Minimally Invasive Cancer Surgery: Indications and Outcomes

Oncological Horizons: The Synergy of Medical and Surgical Innovations in Cancer Treatment

The landscape of cancer treatment has witnessed a remarkable transformation in recent years, marked by the convergence of medical and surgical innovations. Historically, cancer therapy faced challenges, including limited efficacy and severe side effects. This narrative review explores the historical progression of cancer treatments, shedding light on significant breakthroughs in both medical and surgical oncology. It comprehensively addresses the medical domain, covering chemotherapy, targeted therapies, immunotherapy, hormonal treatments, and radiological procedures. Simultaneously, it delves into the surgical realm, discussing the evolution of surgical techniques, minimally invasive procedures, and the role of surgery across various stages of cancer. The article emphasizes the fusion of medical and surgical approaches, highlighting neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies and the significance of multidisciplinary tumor boards. It also addresses innovations, challenges, and the pivotal role of patient-centered care. Furthermore, it offers insights into the future directions and forecasts in the constantly evolving field of integrated oncological care. This review provides a comprehensive understanding of the dynamic and transformative nature of cancer treatment, reflecting the unwavering commitment of the medical and surgical communities in the ongoing fight against cancer.

The Atlantic divide: contrasting surgical robotics training in the USA, UK and Ireland

The uptake of robotic surgery is rapidly increasing worldwide across surgical specialties. However, there is currently a much higher use of robotic surgery in the United States of America (USA) compared to the United Kingdom (UK) and Ireland. Reduced exposure to robotic surgery in training may lead to longer learning curves and worse patient outcomes. We aimed to identify whether any difference exists in exposure to robotic surgery during general surgical training between trainees in the USA, UK and Ireland. Over a 15-week period from September 2021, a survey was distributed through the professional networks of the research team. Participants were USA, UK or Irish trainees who were part of a formal general surgical training curriculum. 116 survey responses were received. US trainees (n = 34) had all had robotic simulator experience, compared to only 37.93% of UK (n = 58) and 75.00% of Irish (n = 24) trainees (p <  0.00001). 91.18% of US trainees had performed 15 or more cases as the console surgeon, compared to only 3.44% of UK and 16.67% of Irish trainees (p <  0.00001). Fifty UK trainees (86.21%) and 22 Irish trainees (91.67%) compared to 12 US trainees (35.29%) do not think they have had adequate robotics training (p <  0.00001). Surgical trainees in the USA have had significantly more exposure to training in robotic surgery than their UK and Irish counterparts.

Health-related quality of life and oncologic outcomes after surgery in older adults with colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Data regarding changes in functional status and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) before and after surgery are lacking. We identified colorectal cancer patients from the SEER-Medicare Health Outcomes Survey (MHOS) linked database to evaluate the association between HRQOL and survival.

METHODS

HRQOL survey data captured physical/mental health, activities of daily living (ADLs), and medical comorbidities. Patients who underwent surgery with HRQOL surveys prior to cancer diagnosis and ≥ 1 year after diagnosis were selected. Patient, disease, and HRQOL measures were analyzed in regard to overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and non-DSS.

RESULTS

Of 590 patients included, 55% were female, 75% were Caucasian, and 83% had colonic primary. Disease extent was localized for 52%, regional for 41%, and distant for 7%. Median OS was 83 months. Decreased OS was independently associated with age ≥ 75 (HR 1.7, p < 0.0001), male sex (HR 1.4, p = 0.011), advanced disease (regional-HR 2.0, p < 0.0001; distant-HR 7.0, p < 0.0001), and decreased mental HRQOL (HR 1.4, p = 0.005). Decreased DSS was independently associated with advanced disease (regional-HR 4.1, p < 0.0001; distant-HR 16.5, p < 0.0001) and rectal primary (HR 1.6, p = 0.047). Decreased non-DSS was independently associated with age ≥ 75 (HR 2.2, p < 0.0001), male sex (HR 1.4, p = 0.03), decreased mental HRQOL (HR 1.4, p = 0.02), and increased comorbidities (HR 1.4, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The potential overall survival benefit of oncologic surgery is diminished by declines in physical and mental health. Early identification of older surgical patients at risk for functional and HRQOL declines may improve survival following colorectal cancer surgery.

Safety and efficacy for robot-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the clinical safety and efficacy of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RAPD) or robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RADP) with open surgery.

METHODS

Multiple databases (PubMed, Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) were searched to identify studies comparing the outcomes of RAPD and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) or RADP and open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) (up to December 31, 2017). Fixed and random effects models were applied according to different conditions.

RESULTS

Fifteen non-randomized controlled trials (11 RAPD vs. OPD and 4 RADP vs. ODP) involving 3690 patients were included. Robot-assisted surgery had longer operative time (RAPD vs. OPD: P = 0.0005; RADP vs. ODP: P < 0.00001) but lesser blood loss than open surgery (RAPD vs. OPD: P = 0.0009; RADP vs. ODP: P = 0.0007). RAPD was associated with less wound infection, a lower positive margin rate, lower overall complications, and faster postoperative off-bed activity. There was no significant difference in the lymph node yield, the rate of pancreatic fistula, delayed gastric emptying, reoperation, length of hospital stay and mortality between the two groups. Compared with ODP, RADP was associated with less blood transfusion, fewer lymph nodes harvested, lower complications and shorter hospital stay. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of spleen preservation, positive margin, pancreatic fistula, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted surgery is a safe and feasible alternative to OPD and ODP with regard to perioperative outcomes. However, due to the lack of high-quality randomized controlled trials, the evidence is still limited.

A Pilot Study for a Better Visibility in the 3D Laparoscopic Right Colectomy Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of digital defog technique in 3D laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer.

METHODS

Fifty patients with right colon cancer were divided into digital defogging group and control group. The intraoperative image clarity, the surgeon's anxiety, the time of operation and the time of fog nursing were compared.

RESULTS

The clarity of the video screen of the digital defogging group was significantly higher than that of the control group, and the degree of anxiety was significantly lower than that of the control group. The operative time was (136.4 ± 30.4) min in the digital defogging group, the operation time of the control group was (168.7 ± 32.7) min, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The time of dehumidification was (4.8 ± 1.3) min in the digital defogging group and (16.3 ± 4.6) min in the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Digital defogging technology in the 3D laparoscopic right colon cancer surgery significantly improves the clarity of video images, reduces the surgeon due to screen clarity caused by anxiety, reduces the operation of right colon cancer time and reduces the time to fog care.