Trends and outcomes in laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer from 2005 to 2016 using the ACS-NSQIP database, a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg. 2019;63:71-76. [PMID: 30771485 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2019.02.006]

Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has been endorsed by clinical guidelines for colon cancer, but not for rectal cancer on account of unapproved oncologic equivalence with open surgery.

AIMS

We started this largest-to-date meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy in the treatment of rectal cancer compared with open surgery.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Both randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic proctectomy and open surgery between January 1990 and March 2020 were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase Databases (PROSPERO registration number CRD42020211718). The data of intraoperative, pathological, postoperative and survival outcomes were compared between two groups.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs and 93 NRCTs including 216,615 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with 48,888 patients received laparoscopic surgery and 167,727 patients underwent open surgery. Compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery group showed faster recovery, less complications and decreased mortality within 30 days. The positive rate of circumferential margin (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72 to 0.85, p < 0.0001) and distal margin (RR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.85 p < 0.0001) was significantly reduced in the laparoscopic surgery group, but the completeness of total mesorectal excision showed no significant difference. The 3-year and 5-year local recurrence, disease-free survival and overall survival were all improved in the laparoscopic surgery group, while the distal recurrence did not differ significantly between the two approaches.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy is non-inferior to open surgery for rectal cancer with respect to oncological outcomes and long-term survival. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery provides short-term advantages, including faster recovery and less complications.

Laparoscopic rectal cancer resection yields comparable clinical and oncological results with shorter hospital stay compared to open access: a 5-year national cohort

PURPOSE

Although widely applied, the results following laparoscopic rectal resection (LRR) compared to open rectal resection (ORR) are still debated. The aim of this study was to assess clinical short- and long-term results as well as oncological resection quality following LRR or ORR for cancer in a 5-year national cohort.

METHODS

Data from the Norwegian Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery and the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Registry were retrieved from January 2014 to December 2018 for patients who underwent elective resection for rectal cancer. Primary end point was 5-year overall survival. Secondary end points were local recurrence rates within 5 years, oncological resection quality, and short-term outcome measures.

RESULTS

A total of 1796 patients were included, of whom 1284 had undergone LRR and 512 ORR. There was no difference in 5-year survival rates between the groups after adjusting for relevant covariates with Cox regression analyses. Crude 5-year survival was 77.1% following LRR compared to 74.8% following ORR (p = 0.015). The 5-year local recurrence rates were 3.1% following LRR and 4.1% following ORR (p = 0.249). Length of hospital stay was median 8.0 days (quartiles 7.0-13.0) after ORR compared to 6.0 (quartiles 4.0-8.0) days after LRR. After adjusting for relevant covariates, estimated additional length of stay after ORR was 3.1 days (p < 0.001, 95% CI 2.3-3.9). Rates of positive resection margins and number of harvested lymph nodes were similar. There were no other significant differences in short-term outcomes between the groups.

CONCLUSION

LRR was performed with clinical and oncological outcomes similar to ORR, but with shorter hospital stay.

Surgical outcomes and factors associated with postoperative complications of colorectal cancer in a Colombian Caribbean population: Results from a regional referral hospital

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer is the most common malignant neoplasm of the gastrointestinal tract. Its incidence and mortality vary markedly at a global level. Assessing the epidemiological behavior of this condition allows reevaluating diagnostic, therapeutic and prognostic options, based on new findings. In Colombia, few studies have correlated variables associated with surgical and oncological outcomes in this type of cancer. Then, the aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes and factors associated with postoperative complications of colorectal cancer in a Colombian Caribbean Population.

METHODS

Retrospective cross-sectional study, including patients with a histopathological diagnosis of colorectal cancer who underwent open or laparoscopic surgery, during a period of two years (2018-2020), from a regional referral hospital. Clinical history variables were collected. Frequencies and prevalence ratios were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were finally included. Adenocarcinoma of non-special type with advanced clinical stages was the most prevalent (72.6%). Rectal neoplasia (45.2%) was the most frequent anatomical subsite, followed by proximal colon (p = 0.026). The anatomical subsite of the neoplasm, intraoperative complication (PR 1.38; 95% CI, 1.21-1.59, p = 0.001) and intensive care stay (PR 1.062; 95% CI, 1.01-1.12, p = 0.048) were associated with postoperative outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The anatomical subsite of the neoplasm location, the presence of intraoperative complications and the stay in intensive care may be associated with the surgical and oncological outcome of individuals with colon cancer from the Colombian Caribbean region.

The learning curve of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery of millennial surgeons: Lessons for a safe implementation in low- and middle-income countries

Objective

This study aimed to analyse the learning curve (LC) in laparoscopic rectal cancer resections of 2 millennial surgeons during the implementation of the first laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery programme in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) cancer centre.

Methods

All consecutive patients operated by two millennial surgeons for primary rectal adenocarcinoma between January 2018 and March 2020 were included. The LC was analysed for operative duration and conversion to open surgery using both cumulative sum (CUSUM) and/or variable life-adjusted display (VLAD) charts.

Results

Eighty-four patients were included, 45 (53.6%) men with a mean age of 57.3 years. Abdominoperineal resection was performed in 31 (36.9%) cases and resections were extended to other organs in 20 (23.8%) patients. Thirteen patients (15.5%) had conversion to open surgery. Using CUSUM, Learning curve based on conversion was completed at 12 cases for the first surgeon versus 10 cases for the second. While using VLAD and learning curve-CUSUM (LC-CUSUM), the cases needed were 26 vs 24 respectively. The median operative duration was 314 min with a LC completed at cases (17 vs. 26), and (18 vs. 29) using, respectively, standard and LC-CUSUM.

Conclusions

This study shows a safe and short LC of millennial surgeons during the implementation of a laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery in an LMIC cancer centre, and the valuable use of modern statistical methods in the prospective assessment of LC safety during surgical training.

Obesity and narrow pelvis prolong the operative time in conventional laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, but not in a two-team transanal total mesorectal excision approach

PURPOSE

Narrow pelvis, tumor diameter, and obesity have been reported as clinical variables correlated with the difficulty of conventional laparoscopic low anterior resection (Lap-LAR). A two-team transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) approach where the transabdominal and TaTME are performed simultaneously might reduce the difficulty associated with these factors. This study aimed to clarify the factors associated with the longer time required for TME (TME time) in conventional Lap-LAR and a two-team approach for TaTME.

METHODS

We analyzed 52 patients with rectal carcinoma treated with Lap-LAR and 35 patients treated with TaTME. We performed simple linear regression analysis to assess the association between TME time and bony pelvic size using 3D pelvimetry, longest tumor diameter, and body mass index (BMI).

RESULTS

Linear regression analysis demonstrated a highly significant association between TME time and obstetric conjugate (R²  = 0.098, P = .024) and BMI (R²  = 0.307, P < .001) in the Lap-LAR group, while no significant association was observed in the TaTME group. Male patients, who had a narrower bony pelvis and higher BMI than female patients, had longer TME time than female patients in the Lap-LAR group (213 minutes vs 172 minutes, P = .021), while the TME time of male and female patients did not differ in the TaTME group (122 minutes vs 108 minutes, P = .451). The TME time in the TaTME group was significantly shorter than that in the Lap-LAR group (121 minutes vs 197 minutes, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

A two-team TaTME approach provided a shorter TME time compared to conventional Lap-LAR, regardless of pelvic size and BMI.

Analysis of bowel function, urogenital function, and long-term follow-up outcomes associated with robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgical approaches to total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The present study comparatively analyzed short-term clinical effectiveness and long-term follow-up endpoints associated with robotic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (RAS) and laparoscopic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (LAS) when used to treat low rectal cancer.

METHOD

Within such a single-center retrospective cohort analysis, low rectal cancer patients that underwent RAS (n=200) or LAS (n=486) between January 2015 and beginning of July 2018 were enrolled.

RESULTS

The mean operative durations in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 249±64 min and 203±47 min, respectively (P<0.001). Temporary ileostomy rates in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 64.5% and 51.6% (P = 0.002). In addition, major variations across such cohorts regarding catheter removal timing, time to liquid intake, time to first leaving bed, and length of hospitalization (all P<0.001). This distal resection margin distance within the RAS cohort was diminished in comparison to LAS cohort (P=0.004). For patients within the LAS cohort, the time required to recover from reduced urinary/female sexual function was > 6 months post-surgery (P<0.0001), whereas within the RAS cohort this interval was 3 months (P<0.0001). At 6 months post-surgery, male sexual function within RAS cohort was improved in comparison to LAS cohort (P<0.001). At 6 months post-surgery, Wexner scores revealed similar results (P<0.001). No major variations within overall or disease-free survival were identified across these cohorts at 3 or 5 years post-surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic sphincter-preserving surgery is a safe and effective surgical technique in low rectal patients in terms of postoperative oncological safety and long-term endpoints. And the RAS strategy provides certain additional benefits with respect to short-term urogenital/anorectal functional recovery in treated patients compared to LAS.

Increasing rates of laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery and decreasing rates of surgical site infections: an observational study in Japan from 2012-2017

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSI) are the most common healthcare-associated infection, and gastrointestinal surgery is frequently followed by a high incidence of SSI. Epidemiological analysis of the temporal trends in SSI following gastrointestinal surgery has yet to be performed in Japan. Our purpose was to descriptively investigate these trends.

METHODS

Extracting national surveillance data from the Japan Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (JANIS) system, we analyzed the frequency of SSI events following gastrointestinal surgery, which consisted of seven surgical procedures, from 2012-2017. We calculated the standardized infection ratio to compute risk-adjusted SSI frequency, and used the trend test to detect time-dependent changes.

RESULTS

The frequency of SSI events, except for those associated with surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract, revealed a decreasing time-dependent trend. The use of laparoscopic surgery increased dramatically over time (p < 0.01 for the six applicable surgical sites), while the frequency of SSI events during laparoscopic surgery remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing use of laparoscopic surgery was identified, and the observation coincided with the decreasing trend in SSI, especially in lower gastrointestinal tract surgery. If the relationship is causal, the overall SSI incidence among previously healthy individuals is expected to decrease, because the use of laparoscopic surgery has large growth potential in Japan.

Lower conversion rate with robotic assisted rectal resections compared with conventional laparoscopy; a national cohort study

Background

Conversion from laparoscopic to open access colorectal surgery is associated with a poorer postoperative outcome. The aim of this study was to assess conversion rates and outcomes after standard laparoscopic rectal resection (LR) and robotic laparoscopic rectal resection (RR).

Methods

A national 5-year cohort study utilizing prospectively recorded data on patients who underwent elective major laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. Data were retrieved from the Norwegian Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery and from the Norwegian Colorectal Cancer Registry. Primary end point was conversion rate. Secondary end points were postoperative complications within 30 days and histopathological results. Chi-square test, two-sided T test, and Mann–Whitney U test were used for univariable analyses. Both univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to analyze the relations between different predictors and outcomes, and propensity score matching was performed to address potential treatment assignment bias.

Results

A total of 1284 patients were included, of whom 375 underwent RR and 909 LR. Conversion rate was 8 out of 375 (2.1%) for RR compared with 87 out of 909 (9.6%) for LR (p < 0.001). RR was associated with reduced risk for conversion compared with LR (aOR 0.22, 95% CI 0.10–0.46). There were no other outcome differences between RR and LR. Factors associated with increased risk for conversion were male gender, severe cardiac disease and BMI > 30. Conversion was associated with higher rates of major complications (20 out of 95 (21.2%) vs 135 out of 1189 (11.4%) p = 0.005), reoperations (13 out of 95 (13.7%) vs 93 out of 1189 (7.1%) p = 0.020), and longer hospital stay (median 8 days vs 6 days, p = 0.001).

Conclusion

Conversion rate was lower with robotic assisted rectal resections compared with conventional laparoscopy. Conversions were associated with higher rates of postoperative complications.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic low anterior resection: A single-center retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a serious complication affecting short-term and long-term outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. While laparoscopic low anterior resection is a widespread procedure, the risk factors for AL are not well established. This study aimed to evaluate risk factors for AL after laparoscopic low anterior resection with double stapling technique (DST) anastomosis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of laparoscopic low anterior resection with DST anastomosis for rectal cancer between January 2010 and February 2019. Finally, a total of 1197 patients were eligible for the study. Twenty-five variables were collected for univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

AL occurred in 49 patients (4.1%). In multivariate analysis, blood loss (≥70 mL) and no defunctioning stoma were independent risk factors (odds ratio [OR] 2.23; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-4.34; P = .030 and OR 3.15; 95% CI 1.66-6.37; P = .0003, respectively). In addition, risk factors for AL were analyzed in 601 patients without defunctioning stoma. As a result, AL occurred in 36 patients (6.0%) and multivariate analysis demonstrated that blood loss (≥70 mL) and anastomotic level from anal verge (<5 cm) were independent risk factors (OR 3.11; 95% CI 1.24-7.44; P = .016 and OR 2.33; 95% CI 1.14-4.69; P = .020, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic low anterior resection is feasible and safe with a low AL rate. Important factors associated with AL were blood loss and defunctioning stoma. Without defunctioning stoma, blood loss and distal anastomosis are also important factors.

Anatomical framework for pre-operative planning of laparoscopic left-sided colorectal surgery: Potential relevance of the distance between the inferior mesenteric artery and inferior mesenteric vein

BACKGROUND

The medial-to-lateral approach is favored by most colorectal surgeons for laparoscopic retroperitoneal dissection and mobilisation of the left colon. The peritoneal access window, i.e. the distance between the inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) and inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) must be large enough to perform the procedure safely and successfully. However, studies investigating the IMA-IMV distance and factors affecting this variable, are scarce. Therefore, we examined the IMA-IMV and D3-IMA distances to determine an anatomical framework on planning and adapting surgical therapy.

BASIC PROCEDURES

The IMA-IMV and D3-IMA distances were retrospectively measured in 230 patients (127 Male/103 Female, Median Age=54.5) who had undergone pre-operative CT-scanning before laparoscopic left-sided colorectal surgery. Two observers rated the images and interrater reliability was calculated. Subgroup, simple and multiple linear regression analyses were performed in order to detect potential interaction between morphometric variables and IMA-IMV distance.

MAIN FINDINGS

We demonstrated a significant correlation between the inferior margin of the duodenum and the origin of IMA. Determination of the IMA-IMV distance was simple and reproducible. Approximately 45% of patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal procedures had a narrow distance (≤50mm). There was a sexual dimorphism in IMA-IMV distance, being consistently large in males. There were no other pre-operative factors which predicted whether the peritoneal dissection window for a medial-to-lateral approach was sufficient.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results provide new data for a better understanding of metric variations in abdominal vascular structures and complement previous observations. In view of our results, we recommend pre-operative measurement of the IMA-IMV before colorectal surgery where the medial-to-lateral approach is planned. Given that a narrow distance may predict a difficult dissection, this factor should be taken into account to determine the optimal surgical approach in each patient.

Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): 10-year follow-up of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has been widely used for rectal cancer; however, its long-term outcomes remain controversial. This study aimed to assess the long-term oncological safety of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer using 10-year follow-up data of the Comparison of Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low REctal cancer After Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN) trial.

METHODS

The COREAN trial is a, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Eligible participants were aged 18-80 years, had cT3N0-2M0 middle or low rectal cancer with lesions located within 9 cm of the anal verge, and had been treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to open or laparoscopic surgery with a computer-generated random allocation sequence with a random permuted block design. Neither patients nor clinicians were masked to treatment assignment. Open or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision was done 6-8 weeks after the administration of preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (fluoropyrimidines alone, doublet therapy, or triplet therapy) at a dose of 50·5 Gy over 5·5 weeks. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy was administered for 4 months. The primary endpoint of 3-year disease-free survival was published previously. Here, we report 10-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence. Analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population of all participants who were randomly assigned and provided follow-up data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00470951.

FINDINGS

Of the 340 patients enrolled in the COREAN trial between April 4, 2006, and Aug 26, 2009 (170 patients in each group), two patients in the laparoscopic surgery group moved abroad and were lost to follow-up, so were not included in this 10-year analysis. The median duration of follow-up was 143 months (IQR 122-156). No differences were observed in 10-year overall survival (74·1% [95% CI 66·8-80·0] in the open surgery group vs 76·8% [69·6-82·5] in the laparoscopic surgery group; p=0·44), 10-year disease-free survival (59·3% [51·1-66·5] vs 64·3% [56·0-71·5]; p=0·20), or 10-year local recurrence (8·9% [5·2-15·0] vs 3·4% [1·4-7·9]; p=0·050) between the open surgery and laparoscopic surgery groups at 10 years after surgery. The stratified hazard ratios, adjusted for ypT and ypN classification and tumour regression grade, for open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery were 0·94 (95% CI 0·63-1·43) for overall survival, 1·05 (0·74-1·49) for disease-free survival, and 2·22 (0·78-6·34) for local recurrence.

INTERPRETATION

The 10-year follow-up of the COREAN trial confirms the long-term oncological safety of laparoscopic surgery in patients with rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Similar to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery does not compromise long-term survival outcomes in rectal cancer when performed by well trained surgeons.

FUNDING

National Cancer Center, Goyang, South Korea.

[Evidence in minimally invasive oncological surgery of the colon and rectum]

An essential component of the treatment of colorectal cancer is a resection of the tumor-bearing segment of the bowels. After the development of minimally invasive procedures the feasibility and safety in oncological, colorectal surgery was questioned. The broad study situation for colon cancer over the last years showed predominantly consistent benefits during the perioperative phase and non-inferiority concerning long-term oncological outcomes. The implementation of laparoscopic rectal resection was more hesitant due to the complexity of the procedure and insufficient study data; however, overall the short-term benefits seem to be maintained and laparoscopic rectal resection is thought to be noninferior to open resection in the long run even though findings on the quality of the resected specimen are heterogeneous. Accordingly, most guidelines now include a recommendation of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. The limitation with respect to an achievable oncological equivalency of resection takes account of the complexity and the requirements of the intervention only in the setting of rational selection of patients and sufficient experience of the surgeon.

Impact of BMI on Adverse Events After Laparoscopic and Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

The impact of body mass index (BMI) on outcomes after open or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remains unclear. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to examine the interaction of body mass index and surgical modality (i.e., laparoscopy versus open) with respect to short-term clinical outcomes in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP database (2012-2016) was reviewed for patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause morbidity. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 16,145 patients were grouped into open (N = 6759, 42%) and laparoscopic (N  = 9386, 58%) cohorts. Patients with higher BMI (p < 0.001) and those undergoing open surgery (p < 0.001) were at increased risk of all-cause morbidity. There was no significant change in the odds ratio of experiencing all-cause morbidity between open and laparoscopic surgery with increasing BMI (p = 0.572). Median length of stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group (4 days vs. 6 days; p < 0.001), at the cost of increased operative time (239 min vs. 210 min, p < 0.001). The difference in operative time between laparoscopy and open surgery did not increase with rising BMI (i.e., ∆37 min vs. ∆39 min at BMI 25 kg/m² vs 50 kg/m², respectively, p = 0.491).

CONCLUSION

BMI may not be a strong modifier for surgical approach with respect to short-term clinical outcomes in patients with obesity and rectal cancer. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with improved short-term clinical outcomes, without much change in the absolute difference in operative time compared with open surgery, even at higher BMIs.

One-stitch method vs. traditional method of protective loop ileostomy for rectal cancer: the impact of BMI obesity

PURPOSE

Protective loop ileostomy is an effective diversion measure often used to reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes of the one-stitch method (OM) of protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior resection for BMI obesity patients with rectal cancer compared with the traditional method (TM).

METHODS

The patients diagnosed as rectal adenocarcinoma cases by preoperative pathology were included in this retrospective study. The subjects underwent protective loop ileostomy in laparoscopic low anterior resection from January 2016 to June 2019 in the Shandong Provincial Hospital affiliated to Shandong University. The data of loop ileostomy and stoma closure operation were retrieved from the medical cases system of the hospital.

RESULTS

242 patients were included in the present study. In the BMI obese cohort, the OM group showed a shorter operative time both in the loop ileostomy (232.5 vs. 250.0 min, p = 0.04) and stoma closure operation (102.5 vs. 115.0 min, p = 0.001) and a lower peristomal adhesion extent (p = 0.02) and a shorter median postoperative stay (6 vs. 7 days, p = 0.03) during stoma closure operation than that of the TM group. In the TM group, obese cases showed a higher operative time of stoma closure operation (115.0 vs. 95.0, p < 0.001), a higher parastomal hernia rate (p = 0.04), a higher peristomal adhesion extent (p = 0.005) and a longer postoperative stay of stoma closure operation (p = 0.02) compared with the non-obese cases, while in the OM group, no significant differences were observed between the obese and non-obese cases in terms of the above-mentioned factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The OM exhibited more advantages than TM, notably in BMI obesity patients.

Do specific operative approaches and insurance status impact timely access to colorectal cancer care?

INTRODUCTION

The increased use of minimally invasive surgery in the management of colorectal cancer has led to a renewed focus on how certain factors, such as insurance status, impact the equitable distribution of both laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Our goal was to analyze surgical wait times between robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches, and to determine whether insurance status impacts timely access to treatment.

METHODS

After IRB approval, adult patients from the National Cancer Database with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer were identified (2010-2016). Patients who underwent radiation therapy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, had wait times of 0 days from diagnosis to surgery, or had metastatic disease were excluded. Primary outcomes were days from cancer diagnosis to surgery and days from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy. Multivariable Poisson regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Among 324,784 patients, 5.9% underwent robotic, 47.5% laparoscopic, and 46.7% open surgery. Patients undergoing robotic surgery incurred the longest wait times from diagnosis to surgery (29.5 days [robotic] vs. 21.7 [laparoscopic] vs. 17.2 [open], p < 0.001), but the shortest wait times from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy (48.9 days [robotic] vs. 49.9 [laparoscopic] vs. 54.8 [open], p < 0.001). On adjusted analysis, robotic surgery was associated with a 1.46 × longer wait time to surgery (IRR 1.462, 95% CI 1.458-1.467, p < 0.001), but decreased wait time to adjuvant chemotherapy (IRR 0.909, 95% CI 0.905-0.913, p < 0.001) compared to an open approach. Private insurance was associated with decreased wait times to surgery (IRR 0.966, 95% CI 0.962-0.969, p < 0.001) and adjuvant chemotherapy (IRR 0.862, 95% CI 0.858-0.865, p < 0.001) compared to Medicaid.

CONCLUSION

Though patients undergoing robotic surgery experienced delays from diagnosis to surgery, they tended to initiate adjuvant chemotherapy sooner compared to those undergoing open or laparoscopic approaches. Private insurance was independently associated not only with access to robotic surgery, but also shorter wait times during all stages of treatment.

Role of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer

Rectal cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Surgical resection for rectal cancer usually requires a proctectomy with respective lymphadenectomy (total mesorectal excision). This has traditionally been performed transabdominally through an open incision. Over the last thirty years, minimally invasive surgery platforms have rapidly evolved with the goal to accomplish the same quality rectal resection through a less invasive approach. There are currently three resective modalities that complement the traditional open operation: (1) Laparoscopic surgery; (2) Robotic surgery; and (3) Transanal total mesorectal excision. In addition, there are several platforms to carry out transluminal local excisions (without lymphadenectomy). Evidence on the various modalities is of mixed to moderate quality. It is unreasonable to expect a randomized comparison of all options in a single trial. This review aims at reviewing in detail the various techniques in regard to intra-/perioperative benchmarks, recovery and complications, oncological and functional outcomes.

A comparative analysis of outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic elective (procto-) colectomies for benign and malignant disease

Laparoscopy has emerged as a common alternative to the open approach for colorectal operations. Robotic surgery has many advantages, but cost and outcomes are an area of study. There are no randomized-controlled trials of all techniques. The present study evaluated a cohort of veterans undergoing (procto-) colectomy for benign or malignant colorectal disease. This is a single-institution retrospective review. We compared open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomies. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. The secondary endpoints included morbidity, operative times, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), conversion rate, and the learning curve (LC). Subgroup analyses were undertaken for: (1) right hemicolectomies (RHC) and (2) by specific surgeons most familiar with each approach. The cohort included 390 patients (men = 95%, White = 70.8%, BMI = 29.3 ± 6.4 kg/m², age = 63.7 ± 10.2 years) undergoing (open = 117, laparoscopic = 168, and robotic = 105), colorectal operations for colorectal adenocarcinoma (52.8%) and benign disease. Thirty-day morbidity was similar across all techniques (open = 46.2%, laparoscopic = 42.9%, and robotic = 38.1%; NS). EBL and LOS were decreased with minimally invasive techniques compared to open. Operative time was longer in robotic, but equalized to laparoscopic after 90 cases. The learning curve was reduced to 20 when performed by the surgeon most familiar with the robot. EBL and operative time independently predicted complications for the entire cohort. The best technique for colorectal operations rests on the surgeon's experience, but minimally invasive techniques are gaining momentum over open colectomies. Robotic colectomy is emerging as a non-inferior approach to laparoscopy in terms of outcomes, while maintaining all its technical advantages.

Sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics associated with blood donation in the United States: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Contemporary population-based data on characteristics associated with blood donation in the United States (U.S.) are limited.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A cross-sectional analysis was performed among 28,739 persons aged 18 years and older who participated in the 2016 National Health Interview Survey, a household survey of the noninstitutionalized U.S. civilian population. Analyses were weighted and accounted for the complex survey design. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) were estimated by multivariable log-binomial regression.

RESULTS

The percentage of individuals reporting a past-year history of blood donation was 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.3%-6.1%) and was highest in the youngest age group (18-24 years, 8.4%). A past-year history of blood donation was more common in males compared to females (6.3% vs. 5.1%; aPR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.99-1.27]) and those born in the U.S. compared to individuals born outside the U.S. (6.4% vs. 2.4%; aPR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.49-2.47]). The percentage of individuals with a past-year history of blood donation was significantly lower in blacks (3.9%; aPR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.47-0.75]) and Hispanics (3.0%; aPR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.48-0.83]) in comparison to whites (6.9%). Being a college graduate, being employed, being physically active, and never being a cigarette smoker were factors positively associated with blood donation. The percentage of individuals with a past-year history of blood donation varied by geographic census region, with prevalence being higher in the Midwest (7.3%) and South (6.0%) compared to the Northeast (4.7%) and West (4.4%).

CONCLUSION

Continued differences in the blood donor population with reference to the U.S. population underscore the need to understand barriers or deterrents to blood donation. Evidence-based donor recruitment and related policies remain imperative to ensure that there is a sustainable blood supply.