robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone against that of robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction to provide a discussion on this issue. 49 patients who underwent robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction and 49 matched patients who underwent conventional robotic assisted rectal cancer resection were systematically analyzed in this study. Regarding the baseline characteristics, after matching, no significant differences were observed between the natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) group and the robotic assisted rectal cancer resection (RARC) group. Patients in the NOSE group had a reduced visual analog scale (p < 0.001), passed flatus more quickly (p = 0.002) and suffered less surgical stress than those in the RARC group. Moreover, 4 complications were observed in the NOSE group and 7 complications in the RARC group with no significant difference (p = 0.337) in terms of complications. The two groups had a similar survival outcomes, where the 3-year overall survival (p = 0.738) and 3-year progression-free survival (p = 0.986) were all comparable between the two groups. Histological differentiation and T stage could be regarded as independent prognostic factors for 3-year overall survival and 3-year progression-free survival. Robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction is a safe and feasible minimally invasive surgery for patients suffering from rectal cancer as it encompasses considerable several advantages. Histological differentiation and T stage may serve as independent prognostic factors for 3-year overall survival and 3-year progression-free survival.

Natural orifice specimen extraction with laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer: A case report

BACKGROUND

This article introduces the surgical method and early experience in performing totally laparoscopic radical gastrectomy with transrectal specimen extraction for gastric cancer, and we evaluate the short-term effects and feasibility of this new procedure for gastric cancer in a 64-year-old male patient. This approach may provide new possibilities for gastric natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) surgery. In addition, we believe that this new procedure may further relieve pain, speed up recovery, and cause minimal physiological and psychological impact.

CASE SUMMARY

We performed NOSE gastrectomy in a male patient. Tumor resection, digestive tract reconstruction, and lymph node dissection were performed totally laparoscopically; the specimen was extracted from the natural orifice of the rectum-anus. This procedure reduced damage to the abdominal wall and decreased postoperative pain. We successfully performed radical gastrectomy without conversion and complications. Total operative time and blood loss were 176 min and 50 mL, respectively. The patient resumed normal activities of daily living on day 1 without pain, and passed flatus within 48 h. Postoperative hospital stay was 10 d. The number of resected lymph nodes was 0/43. During the follow-up, no stricture or anastomotic leakage was detected. Three months postoperatively, colonoscopy showed full recovery of the rectum without stricture or scar contracture. Computed tomography and laboratory test results showed no signs of tumor recurrence. There was no visible scar on the abdominal wall.

CONCLUSION

It is safe and reliable to perform totally laparoscopic radical gastrectomy with transrectal specimen extraction for distal gastric cancer patients.