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

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.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Robotic surgery is being increasingly used for colorectal cancer surgery. However, its utility versus laparoscopic surgery in older patients is unclear. We systematically examined evidence to assess the differences in short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in older patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Comparative studies published on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched up to August 30th, 2023.

RESULTS

Seven studies totaling 14,043 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed no difference in the operation time between the robotic and laparoscopic groups. Meta-analysis of ClavienDindo complications showed no difference between the robotic and laparoscopic groups for grades I and II or grades III and IV complications. Similarly, conversion to open surgery, reoperation rates and length of hospital stay were not significantly different between the two groups. Readmission rates and mortality rates were significantly lower with robotic surgery.

CONCLUSION

This first meta-analysis comparing outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in older colorectal cancer patients shows that both approaches result in no difference in operating time, complication rates, conversion to open surgery, reoperation rates, and LOS. Scarce data shows that mortality and readmission rates may be lower with robotic 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.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Surgery in Very Elderly Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A Survival Analysis and Comparative Study

(1) Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a global health concern, particularly among the elderly population. This study aimed to assess the impact of laparoscopic surgery on CRC patients aged ≥80 years. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive CRC patients who underwent surgery at our institution between July 2018 and July 2023. The patients were categorized into three groups: those aged over 80 who underwent laparoscopic surgery (Group A), those aged over 80 who underwent open surgery (Group B), and those under 80 who underwent laparoscopic surgery (Group C). We examined various clinical and surgical parameters, including demographic data, medical history, surgical outcomes, and survival. (3) Results: Group A (N = 113) had shorter hospital stays than Group B (N = 23; p = 0.042), with no significant differences in complications or 30-day outcomes. Compared to Group C (N = 269), Group A had higher comorbidity indices (p < 0.001), more emergency admissions, anemia, low hemoglobin levels, colonic obstruction (p < 0.001), longer hospital stays (p < 0.001), and more medical complications (p = 0.003). Laparotomic conversion was associated with obstructive neoplasms (p < 0.001), and medical complications with ASA scores (p < 0.001). Both the medical and surgical complications predicted adverse 30-day outcomes (p = 0.007 and p < 0.001). Survival analysis revealed superior overall survival (OS) in Group A vs. Group B (p < 0.0001) and inferior OS vs. Group C (p < 0.0001). After a landmark analysis, the OS for patients aged 80 or older and those under 80 appeared to be similar (HR 2.55 [0.75-8.72], p = 0.136). (4) Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery in very elderly CRC patients shows comparable oncological outcomes and surgical complications to younger populations. Survival benefits are influenced by age, comorbidities, and medical complications. Further prospective multicenter studies are needed in order to validate these findings.

Comparison of short-term outcomes and survival between minimally invasive colectomy and open colectomy in patients 80 years of age and older

We investigated the short- and long-term outcomes of patients 80 years of age and older with colon cancer who underwent robotic colectomy versus laparoscopic colectomy. Data for patients treated at a comprehensive cancer center between January 2006 and November 2018 were collected retrospectively. Outcomes from minimally invasive laparoscopic or robotic colectomy were compared. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method with significance evaluated by the log-rank test. The laparoscopic (n = 104) and the robotic (n = 75) colectomy groups did not differ across baseline characteristics. Patients who underwent a robotic colectomy had a shorter median length of hospital stay (5 versus 6 days; p < 0.001) and underwent fewer conversions to open surgery (3% versus 17%; p = 0.002) compared to the laparoscopic cohort. The groups did not differ in postoperative complication rates, overall survival or disease-free survival. Elderly patients undergoing robotic colectomy for colon cancer have a shorter hospital stay and lower rates of conversion without compromise to oncologic outcomes.

Frailty Assessment and Prehabilitation as Part of a PeRioperative Evaluation and Planning (PREP) Program for Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery

Frailty assessment and prehabilitation can be incrementally implemented in a multidisciplinary, multiphase pathway to improve patient care. To start, modifications can be made to a surgeon's practice with existing resources while adapting standard pathways for frail patients. Frailty screening can identify patients in need of additional assessment and optimization. Personalized utilization of frailty data for optimization through prehabilitation can improve postoperative outcomes and identify patients who would benefit from adapted care. Additional utilization of the multidisciplinary team can lead to improved outcomes and a strong business case to add additional members of the team.

Benefits of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults compared with younger adults: a retrospective study

Randomized research demonstrated that robotic surgery was oncologically safe and beneficial in the short term. We investigated whether older adults benefit from robotics more than younger adults do in terms of short-term outcomes. We identified all older (≥ 70 years old) and younger (≤ 70) adults with rectal cancer treated with resection between 2019 and 2022 from an institutional database. We assessed the short-term post-operative 90-day outcomes, which included the first bowel movement, length of hospital duration, sepsis, and harvested lymph node on an age-based differentiation. The key outcomes were complications and grades III-IV on the Clavien-Dindo scale. We identified 298 individuals treated with oncologic resection of rectal cancer: 108 (36.6%) were older adults, while 190 (63.4%) were younger adults. Older adults treated with robotic surgery include 45 (41.6%), whereas 63 (58.3%) older adults were treated with laparoscopic surgery, and 85 (44.7%) younger adults were treated with robotic surgery, while 105 (55.2%) younger adults were treated with laparoscopic surgery. The Clavien-Dindo grading system exposes a substantial P < 0.05 in younger group, whereas grade III-IV patients are seen more frequently in laparoscopic surgery than robotic surgery. Younger and older persons both benefited differently from robotic surgery when compared to laparoscopic surgery in terms of major post-operative complications.

Surgery for T4 Colorectal Cancer in Older Patients: Determinants of Outcomes

Background: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of older and younger patients with T4 colorectal cancer (CRC) treated with surgery. Methods: Consecutive patients with T4 CRC treated surgically at Henri Mondor Hospital between 2008 and 2016 were retrospectively analyzed in age subgroups (1) 50−69 years and (2) ≥70 years for overall and relative survival. The multivariable analyses were adjusted for adjusted for age, margin status, lymph node involvement, CEA level, postoperative complications (POC), synchronous metastases, and type of surgery. Results: Of 106 patients with T4 CRC, 57 patients (53.8%) were 70 years or older. The baseline characteristics were generally balanced between the two age groups. Older patients underwent adjuvant therapy less commonly (42.9 vs. 57.1%; p = 0.006) and had a longer delay between surgery and chemotherapy (median 40 vs. 34 days; p < 0.001). A higher trend for POC was reported among the older patients but did not impact the survival outcomes. After adjusting for confounding factors, the overall survival was shorter among the older patients (HR = 3.322, 95% CI 1.49−7.39), but relative survival was not statistically correlated to the age group (HR = 0.873, 95% CI 0.383−1.992). Conclusions: Older patients with CRC were more prone to severe POC, but age did not impact the relative survival of patients with T4 colorectal cancer. Older patients should not be denied surgery based on age alone.

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 under-treatment of older adult patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Older patients with cancer often have lower surgery rates and survival than younger patients, but this may reflect surgical contraindications of advanced disease, comorbidities, and frailty - and not necessarily under-treatment.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to describe variations in surgery rates and observed or net survival among younger (<75) and older (≥75) patients with breast, lung and colorectal cancer, while taking account of pre-existing health factors, in order to understand how under-treatment is defined and estimated in the literature.

METHOD

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and PubMed databases were searched for studies reporting surgery rates and observed or net survival among younger and older patients with breast, lung, and colorectal cancer. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale, and random effects meta-analyses were used to combine study results. The I-squared statistic and subgroup analyses were used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirty relatively high-quality studies of patients with breast (230,200; 71.9%), lung (77,573; 24.2%), and colorectal (12,407; 3.9%) cancers were identified. Compared to younger patients, older patients were less likely to receive surgical treatment for 1) breast cancer after adjusting for comorbidity, performance status (PS), functional status and patient choice, 2) lung cancer after accounting for stage, comorbidity, PS, and 3) colorectal cancer after adjusting for stage, comorbidity, and gender. The pooled unadjusted analyses showed lower surgery receipt in older patients with breast (odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.78), lung (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.75), and colorectal (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51-0.68) cancer. In separate analyses, older patients with breast, lung and colorectal cancer had lower observed and net survival, compared to younger patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower surgery rates in older patients may contribute to their poorer survival compared to younger patients. Future research quantifying under-treatment should include necessary clinical factors, patient choice, patient's quality of life and a statistically-robust approach, which will demonstrate how much of the survival deficit in older patients is due to their receiving lower surgery rates.

Factors affecting short-term survival in patients older than 85 treated with resection for stage II and III colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients ≥85 years of age have high rates of colon cancer but disproportionately poor outcomes. Factors affecting short-term (90-day) survival in patients ≥85 undergoing surgery for stage II and III colon cancer were examined to identify potentially modifiable factors to improve outcomes.

METHODS

The New York State Cancer Registry and Statewide Planning Research and Cooperative System were queried for patients ≥85 years who underwent colectomy for stage II and III colon cancer between 2004 and 2012. Regression analyses were performed for factors associated with 90-day mortality and stratified by elective and nonelective surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 3,779 patients ≥85 years of age underwent colectomy between 2004 and 2012 for stage II or III colon cancer. Of these, 48.4% underwent nonelective colectomy, 79.9% had an open operation, and 90-day survival was 83.2%. Worse survival was associated with nonelective surgery (odds ratio = 3.81, 95% confidence interval = 3.03-4.89). Improved survival in the nonelective and overall groups was associated with a minimally invasive operation (nonelective group: odds ratio = 0.35, 95% confidence interval = 0.21-0.58; overall group: odds ratio = 0.50, 95% confidence interval = 0.36-0.73) and discharged to another health care facility (nonelective group: odds ratio = 0.30, 95% confidence interval = 0.22-0.39; overall group: odds ratio = 0.42, 95% confidence interval = 0.33-0.53). High surgeon annual operating volume was associated with improved survival in the elective and nonelective groups (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Factors associated with greater odds of 90-day mortality in this population include nonelective surgery, preoperative weight loss, and multiple comorbidities, whereas a minimally invasive approach was associated with lower mortality. Potential areas to improve outcomes in this population include using a multidisciplinary team approach, addressing frailty preoperatively when possible, and potentially reconsidering screening guidelines for colorectal cancer to reduce rates of emergency operations.

Robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly patients in terms of recovery time: a monocentric experience

Colorectal cancer has a great socio-sanitary relevance. It represents the third cancer by incidence and mortality. Ageing plays a major role in the development of colorectal cancer and this tumour, in patients aged 65 and older, has gradually increased over the past decade. The robotic technique is considered the evolution of conventional laparoscopy. Few studies evaluate the effects of robotic surgery in elderly patient, and even fewer are those that compare it with laparoscopic surgery in this population. The aim of this study was to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery compared to laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients older than 65 years. We conducted a retrospective study enrolling 83 elderly patients (age > 65) undergoing robotic and laparoscopic colectomy (32 and 51, respectively) between January 2019 and January 2021. For statistical analysis, p values were calculated using t test and chi-square test. p < 0.05 is the criterion for statistical significance. Statistical analyses were performed with the Number Cruncher Statistical System (NCSS) 2020 data analysis version 20.0.1 (Utah, USA). The operation time was higher in robotic left (p = 0.003, mean time 249.6 vs 211.7 min) and right (p = 0.004, mean time 238.5 vs 183.5 min) hemicolectomy and similar for procedures on rectosigmoid and rectum when compared to laparoscopic technique. In terms of length of hospital stay and recovery of bowel function, these values were significantly lower for robotic group in left hemicolectomy (p = 0.004), rectum (p = 0.003) and rectosigmoid (p = 0.003), while right hemicolectomy was similar in two groups (p = 0.26). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding conversion rate, postoperative complications, length of specimen, number of lymph nodes encountered and oncological results. Colorectal robotic surgery in elderly patients appears as a feasible and safe surgical approach when compared to the laparoscopic one, showing a shorter recovery and a reduction of length of stay with similar oncological outcomes even if with an increase of operating times.

The Clinical Frailty Scale is a useful tool for predicting postoperative complications following elective colon cancer surgery at the age of 80 years and above: A prospective, multicentre observational study

AIM

Identification of the risks of postoperative complications may be challenging in older patients with heterogeneous physical and cognitive status. The aim of this multicentre, observational study was to identify variables that affect the outcomes of colon cancer surgery and, especially, to find tools to quantify the risks related to surgery.

METHOD

Patients aged ≥80 years with electively operated Stage I-III colon cancer were recruited. The prospectively collected data included comorbidities, results of the onco-geriatric screening tool (G8), Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF), and operative and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients (mean 84.5 years, range 80-97, 60% female) were included. History of cerebral stroke (64% vs. 37%, p = 0.02), albumin level 31-34 g/l compared with ≥35 g/l (57% vs. 32%, p = 0.007), CFS 3-4 and 5-9 compared with CFS 1-2 (49% and 47% vs. 16%, respectively) and American Society of Anesthesiologists score >3 (77% vs. 28%, P = 0.006) were related to a higher risk of complications. In multivariate logistic regression analysis CFS ≥3 (OR 6.06, 95% CI 1.88-19.5, p = 0.003) and albumin level 31-34 g/l (OR 3.88, 1.61-9.38, p = 0.003) were significantly associated with postoperative complications. Severe complications were more common in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (43% vs. 13%, p = 0.047), renal failure (25% vs. 12%, p = 0.021), albumin level 31-34 g/l (26% vs. 8%, p = 0.014) and CCI >6 (23% vs. 10%, p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

Surgery on physically and cognitively fit aged colon cancer patients with CFS 1-2 can lead to excellent operative outcomes similar to those of younger patients. The CFS could be a useful screening tool for predicting postoperative complications.

Surgical and functional outcomes and survival following Colon Cancer surgery in the aged: a study protocol for a prospective, observational multicentre study

Background

The number of colorectal cancer patients increases with age. The decision to go through major surgery can be challenging for the aged patient and the surgeon because of the heterogeneity within the older population. Differences in preoperative physical and cognitive status can affect postoperative outcomes and functional recovery, and impact on patients’ quality of life.

Methods / design

A prospective, observational, multicentre study including nine hospitals to analyse the impact of colon cancer surgery on functional ability, short-term outcomes (complications and mortality), and their predictors in patients aged ≥80 years. The catchment area of the study hospitals is 3.88 million people, representing 70% of the population of Finland. The data will be gathered from patient baseline characteristics, surgical interventional data, and pre- and postoperative patient-questionnaires, to an electronic database (REDCap) especially dedicated to the study.

Discussion

This multicentre study provides information about colon cancer surgery’s operative and functional outcomes on older patients. A further aim is to find prognostic factors which could help to predict adverse outcomes of surgery.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03904121). Registered on 1 April 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08454-8.

Do older patients (> 80 years) also benefit from ERAS after colorectal resection? A safety and feasibility study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a standard Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program following colorectal resection in a geriatric population, aged 80 years and older.

METHODS

In this single-center before-after cohort study all patients aged 80 years and older were included after colorectal resection. Patients were divided in a pre-ERAS and an ERAS group, according to the type of perioperative care. Data were prospectively collected and analysed retrospectively. The primary outcome was short-term complication rate. Secondary outcome parameters were length of stay (LOS), 30-day mortality and readmission rate.

RESULTS

Over 4 years, 219 patients were included. Of those, 151 underwent colonic and 68 rectal resection, following the ERAS protocol perioperatively in 45 and 21 cases. There were no differences in complication rate, 30-day mortality or readmission rate in the pre-ERAS versus ERAS groups. LOS after colonic resection was reduced by 2.5 days in the ERAS group (p = 0.020). Laparoscopy was found to be an independent variable of LOS (p < 0.001, p = 0.009) and complication rate (p = 0.011, p < 0.001) for colonic and rectal surgery respectively.

DISCUSSION

A standard ERAS protocol is safe and feasible in older patients undergoing colorectal resection. Colon resection was related with shorter LOS without increasing morbidity, readmission rate nor 30-day mortality. No adverse outcome after rectal resection was found either. Laparoscopy was associated with lower complication rate and shorter LOS.

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic approach within an ERAS protocol should be considered for colorectal resection in every patient regardless of age.

Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for elderly rectal cancer patients in Japan: a nationwide study

Background

This study aimed to analyse the perioperative results from a national dataset of rectal cancer resections in elderly patients.

Methods

The clinical records of patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery between 2012 and 2014 were retrieved from the Japanese National Clinical Database and analysed retrospectively. Patients were categorized according to age and those 80 years or older were defined as elderly. Subgroups were also defined according to the surgical approach (laparoscopy versus open surgery). The short-term outcomes, including mortality, anastomotic leak, surgical site infections and medical complications were compared between subgroups.

Results

Of 56 175 patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery, some 6717 patients were elderly and laparoscopy was performed in 46.8 per cent of the sample. When comparing laparoscopy and open surgery in elderly patients, the operative mortality rate (1.5 versus 2.8 per cent; P < 0.001), the incidence of anastomotic leakage (5.2 versus 6.5 per cent; P = 0.026), surgical site infections (6.0 versus 8.0 per cent; P = 0.001), pneumonia (1.4 versus 2.5 per cent; P = 0.001), renal failure (0.7 versus 1.3 per cent; P = 0.016) and cardiac events (0.3 versus 0.8 per cent; P = 0.008) were lower for laparoscopy than for open surgery. The overall complication rate in elderly patients (19.5 per cent) was comparable to that in the younger group (P = 0.07). However, incidence of systemic complications was significantly higher in elderly than in younger patients (all P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Laparoscopy was safe and feasible in elderly patients compared with open surgery. However, the rates of systemic complications were significantly higher than in younger patients.

Age and comorbidities do not affect short-term outcomes after laparoscopic rectal cancer resection in elderly patients. A multi-institutional cohort study in 287 patients

Postoperative complications and mortality rates after rectal cancer surgery are higher in elderly than in non-elderly patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether, like in open surgery, age and comorbidities affect postoperative outcomes limiting the benefits of a laparoscopic approach. Between April 2011 and July 2020, data of 287 patients with rectal cancer submitted to laparoscopic rectal resection from different institutions were collected in an electronic database and were categorized into two groups: < 75 years and ≥ 75 years of age. Perioperative data and short-term outcomes were compared between these groups. Risk factors for postoperative complications were determined on multivariate analysis, including age groups and previous comorbidities as variables. Seventy-seven elderly patients had both higher ASA scores (p < 0.001) and cardiovascular disease rates (p = 0.02) compared with 210 non-elderly patients. There were no significative differences between groups in terms of overall postoperative complications (p = 0.3), number of patients with complications (p = 0.2), length of stay (p = 0.2) and death during hospitalization (p = 0.9). The only independent variables correlated with postoperative morbidity were male gender (OR 2.56; 95% CI 1.53-3.68, p < 0.01) and low-medium localization of the tumor (OR 2.12; 75% CI 1.43-4.21, p < 0.01). Although older people are more frail patients, short-term postoperative outcomes in patients ≥ 75 years of age were similar to those of younger patients after laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Elderly patients benefit from laparoscopic rectal resection as well as non-elderly patient, despite advanced age and comorbidities.

A Comparison of Colectomy Outcomes Utilizing Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Techniques

INTRODUCTION

Robotic colectomy could reduce morbidity and postoperative recovery over laparoscopic and open procedures. This comparative review evaluates colectomy outcomes based on surgical approach at a single community institution.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent colectomy by a fellowship-trained colon and rectal surgeon at a single institution from 2015 through 2019 was performed, and a cohort developed for each approach (open, laparoscopic, and robotic). 30-day outcomes were evaluated. For dichotomous outcomes, univariate logistic regression models were used to quantify the individual effect of each predictor of interest on the odds of each outcome. Continuous outcomes received a similar approach; however, linear and Poisson regression modeling were used, as appropriate.

RESULTS

115 patients were evaluated: 14% (n = 16) open, 44% (n = 51) laparoscopic, and 42% (n = 48) robotic. Among the cohorts, there was no statistically significant difference in operative time, rate of reoperation, readmission, or major complications. Robotic colectomies resulted in the shortest length of stay (LOS) (Kruskal-Wallis P < .0001) and decreased estimated blood loss (EBL) (Kruskal-Wallis P = .0012). Median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR] 53-72). 54% (n = 62) were female. Median American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification was 3 (IQR 2-3). Median body mass index was 28.67 (IQR 25.03-33.47). A malignant diagnosis was noted on final pathology in 44% (n = 51).

CONCLUSION

Among the 3 approaches, there was no statistically significant difference in 30-day morbidity or mortality. There was a statistically significant decreased LOS and EBL for robotic colectomies.

Risk factors of short-term survival in the aged in elective colon cancer surgery: a population-based study

PURPOSE

Patients aged > 80 years represent an increasing proportion of colon cancer diagnoses. Selecting patients for elective surgery is challenging because of possibly compromised health status and functional decline. The aim of this retrospective, population-based study was to identify risk factors and health measures that predict short-term mortality after elective colon cancer surgery in the aged.

METHODS

All patients > 80 years operated electively for stages I-III colon cancer from 2005 to 2016 in four Finnish hospitals were included. The prospectively collected data included comorbidities, functional status, postoperative surgical and medical outcomes as well as mortality data.

RESULTS

A total of 386 patients (mean 84.0 years, range 80-96, 56% female) were included. Male gender (46% vs 35%, p = 0.03), higher BMI (51% vs 37%, p = 0.02), diabetes mellitus (51% vs 37%, p = 0.02), coronary artery disease (52% vs 36%, p = 0.003) and rheumatic diseases (67% vs 39%, p = 0.03) were related to higher risk of complications. The severe complications were more common in patients with increased preoperative hospitalizations (31% vs 15%, p = 0.05) and who lived in nursing homes (30% vs 17%, p = 0.05). The 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 6.0% and 15% for all the patients compared with 30% and 45% in patients with severe postoperative complications (p < 0.001). Severe postoperative complications were the only significant patient-related variable affecting 1-year mortality (OR 9.60, 95% CI 2.33-39.55, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The ability to identify preoperatively patients at high risk of decreased survival and thus prevent severe postoperative complications could improve overall outcome of aged colon cancer patients.

Effect of Age on Laparoscopic Surgery and Postoperative Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients With Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the postoperative complications of laparoscopic colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery and the adverse events of postoperative chemotherapy in elderly patients compared to younger patients and to identify the factors influencing the termination of postoperative chemotherapy.

METHODS

Between June 2015 and May 2018, 188 patients with CRC underwent laparoscopic surgery with curative intent. Patients aged ≥ 70 were defined as elderly. Postoperative complications and adverse events of chemotherapy were assessed by using the Clavien-Dindo classification and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, respectively. The clinicopathological factors were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were considered elderly with a mean age of 77.5 ± 5.5 years. Overall postoperative complications occurred in 68 patients (36.2%). Age and primary tumor location were independent predictors of overall postoperative complications. Smoking history was the only independent predictor of major postoperative complications. Of 113 patients who were recommended postoperative chemotherapy, 90 patients (79.6%) received postoperative chemotherapy. Overall adverse events occurred in 40 patients (44.4%). The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification and chemotherapy regimen were significantly associated with overall adverse events. The chemotherapy regimen was the only factor significantly associated with severe adverse events. Of 90 patients, postoperative chemotherapy could not be completed in 11 (12.2%). Age was the only factor significantly associated with stopping postoperative chemotherapy (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that laparoscopic CRC surgery and postoperative chemotherapy were feasible in elderly patients. Further efforts are needed to ensure that elderly patients have the opportunity to make informed decisions regarding postoperative chemotherapy.

Minimizing the impact of colorectal surgery in the older patient: The role of minimally invasive surgery in the geriatric population

With an aging population comes a greater incidence of colorectal cancer and a corresponding need for surgical resection in the geriatric population. This heterogeneous group of patients may benefit from multidisciplinary pre-operative evaluation and optimization, prehabilitation, enhanced recovery protocols, and a minimally invasive approach to resection. Concerns regarding the ability of the older patient to tolerate the physiologic demands of pneumoperitoneum have not been validated. Conversely, these vulnerable patients may experience a greater reduction in morbidity than their younger counterparts through the use of minimally invasive techniques.

Benefits of minimally-invasive surgery for sigmoid and rectal cancer in older adults compared with younger adults: Do older adults have the most to gain?

INTRODUCTION

Randomized trials demonstrated oncologic safety and short-term benefits of laparoscopy. We investigated if the benefit of laparoscopy on short-term outcomes is greater for older adults compared with younger adults.

METHODS

We identified all older (≥70 years old) and younger (<70) adults with primary sigmoid and rectal cancer treated with resection between 2002 and 2018 from an institutional database. We compared 30-day postoperative outcomes using multivariable logistic regression with an interaction term between age group and surgical approach. Primary outcomes were death, major (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) and minor (Clavien-Dindo I-II) complications, and wound complications.

RESULTS

We included 792 patients, 293 (37%) older and 499 (63%) younger. Use of laparoscopy was similar between age groups: 120/293 (41%) older, 204/499 (41%) younger (p = .98). All patients had 30-day follow-up. Compared with open resection, minimally-invasive resection was associated with a greater reduction in deaths in older adults than in younger adults (absolute difference in older adults 7.0% less versus 2.1% less in younger adults; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] older 3.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-7.33; aOR younger 0.31, 95% CI 0.05-1.24; interaction p = .01). Similarly, minimally-invasive resection was associated with a greater reduction in major complications in older adults than in younger adults (absolute difference in older adults 6.4% less versus 2.4% less in younger adults; aOR older 1.91, 95% CI 1.07-3.41; aOR younger 0.70, 95% CI 0.34-1.38; interaction p = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally-invasive compared with open surgery demonstrated a differential benefit on postoperative death and major complications between younger and older adults.

Safe surgery in the elderly: A review of outcomes following robotic proctectomy from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample in a cross-sectional study

Background

As our nation's population ages, operating on older and sicker patients occurs more frequently. Robotic operations have been thought to bridge the gap between a laparoscopic and an open approach, especially in more complex cases like proctectomy.

Methods

Our objective was to evaluate the use and outcomes of robotic proctectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer in the elderly. A retrospective cross-sectional cohort study utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS; 2006-2013) was performed. All cases were restricted to age 70 years old or greater.

Results

We identified 6740 admissions for rectal cancer including: 5879 open, 666 laparoscopic, and 195 robotic procedures. The median age was 77 years old. The incidence of a robotic proctectomy increased by 39%, while the open approach declined by 6% over the time period studied. Median (interquartile range) length of stay was shorter for robotic procedures at 4.3 (3-7) days, compared to laparoscopic 5.8 (4-8) and open at 6.7 (5-10) days (p < 0.01), while median total hospital charges were greater in the robotic group compared to laparoscopic and open cases ($64,743 vs. $55,813 vs. $50,355, respectively, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the risk of total complications between the different approaches following multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

Robotic proctectomy was associated with a shorter LOS, and this may act as a surrogate marker for an overall improvement in adverse events. These results demonstrate that a robotic approach is a safe and feasible option, and should not be discounted solely based on age or comorbidities.

Laparoscopic hepatectomy for elderly patients: Major findings based on a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

As the general population continues to age, there is an increase need for surgical management of elderly patients. Compared to open hepatectomy (OH), laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) offers earlier mobilization, less blood loss, and shorter postoperative hospital stay. However, whether these advantages of LH over OH are retained in elderly patients remains to be clarified. Therefore, in this study, we sought to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of LH for elderly patients.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was performed to identify studies that compared LH and OH. Studies comparing LH in elderly and LH in nonelderly patients were also identified. Outcomes of interest included conversion rate, operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, rate and type of morbidity, mortality rate, margin status (R0), and long-term oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

Nine studies met our inclusion criteria for this analysis. Of these, 5 compared LH and OH in elderly patients, 3 compared LH in elderly and nonelderly patients, and 1 included both outcomes. Compared to those with OH, elderly patients who underwent LH had similar operative times [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.15 minutes; 95% confidence interval (CI): -28.28-30.59, P = .94], less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -0.71 mL; 95% CI: -1.29 to -0.16, P = .01), a lower rate of transfusion [risk ratio (RR) = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.40-0.94, P = .02], comparable R0 rates (RR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.96-1.07, P = .70), less postoperative complications (RR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76, P < .01), and shorter hospital stay (WMD = -3.22 days; 95% CI: -4.21 to -2.23, P < .01). The limited long-term outcomes indicated that survival status was comparable between LH and OH for elderly patients. The pooled outcomes for elderly versus nonelderly patients indicated that the safety and effectiveness of LH over OH in elderly patients was not inferior to those in nonelderly patients.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that LH is a feasible and safe alternative to OH in elderly patients, providing a lower rate of morbidity and favorable postoperative recovery and outcomes.

Oncologic outcomes after radical surgery for periampullary cancer in octogenarians

Backgrounds/Aims

Interest in treatments for elderly patients has increased with life expectancy, and various studies have reported on the safety and feasibility of radical surgery in elderly patients with cancer. Here, we investigated oncologic outcomes of periampullary cancer in octogenarians.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 68 patients over 80 years of age who were diagnosed with periampullary cancer and were eligible for surgery; we analyzed overall survival (OS) and immediate postoperative complications and mortality.

Results

There were no significant differences in mean age, disease type, oncologic features, comorbidities, or nutritional status between the patients who had surgery and those who did not. Five patients (20.0%) had major postoperative complications, but there was no immediate postoperative mortality. Patients who had surgery (n=25) had better OS (29.3 months; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.6–53.0) than did those who did not (n=43, OS: 7.6 months; 95% CI: 3.2–12.0 months; p<0.001). Similarly, patients with distal common bile duct cancer who underwent surgery had better OS than those who did not (surgery group: n=13, OS: 29.3 months, 95% CI: 8.9–49.7; non-surgery group: n=15, OS: 5.7 months, 95% CI: 4.2–7.2 months; p=0.002).

Conclusions

Radical surgery for octogenarian patients with periampullary cancer is safe, feasible, and expected to result in better survival outcomes, especially for patients with common bile duct cancer.

Advances in geriatric oncology: a multidisciplinary perspective

A growing majority of people with cancer is composed of older patients. For many such patients, independence and quality of life are as important as prolongation of survival, emphasizing the need for treatments that are not only effective but also well-tolerated. Given age-related decline in organ function and the prevalence of comorbidities and polypharmacy, optimum management is complex and requires collaboration between oncologists and geriatricians. Advances in surgery now include preoperative assessment and, when indicated, prehabilitation of the patient, as well as the enhanced recovery after surgery approach. Medical treatment is benefiting from the advent of highly effective novel immunomodulatory agents that join the tumor-targeted small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies in modifying the tolerability of therapy. Improved tolerability is evident with radiotherapy (RT). The adoption of stereotactic body RT in community oncology practice is increasing the proportion of elderly patients with comorbidities who can receive curative treatment. A further aspect of precision medicine as it relates to the older cancer patient is the tailoring of intervention to the robustness or frailty and life expectancy of the individual. Quantitative and validated tools for comprehensive geriatric assessment are playing an important role in this process.

The use of laparoscopic rectopexy to manage rectal prolapse with Pseudo-Meigs' syndrome in a 64-year-old female: a case report

We report a rare case of rectal prolapse with Pseudo‐Meigs’ syndrome in which laparoscopic bilateral oophorectomy and rectopexy were performed simultaneously and resulted in improved quality of life due to the loss of ascites and the repair of rectal prolapse. Laparoscopic surgery is feasible for rectal prolapse with Pseudo‐Meigs’ syndrome.

Impact of frailty on approach to colonic resection: Laparoscopy vs open surgery

AIM

To understand the influence of frailty on postoperative outcomes for laparoscopic and open colectomy.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2005-2012) for patients undergoing colon resection [open colectomy (OC) and laparoscopic colectomy (LC)]. Patients were classified as non-frail (0 points), low frailty (1 point), moderate frailty (2 points), and severe frailty (≥ 3) using the Modified Frailty Index. 30-d mortality and complications were used as the primary end point and analyzed for the overall population. Complications were grouped into major and minor. Subset analysis was performed for patients undergoing colectomy (total colectomy, partial colectomy and sigmoid colectomy) and separately for patients undergoing rectal surgery (abdominoperineal resection, low anterior resection, and proctocolectomy). We analyzed the data using SAS Platform JMP Pro version 10.0.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, United States).

RESULTS

A total of 94811 patients were identified; the majority underwent OC (58.7%), were white (76.9%), and non-frail (44.8%). The median age was 61.3 years. Prolonged length of stay (LOS) occurred in 4.7%, and 30-d mortality was 2.28%. Patients undergoing OC were older (61.89 ± 15.31 vs 60.55 ± 14.93) and had a higher ASA score (48.3% ASA3 vs 57.7% ASA2 in the LC group) (P < 0.0001). Most patients were non-frail (42.5% OC vs 48% LC, P < 0.0001). Complications, prolonged LOS, and mortality were significantly more common in patients undergoing OC (P < 0.0001). OC had a higher risk of death and complications compared to LC for all frailty scores (non-frail: OR = 4.7, and OR = 4.67; mildly frail: OR = 2.51, and OR = 2.47; moderately frail: OR = 2.94, and OR = 2.02, severely frail: OR = 2.37, and OR = 2.34, P < 0.05) and an increase in absolute mortality with increasing frailty (non-frail 0.68% OC, mildly frail 1.39%, moderately frail 3.44%, and severely frail 5.83%, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

LC is associated with improved outcomes. Although the odds of mortality are higher in non-frail, there is a progressive increase in mortality with increasing frailty.

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.

Laparoscopic vs open partial colectomy in elderly patients: Insights from the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database

AIM

To compare the outcomes between the laparoscopic and open approaches for partial colectomy in elderly patients aged 65 years and over using the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database.

METHODS

The ACS NSQIP database for the years 2005-2011 was queried for all patients 65 years and above who underwent partial colectomy. 1:1 propensity score matching using the nearest- neighbor method was performed to ensure both groups had similar pre-operative comorbidities. Outcomes including post-operative complications, length of stay and mortality were compared between the laparoscopic and open groups. χ(2) and Fisher's exact test were used for discrete variables and Student's t-test for continuous variables. P < 0.05 was considered significant and odds ratios with 95%CI were reported when applicable.

RESULTS

The total number of patients in the ACS NSQIP database of the years 2005-2011 was 1777035. We identified 27604 elderly patients who underwent partial colectomy with complete data sets. 12009 (43%) of the cases were done laparoscopically and 15595 (57%) were done with open. After propensity score matching, there were 11008 patients each in the laparoscopic (LC) and open colectomy (OC) cohorts. The laparoscopic approach had lower post-operative complications (LC 15.2%, OC 23.8%, P < 0.001), shorter length of stay (LC 6.61 d, OC 9.62 d, P < 0.001) and lower mortality (LC 1.6%, OC 2.9%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Even after propensity score matching, elderly patients in the ACS NSQIP database having a laparoscopic partial colectomy had better outcomes than those having open colectomies. In the absence of specific contraindications, elderly patients requiring a partial colectomy should be offered the laparoscopic approach.

Incisional and port-site hernias following robotic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The association between extraction site location, robotic trocar size, and the incidence of incisional hernias in robotic colorectal surgery remain unclear. Laparoscopic literature reports variable rates of incisional hernias versus open surgery, and variable rates of trocar site hernias. However, conclusions from these studies are confusing due to heterogeneity in closure techniques and may not be generalized to robotic cases. This study evaluates the effect of extraction site location on incisional hernia rates, as well as trocar hernia rates in robotic colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of multiport and single incision robotic colorectal surgeries from a single institution was performed. Patients underwent subtotal, segmental, or proctocolectomies, and were compared based on the extraction site through either a muscle-splitting (MS) or midline (ML) incision. Hernias were identified by imaging and/or physical exam. Demographics and risk factors for hernias were assessed. Groups were compared using a multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The study included 259 colorectal surgery patients comprising 146 with MS and 113 with ML extraction sites. Postoperative computed tomograms were performed on 155 patients (59.8 %) with a mean follow-up of 16.5 months. The overall incisional hernia rate was 5.8 %. A significantly higher hernia rate was found among the ML group compared to the MS group (12.4 vs. 0.68 %, p < 0.0001). Of the known risk factors assessed, only increased BMI was associated with incisional hernias (OR 1.18). No trocar site hernias were found.

CONCLUSION

Midline extraction sites are associated with a significantly increased rate of incisional hernias compared to muscle-splitting extraction sites. There is little evidence to recommend fascia closure of 8-mm trocar sites.

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal prolapse and pelvic floor disorders

Pelvic floor disorders are different dysfunctions of gynaecological, urinary or anorectal organs, which can present as incontinence, outlet-obstruction and organ prolapse or as a combination of these symptoms. Pelvic floor disorders affect a substantial amount of people, predominantly women. Transabdominal procedures play a major role in the treatment of these disorders. With the development of new techniques established open procedures are now increasingly performed laparoscopically. Operation techniques consist of various rectopexies with suture, staples or meshes eventually combined with sigmoid resection. The different approaches need to be measured by their operative and functional outcome and their recurrence rates. Although these operations are performed frequently a comparison and evaluation of the different methods is difficult, as most of the used outcome measures in the available studies have not been standardised and data from randomised studies comparing these outcome measures directly are lacking. Therefore evidence based guidelines do not exist. Currently the laparoscopic approach with ventral mesh rectopexy or resection rectopexy is the two most commonly used techniques. Observational and retrospective studies show good functional results, a low rate of complications and a low recurrence rate. As high quality evidence is missing, an individualized approach is recommend for every patient considering age, individual health status and the underlying morphological and functional disorders.