Palliative laparoscopic resections for Stage IV colorectal cancer

Short-term outcomes of single-port surgery for palliative resection of the primary tumor in patients with incurable stage IV colon cancer

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term outcomes of single-port surgery (SPS) for palliative resection of the primary tumor in patients with incurable stage IV colon cancer.

METHODS

We studied 66 consecutive patients who underwent SPS or multiport surgery (MPS) for palliative resection of their primary tumor in our department from January 2008 to December 2013. Short-term outcomes and the postoperative course were analyzed between groups retrospectively.

RESULTS

Of the 66 patients, 32 underwent SPS, and 34 underwent MPS. The groups did not differ significantly in terms of preoperative evaluation and short-term outcomes. In the SPS group, one patient was converted to MPS (3.1%); no patients were converted to open surgery. Oncological resection, the proportion of patients who received postoperative chemotherapy, and time to the beginning of postoperative chemotherapy was similar in both groups. The 1-year overall survival rates were 76.7% in the SPS group and 79.4% in the MPS group (P = 0.711).

CONCLUSIONS

SPS is safe and feasible for palliative resection of the primary tumor in patients with incurable stage IV colon cancer.

Clinical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for primary tumor resection in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery with those of open surgery in patients with colorectal cancer and unresectable metastasis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent primary tumor resection of colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis between January 2001 and December 2010.

RESULTS

Of 280 patients, 61 underwent laparoscopic surgery and 219 underwent open surgery. Regarding the short-term outcomes, the amount of blood loss was lower in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.014), although the operation was longer in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.003). The times to flatus (P < 0.001), liquid food intake (P < 0.001), and the duration of hospital stay (P < 0.001) were shorter in the laparoscopic group. The complication rate was lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (P = 0.043). Although the overall survival was significantly better in the laparoscopic group in a univariate analysis, there was no significant difference in the overall survival between the two groups in a multivariate analysis (P = 0.482).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery seems to be a safe and feasible option, with short-term benefit for primary tumor resection in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer with unresectable metastasis.

Palliative resection of the primary tumour in patients with Stage IV colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of the early outcome after laparoscopic and open colectomy

AIM

Resection of the primary tumour in patients with Stage IV colorectal cancer may be performed to avoid future tumour-related complications whilst on systemic treatment. We compared the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic and open colectomy in this patient group.

METHOD

PubMed, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library were searched in the English literature for studies between January 2000 and October 2012 dealing with laparoscopic resection of the primary tumour in Stage IV disease. Single-arm laparoscopic studies were systematically reviewed. Prospective and retrospective studies were included for meta-analysis. End-points include safety, complications, mortality and cancer specific outcome including 5-year and median survival.

RESULTS

Eleven studies comprising 1165 patients undergoing palliative laparoscopic colectomy for Stage IV colorectal cancer were included. Five studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic and open colectomy. The former took longer (pooled mean difference (MD) = 41.52, 95% CI = 11.47-71.56, Z = 2.71, P = 0.007), but resulted in a shorter length of stay (pooled MD = -2.41, 95% CI = -3.84 to -0.99, Z = 3.32, P = 0.0009), with fewer postoperative complications (pooled odds ratio = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.32-0.87, Z = 2.51, P = 0.01) and lower estimated blood loss (pooled MD = -47.71, 95% CI = -80.00 to -15.42, Z = 2.90, P = 0.004). Median survival ranged between 11.4 and 30.1 months.

CONCLUSION

Palliative colectomy performed laparoscopically is associated with a better perioperative outcome than open colectomy. Survival is dependent on the response to systemic chemotherapy.

Multicenter study of short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic palliative resection for incurable, symptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer in Japan

BACKGROUND

This Japanese multicenter retrospective study evaluated short- and long-term outcomes of palliative laparoscopic procedures for symptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer compared with conventional open procedures.

METHODS

Of 968 eligible patients with stage IV colorectal cancer enrolled during January 2006-December 2007 from 41 participating surgical units (Japan Society of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Group), we studied 409 patients who underwent palliative resection of symptomatic primary colorectal tumor.

RESULTS

Data from patients with laparoscopic resection (n = 98) and open colorectal resection (n = 311) were analyzed. Eleven (11.2 %) laparoscopic operations were converted to an open procedure. Fewer complications were reported for laparoscopic resections than for open procedures (13.3 vs. 26.7 %; p = 0.0042). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic vs. open resection group (median, 14 vs. 17 days; p = 0.0242). Postoperative chemotherapy treatment was administered to 245 (78.9 %) patients in the open and 78 (79.6 %) patients in the laparoscopic resection group. Time from surgery to start of postoperative chemotherapy was significantly shorter in the laparoscopic vs. open resection group (median, 32 vs. 27 days; p = 0.0487). Median survival time between the two groups was not significantly different (22.0 vs. 22.2 months; p = 0.948).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic palliative resection results in reduced postoperative complications and earlier recovery with acceptable long-term outcomes comparable with open surgery. When performed by experienced surgeons in selected patients, it may be a safe and feasible option. Because of the potential of significant bias arising from the included studies, further randomized controlled trials should be undertaken to confirm this bias.

Comparison of the feasibility of laparoscopic resection of the primary tumor in patients with stage IV colon cancer with early and advanced disease: the short- and long-term outcomes at a single institution

PURPOSE

The role of resection of the primary tumor in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer (CRC) remains controversial. Laparoscopic resection has become an accepted therapeutic option for treating early stage I-III CRC; however, it has not been evaluated for use in patients with advanced stage disease.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study to evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic resection of the primary tumor exclusively in patients with stage IV colon cancer compared to open resection in patients with stage IV colon cancer and laparoscopic resection in patients with stage I-III colon cancer in terms of operative results and short- and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic resection was performed in 35 stage IV patients and open resection was performed in 40 stage IV patients. One hundred and eighteen stage I-III patients who underwent laparoscopic resection were evaluated. In the comparison between the laparoscopic group and the open group among patients with stage IV colon cancer, postoperative recovery appeared to be better in the laparoscopic group than in the open group, as reflected by shorter times to resumption of a regular diet (p = 0.049), shorter lengths of hospitalization (p = 0.083), increased feasibility of postoperative chemotherapy (p < 0.001), shorter time intervals from surgery to chemotherapy (p = 0.031) and longer median survival (p = 0.078) at the expense of longer operative times (p = 0.025). In the comparison between the laparoscopic resection in stage IV and stage I-III disease groups, no significant differences were observed in operative results and short- and long-term outcomes, except for the rate of ostomy creation (48.5 vs. 8.5%, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection of the primary tumor in patients with stage IV colon cancer achieves equivalent results to that performed in patients with stage I-III disease and that performed in patients with stage IV disease using open resection. The use of a minimally invasive approach in the laparoscopic procedure is beneficial because it results in shorter times to resumption of a normal diet, shorter lengths of hospitalization, increased feasibility of postoperative chemotherapy and shorter time intervals from surgery to chemotherapy at the expense of longer operative times. We believe that patients undergoing laparoscopic resection can receive targeted chemotherapy earlier and more aggressively, which might provide a survival benefit.

Open versus laparoscopic resection of primary tumor for incurable stage IV colorectal cancer: a large multicenter consecutive patients cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the hypothesis that laparoscopic primary tumor resection is safe and effective when compared with the open approach for colorectal cancer patients with incurable metastases.

BACKGROUND

There are only a few reports with small numbers of patients on laparoscopic tumor resection for stage IV colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Data from consecutive patients who underwent palliative primary tumor resection for stage IV colorectal cancer between January 2006 and December 2007 were collected retrospectively from 41 institutions. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between patients who underwent laparoscopic or open resection.

RESULTS

A total of 904 patients (laparoscopic group: 226, open group: 678) with a median age of 64 years (range: 22-95) were included in the analysis. Conversion was required in 28 patients (12.4%) and the most common reasons for conversion (23/28: 82%) were bulky or invasive tumors. There was no 30-day postoperative mortality in either group. The complication rate (NCI-CTCAE grade 2-4) after laparoscopic surgery (17%) was significantly lower than that after open surgery (24%) (P = 0.02), and the difference was greater (4% vs 12%; P < 0.001) when we limited the analysis to severe (≥grade 3) complications. The median length of postoperative hospital stay in the laparoscopic group was significantly shorter than that in the open group (14 vs 17 days; P = 0.002). In univariate analysis, overall survival for the laparoscopic group was significantly better than that for open surgery (median survival time: 25.9 vs 22.3 months, P = 0.04), although no difference was apparent in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic primary tumor resection has advantages in the short term and no disadvantages in the long term. It is a reasonable treatment option for certain stage IV colorectal cancer patients with incurable disease.

Laparoscopic versus open colorectal resections in patients with symptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate short-term and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resection (LR) for patients with symptomatic stage IV colorectal cancer compared with open resection (OR).

METHODS

This study is a retrospective analysis of a prospective database. Patients with a minimum follow-up of 12 months after LR or OR for metastatic colorectal cancer were included. All analyses were performed on an "intention-to-treat" basis.

RESULTS

A total of 162 consecutive patients submitted to LR and 127 submitted to OR were included. In the LR group, conversion rate was 26.5 %, mostly due to locally advanced disease (88.4 %). A greater risk of conversion was observed among patients with a tumor size greater than 5 cm regardless the tumor site (P = 0.07). Early postoperative outcome was significantly better for LR group, with a shorter hospital stay (P = 0.008), earlier onset of adjuvant treatment, and similar postoperative complications (P = 0.853) and mortality rates (P = 0.958). LR for rectal cancer was associated with a higher morbidity compared with colon cancer (P = 0.058). During a median follow-up time of 72 months, there was no significant difference in overall survival between the two groups (P = 0.622).

CONCLUSIONS

LR for symptomatic metastatic CRC is safe and, compared with OR, is associated with a shorter hospital stay and with similar survival rates. Concerns remain about LR of bulky tumors and rectal cancers due to the increased risk of conversion and postoperative complications.

Minimally invasive surgery and cancer: controversies part 1

Perhaps there is no more important issue in the care of surgical patients than the appropriate use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for patients with cancer. Important advances in surgical technique have an impact on early perioperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, pain management, and quality of life issues, as clearly proved with MIS. However, for oncology patients, historically, the most important clinical questions have been answered in the context of prospective randomized trials. Important considerations for MIS and cancer have been addressed, such as what are the important immunologic consequences of MIS versus open surgery and what is the role of laparoscopy in the staging of gastrointestinal cancers? This review article discusses many of the key controversies in the minimally invasive treatment of cancer using the pro-con debate format.

Laparoscopic surgery for stage IV colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopic surgery in the management of stage IV colorectal cancer remains uncertain.

METHODS

Sixty-five patients with stage IV disease from among 578 colorectal cancer patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery since 2001 were compared with 513 patients who had stage 0-III disease. The criteria for excluding stage IV patients from laparoscopic surgery were huge tumors, low rectal cancer, massive ascites due to peritoneal seeding, bowel perforation and/or obstruction, and poor general condition and/or cachexia. Data were analyzed by chi-square test or Student's t-test, with P < 0.05 being considered significant.

RESULTS

The two groups of patients had similar demographic features. The open conversion rate was 4.6% (3/65 patients) in the stage IV group and 2.7% (14/513 patients) in the stage 0-III group, and the difference between the groups was not significant. In the stage IV group, depth of tumor invasion and tumor diameter were both significantly greater than in the stage 0-III group. However, operating time and blood loss were similar in the two groups (stage IV: 189.0 min and 95.0 g; stage 0-III: 182.5 min and 60.0 g), although blood loss was significantly greater in the stage IV group when patients undergoing rectal surgery were compared. The incidence of postoperative complications and the postoperative course of the two groups were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their larger and more invasive tumors, the short-term outcome of laparoscopic surgery in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer was similar to that for stage 0-III patients. This result indicates that laparoscopic surgery can be successfully performed in selected stage IV colorectal cancer patients.

Laparoscopic bowel resection in the setting of metastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to review the outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal resection for patients with stage IV colorectal cancer.

METHODS

From the prospectively collected database for patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer in our institution, those with stage IV colorectal cancer who underwent elective resection of tumor during the period from January 2000 to June 2006 were included. The outcomes of those with laparoscopic resection were reviewed and comparison was made between patients with laparoscopic and open resection.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients (127 men) with median age of 69 years (range: 25-91 years) were included, and 77 underwent laparoscopic resection. Conversion was required in ten patients (13.0%) and all except one conversion were due to fixed or bulky tumors. There was no operative mortality in the laparoscopic group. The complication rate was 14% and the median postoperative hospital stay was 7 days. When patients with laparoscopic resection were compared with those with open operations, there was no difference in age, gender, comorbidity, or tumor size between the two groups. However, the complication rate was significantly lower in those with laparoscopic resection (14% versus 32%, P = 0.007) and the median hospital stay was significantly shorter (7 days versus 8 days, P = 0.005). The operative mortalities and the survivals were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal resection can be performed safely in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. The operative outcomes in terms of complication rate and hospital stay compare favorably with patients with open resection.

Palliation of colorectal cancer

Patients with advanced incurable colorectal cancer (CRC) face a grim prognosis. The goal of palliative intervention is directed at alleviating disease-related symptoms and improving quality of life. The provision of optimal palliative care for these patients is a compound and demanding process. This dilemma becomes more challenging when patients with advanced metastatic colorectal disease present with an incurable and asymptomatic primary lesion. Treatment options are numerous and include a variety of surgical and nonsurgical interventions. Most data regarding the role of surgery in palliation of CRC are from retrospective, nonrandomized case series. Surgical resection may provide good palliation of symptoms and prevent future tumor-related complications. Metal stents are also able to provide good palliative relief of obstruction and should be used when appropriate. The best palliative care will often require a multidisciplinary approach that involves input from surgical and nonsurgical teams, where treatment plans will be made in accordance with the wishes of the patient and family with a goal of decreasing morbidity and a focus on quality of life.