Laparoscopic colon surgery: past, present and future

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Between Laparoscopic and Open Surgery in Colorectal Cancer Patients

Aim

Our research compares the clinical results of open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal malignancies.

Materials and Methods

Our analysis focused on a database that included data on patients with colorectal cancer who had laparoscopic or open surgery for stages I to III at a prestigious healthcare institute in India. Two groups of 50 patients underwent laparoscopic and 50 underwent conventional open colorectal surgery (OCRS and LCRS, respectively) throughout the same time. Patient demographics, operation data, initial postoperative outcomes, follow-up appointments, pathology results, and cancer stages were examined.

Results

The LCRS group had a much longer operation time compared to the OCRS. Subjects in the LCRS group experienced a notably accelerated recovery after surgery. The hospital stay for the OCRS group was considerably longer compared to that in the LCRS group.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is a reliable and convenient alternative to the traditional open approach, providing comparable oncological efficacy.

Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Rectal Cancer Compared with Open and Laparoscopic Surgery

With increasing trends for the adoption of robotic surgery, many centers are considering changing their practices from open or laparoscopic to robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer. We compared the outcomes of robot-assisted rectal resection with those of open and laparoscopic surgery. We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases until October 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing robotic surgery with open or laparoscopic rectal resection were included. Fifteen RCTs and 11 prospective studies involving 6922 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that robotic surgery has lower blood loss, less surgical site infection, shorter hospital stays, and higher negative resection margins than open resection. Robotic surgery also has lower conversion rates, lower blood loss, lower rates of reoperation, and higher negative circumferential margins than laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery had longer operation times and higher costs than open and laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences in other complications, mortality, and survival between robotic surgery and the open or laparoscopic approach. However, heterogeneity between studies was moderate to high in some analyses. The robotic approach can be the method of choice for centers planning to change from open to minimally invasive rectal surgery. The higher costs of robotic surgery should be considered as a substitute for laparoscopic surgery (PROSPERO: CRD42022381468).

Task Autonomy of a Flexible Endoscopic System for Laser-Assisted Surgery

Laser beam steering has been widely studied for the automation of surgery. Currently, flexible instruments for laser surgery are operated entirely by surgeons, which keeps the automation of endoluminal surgery at the initial level. This paper introduces the design of a new workflow that enables the task autonomy of laser-assisted surgery in constrained environments such as the gastrointestinal (GI) tract with a flexible continuum robotic system. Unlike current, laser steering systems driven by piezoelectric require the use of high voltage and are risky. This paper describes a tendon-driven 2 mm diameter flexible manipulator integrated with an endoscope to steer the laser beam. By separating its motion from the total endoscopic system, the designed flexible manipulator can automatically manipulate the laser beam. After the surgical site is searched by the surgeon with a master/slave control, a population-based model-free control method is applied for the flexible manipulator to achieve accurate laser beam steering while overcoming the noise from the visual feedback and disturbances from environment during operation. Simulations and experiments are performed with the system and control methods to demonstrate the proposed framework in a simulated constrained environment.

Improved oncologic outcomes with increase of laparoscopic surgery in modified complete mesocolic excision with D3 lymph node dissection for T3/4a colon cancer: results of 1191 consecutive patients during a 10-year period: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic modified complete mesocolic excision (mCME) with D3 lymph node dissection has been performed with increasing frequency, but the oncological safety remains unclear. This study investigated the oncological safety of laparoscopic modified CME with D3 dissection for pT3/4a M0 colon cancer.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with pT3/4a M0 colon cancer undergoing curative colectomy at a comprehensive cancer center between 2004 and 2013 were included. Outcomes were compared between early (2004-2008, n = 450) and late (2009-2014, n = 741) periods. Prognostic factors were investigated by multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 1191 patients were eligible. Median follow-up was 57 months. Laparoscopic surgeries were more common in the late period (early vs late: 53.6% vs. 91.8%, p < 0.01). Patients in the late period showed lower blood loss (20 mL vs. 10 mL, p < 0.01), higher number of harvested lymph nodes (18.1 vs. 21.6, p < 0.01) and fewer patients with < 12 harvested nodes (13.6% vs. 5.8%, p < 0.01). Postoperative complication rates were similar between periods (2.7% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.97). Five-year relapse-free survival rate (RFS) (75.3% vs. 82.7%, p < 0.01) and overall survival rate (OS) (86.9% vs. 91.7%, p = 0.01) were higher in the late period. Multivariate analysis revealed laparoscopic surgery as an independent favorable prognostic factor for both RFS (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.99, p = 0.03) and OS (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.37-0.83, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Improved oncologic outcomes and more frequent laparoscopic surgery during the 10-year period of the study were demonstrated for modified CME with D3 dissection, suggesting the safety of this procedure performed by experienced surgeons for pT3/4a M0 colon cancer.

Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Hype or Hope? (Indian Experience)

The primary goal to achieve cure in oncology is to reduce recurrence, maximize disease-free survival, maintain function, and optimize quality of life. Surgery remains the mainstay treatment modality in rectal cancer. The current trend is to perform least invasive method of doing complex surgeries while not compromising in the oncological of functional outcomes of patients. Total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer surgery entails removal of the rectum with its fascia as an intact unit while preserving surrounding vital structures. The procedure is technically challenging because of the narrow and deep pelvic cavity housing the rectum encased by fatty lymph vascular tissue within the perirectal fascia, distally the anal sphincter complex, and an intimate surrounded by vital structures like ureter, vessels, and nerves. Robotic technology enables overcoming these difficulties caused by complex pelvic anatomy. This system can facilitate better preservation of the pelvic autonomic nerve and thereby achieve favorable postoperative sexual and voiding functions after rectal cancer surgery. The nerve-preserving TME technique includes identification and preservation of the superior hypogastric plexus nerve, bilateral hypogastric nerves, pelvic plexus, and neurovascular bundles.

Laparoscopic major liver resections: Current standards

Laparoscopic liver resection was slow to be adopted in the surgical arena at the beginning as there were major barriers including the fear of gas embolism, risk of excessive blood loss from the inability to control bleeding vessels effectively, suboptimal surgical instruments to perform major liver resection and the concerns about oncological safety of the procedure. However, it has come a long way since the early 1990s when the first successful laparoscopic liver resection was performed, spurring liver surgeons worldwide to start exploring the roles of laparoscopy in major liver resections. Till date, more than 9000 cases have been reported in the literature and the numbers continue to soar as the hepatobiliary surgical communities quickly learn and apply this technique in performing major liver resection. Large bodies of evidence are available in the literature showing that laparoscopic major liver resection can confer improved short-term outcomes in terms of lesser operative morbidities, lesser operative blood loss, lesser post-operative pain and faster recovery with shorter length of hospitalization. On the other hand, there is no compromise in the long-term and oncological outcomes in terms of comparable R₀ resection rate and survival rates of this approach. Many innovations in laparoscopic major hepatectomies for complex operations have also been reported. In this article, we highlight the journey of laparoscopic major hepatectomies, summarize the technical advancement and lessons learnt as well as review the current standards of outcomes for this procedure.

Oncological and surgical result of hepatoma after robot surgery

BACKGROUND

Most liver resections are currently performed using an open approach. Robotic hepatectomy has been suggested as a safe and effective approach for hepatocellular carcinoma; however, studies regarding oncological and surgical outcomes are still limited. Accordingly, we performed this study to compare the surgical and oncological outcomes between robotic and open approaches.

METHODS

Between June, 2013 and July, 2016, a total of 63 HCC patients undergoing robotic hepatectomy, and 177 patients undergoing open hepatectomy were included in this study to assess the surgical and oncological outcomes after hepatectomy. The data of demographic, clinical features, hepatitis profile, tumor characters, TNM stage, surgical type, pathological outcomes, and postoperative results were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The demographic and clinical features of patients with HCC in both groups were statistically comparable. The robotic group had longer operative times (296 ± 84 vs. 182 ± 51 min, p = 0.032). The postoperative complications rate was slightly lower in the robotic group (11.1 vs. 15.3%, p = 0.418). The rate of Ro resection was similar in both groups (93.7 vs. 96%, p = 0.56). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group (6.21 ± 2.06 vs. 8.18 ± 6.99 days, p = 0.001). The overall recurrence rate of HCC was lower in the robotic group (27 vs. 37.3%, p = 0.140). The 1, 2, 3 year disease-free survival rates were 72.5, 64.3, and 61.6%, respectively, for the open group, while they were 77.8, 71.9, and 71.9%, respectively, for the robotic group, (p = 0.325). The 1, 2, 3 year overall survival rates were 95.4, 92.3, and 92.3%, respectively, for the open group, while they were 100, 97.7, and 97.7%, respectively, for the robotic group (p = 0.137).

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery is a safe and feasible procedure for liver resection in selected patients. The oncological and surgical outcomes of robotic hepatectomy were comparable to open surgery. The robotic hepatectomy carried significantly shorter length of hospital stay.

Laparoscopic resection for colorectal diseases: short-term outcomes of a single center

OBJECTIVE

Even though, laparoscopy is not accepted as the current gold standard in colorectal surgery, it can be performed as safely as open surgery. It is also widely accepted that the technique has many advantages. In this study, we evaluated the results of 33 patients with laparoscopic colorectal resection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients who underwent laparoscopic colon surgery between January 2013 and September 2014 in the General Surgery Clinic at Marmara University Hospital were included in the study. Patients were evaluated in terms of their demographic and tumor histopathologic characteristics, type of surgery and early postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic colorectal resection was performed for 33 patients who had malignant or benign lesions. The median age was 60 (35-70), and 18 (55%) were male patients. The majority of the patients (90%) were diagnosed with colorectal adenocarcinoma. Half of the patients were T3 and 67% had N0 stage. The median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 17 (4-28). Negative surgical margins were obtained in all patients. The postoperative hospital stay was 5 (4-16) days. Postoperative early complications were observed in only 5 patients. The majority of complications were treated without the need for surgery. No mortality was recorded in this series of patients.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that laparoscopic colorectal surgery could be performed safely based on its low complication rate, short length of hospital stay, providing sufficient surgical resection and lymph node dissection.

Minimally Invasive Hepatic Surgery

This review provides an overview of the background and progress that has been made in minimally invasive liver surgery. The essential steps of minimally invasive right and left lobectomy as well as left lateral sectionectomy are reviewed. In addition, existing data regarding the feasibility and oncologic outcomes of minimally invasive hepatic resection for malignancy are discussed.

Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Resection in High-Volume Surgical Centers: Long-Term Outcomes from the LAPCOLON Group Trial

BACKGROUND

Strong evidence has confirmed the benefit of laparoscopy in colorectal cancer resection but remains a challenging procedure. It is not clear that such promising results in selected patients translate into a favorable risk-benefit balance in real practice. We conducted a multicenter national observational registry to assess operative and oncologic long-term outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection.

METHODS

All patients with laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection between 2001 and 2004 were included. Data were extracted from the prospective Italian national database of 10 high-volume centers (≥40 colorectal cancer laparoscopic resections per year). Surgical technique and follow-up were standardized. Survivals were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

We reported 1832 patients with colon (58.5%) and rectal cancer (41.5%). TNM stage was 0-I-II in 1044 patients (57%) and III-IV in 788 patients (43%). Surgery included a totally laparoscopic procedure in 1820 patients (99.3%). Conversion was 10.5%. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day mortality rates were 17 and 1.2%, respectively. Clinical anastomotic leakage rate was 8.3% (n=152). R0 resection was 95%. With a median follow-up of 54.2 months, cancer recurrence rate was 13.3%. At 5 years, cancer-free survival was 86.7%. Upon multivariate analysis, age (P=0.001) and TNM stage (P<0.001) were associated with cancer-free survival. Predictive factors of cancer recurrence were gender (P=0.029) and TNM stage (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In high-volume centers and non-selective patients, laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer achieves good operative results with satisfactory long-term oncologic results. Even in the laparoscopy era, age, gender, and TNM stage remain the most powerful predictor of oncologic outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Liver

Operations on the liver have been undertaken for centuries for numerous indications including trauma, infections, and even for malignancy, but it was not until the past few decades that rates dramatically increased. This expanse in liver operations is due to a multitude of factors, including broader indications as well as improved safety. Our understanding of metastatic disease to the liver, especially colorectal cancer metastases, has vastly amplified the number of patients who would be candidates for hepatic resections and liver-directed therapies. We will focus our discussion here on planned minimally invasive operations for benign and malignant tumors as the majority of the literature relates to this setting.

Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer: systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Surgical practice has been changed since the introduction of robotic techniques and robotic colorectal surgery is an emerging field. Innovative robotic technologies have helped surgeons overcome many technical difficulties of conventional laparoscopic surgery. Herein, we review the clinical studies regarding the application of surgical robots in resections for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted for articles published up to September 9, 2012, using the MEDLINE database. The keywords that were used in various combinations were: "surgical robotics," "robotic surgery," "computer-assisted surgery," "colectomy," "sigmoid resection," "sigmoidectomy," and "rectal resection."

RESULTS

Fifty-nine articles reporting on robot-assisted resections of colon and/or rectum were identified and 41 studies were finally included in the analysis. A total of 1635 colorectal procedures were performed: 254 right colectomies, 185 left colectomies/sigmoid resections, 969 anterior resections, 182 abdominoperineal or intersphincteric resections, 34 colectomies (without being specified as right or left), and 11 total/subtotal colectomies. In general, blood loss, conversion rates, and complications were low but the operative time was longer than the open procedures, whereas the duration of hospitalization was shorter. The number of harvested lymph nodes was also quite satisfactory.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic colorectal operations provide favorable results, with acceptable operative times and low conversion rates and morbidity. Surgical robots may provide additional benefits treating challenging pathologies, such as rectal cancer. Further clinical studies and long-term follow-up are required to better evaluate the outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery.

Robotic liver resection for malignancy: Current status, oncologic outcomes, comparison to laparoscopy, and future applications

Utilization of robotic techniques for resection of the liver is slowly gaining acceptance in specific situations and is now being applied to more challenging endeavors, such as major hepatectomy for cancer. This review provides a summary of robotic applications in liver surgery, with specific attention perioperative outcomes, oncologic outcomes, cost, and comparison to conventional laparoscopic techniques of liver resection. We also discuss future applications of robotic-assisted liver surgery.

Clinical outcomes of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopy and multifactorial analysis of the learning curve for robotic surgery

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the feasibility of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer. Further, we attempted to analyze the learning curve for robotic surgery.

METHODS

A total of 64 patients were retrospectively chart-reviewed. Patients were classified into a laparoscopic procedure (n = 28) group and a robot-assisted (n = 36) group. Comparisons of age, gender, clinical staging, operating time, complications, and pathologic status were analyzed. Besides, we used a seventh-order moving average method for the construction of a learning curve in robotic surgery.

RESULTS

Operating time was 374.3 min (range, 210-570 min) in the laparoscopic group and 485.8 min (range, 315-720 min) in the robotic group, with statistical difference between these two groups (P < 0.001). Thirteen patients (46.4 %) received diverting stoma in the laparoscopic group and seven patients (19.4 %) in the robotic group, with statistical difference between these two groups (P = 0.021). Operative experience of robotic ISR showed that the mean operating time was 519.5 min (range, 360-720 min) in the first stage and 448.2 min (range, 315-585 min) in the second stage, with statistical difference between these two stages (P = 0.02). Multifactorial analysis showed that protective diverting stoma creation or neorectum necrosis was not associated with age, sex, pretreatment T stage, or surgeons' experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data shows that robot-assisted ISR for low rectal cancer is feasible and safe with no compromising oncological outcomes. The surgeons' experience improves operating time in robotic surgery.

What is the effect of laparoscopic colectomy on pattern of colon cancer recurrence? A propensity score and competing risk analysis compared with open colectomy

BACKGROUND

Variability in colon cancer recurrence after laparoscopic colectomy (LAC) remains poorly understood. The aim of our study was to quantify the influence of LAC on colon cancer recurrence patterns.

METHODS

We included 986 patients undergoing curative colectomy at our institution between 1992 and 2008. Kaplan-Meier, multivariable Cox regression, propensity score adjustment, and competing risks modeling were used to evaluate the influence of laparoscopic surgery on the site of colon cancer recurrence, including the following: liver metastasis, lung metastasis, local recurrence, peritoneal dissemination, other, and multiple sites. We estimated the risk factors for each recurrence site.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic surgery was used in 419 (42.5 %) of 986 patients, with an overall median follow-up time of 5.0 years (interquartile range 3.5). The overall 5-year disease-free survival rate was 86.1 % (open surgery 81.8 % vs. laparoscopic surgery 92.0 %; p < 0.001). However, after covariates and propensity score adjustment, laparoscopic surgery was not a significant risk factor for each type of recurrence: liver hazard ratio (HR) 0.93 (95 % CI 0.45-1.89), p = 0.84; lung HR 0.67 (95 % CI 0.26-1.70), p = 0.39; local HR 0.56 (95 % CI 0.12-2.63), p = 0.46; peritoneal HR 2.49 (95 % CI 0.75-8.27), p = 0.14; others HR 0.47 (95 % CI 0.04-5.13), p = 0.53; multiple HR 0.88 (95 % CI 0.25-3.14), p = 0.84. The risk factors for each type of recurrence were variable and characterized by specific clinicopathological features.

CONCLUSION

Our study reveals that LAC and open colectomy demonstrate comparable overall colon cancer recurrence rates and recurrence sites. Specific clinicopathological characteristics may have a stronger influence on colon cancer recurrence site compared with the surgical technique.

Laparoscopic approach to gastrointestinal malignancies: Toward the future with caution

After the rapid acceptance of laparoscopy to manage multiple benign diseases arising from gastrointestinal districts, some surgeons started to treat malignancies by the same way. However, if the limits of laparoscopy for benign diseases are mainly represented by technical issues, oncologic outcomes remain the foundation of any procedures to cure malignancies. Cancerous patients represent an important group with peculiar aspects including reduced survival expectancy, worsened quality of life due to surgery itself and adjuvant therapies, and challenging psychological impact. All these issues could, potentially, receive a better management with a laparoscopic surgical approach. In order to confirm such aspects, similarly to testing the newest weapons (surgical or pharmacologic) against cancer, long-term follow-up is always recommendable to assess the real benefits in terms of overall survival, cancer-free survival and quality of life. Furthermore, it seems of crucial importance that surgeons will be correctly trained in specific oncologic principles of surgical oncology as well as in modern miniinvasive technologies. Therefore, laparoscopic treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies requires more caution and deep analysis of published evidences, as compared to those achieved for inflammatory bowel diseases, gastroesophageal reflux disease or diverticular disease. This review tries to examine the evidence available to date for the use of laparoscopy and robotics in malignancies arising from the gastrointestinal district.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer: a literature review and recommendations from the Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie

BACKGROUND

Adoption of the laparoscopic approach for colorectal cancer treatment has been slow owing to initial case study results suggesting high recurrence rates at port sites. The use of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer still raises a number of concerns, particularly with the technique's complexity, learning curve and longer duration. After exploring the scientific literature comparing open and laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer with respect to oncologic efficacy and shortterm outcomes, the Comité de l'évolution des pratiques en oncologie (CEPO) made recommendations for surgical practice in Quebec.

METHODS

Scientific literature published from January 1995 to April 2012 was reviewed. Phase III clinical trials and meta-analyses were included.

RESULTS

Sixteen randomized trials and 10 meta-analyses were retrieved. Analysis of the literature confirmed that for curative treatment of colorectal cancer, laparoscopy is not inferior to open surgery with respect to survival and recurrence rates. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery provides short-term advantages, including a shorter hospital stay, reduced analgesic use and faster recovery of intestinal function. However, this approach does require a longer operative time.

CONCLUSION

Considering the evidence, the CEPO recommends that laparoscopic resection be considered an option for the curative treatment of colon and rectal cancer; that decisions regarding surgical approach take into consideration surgeon experience, tumour stage, potential contraindications and patient expectations; and that laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer be performed only by appropriately trained surgeons who perform a sufficient volume annually to maintain competence.

Robotic surgery of the liver: Italian experience and review of the literature

Robotic liver resection is a new promising minimally invasive surgical technique not yet validated by level I evidence. During recent years, the application of the laparoscopic approach to liver resection has grown less than other abdominal specialties due to the intrinsic limitations of laparoscopic instruments. Robotics can overcome these limitations above all for complex operations. A review of the literature on major hepatic surgery was conducted on PubMed using selected keywords. Two hundred and thirty-five patients in 17 series were analysed and outcomes such as operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, conversion rate, and costs were described. The most commonly performed procedures were wedge resection and segmentectomy, but the predominance of major hepatectomies performed with robotic surgery is likely due to the superior control achieved by the robotic system.

The conversion and complication rates were 4.2% and 13.4%, respectively. Intracavitary fluid collections and bile leaks were the most frequently occurring morbidities. The mean operation time was 285 min. The mean intraoperative blood loss was 50–280 mL. The mean postoperative hospital stay was four to seven days. Overall survival and long-term outcomes were not reported. Robotic liver surgery in Italy has become a clinical reality that is gaining increasing acceptance; a survey was carried out on robotic surgery, which showed that it is perceived as a significant advantage for operators and a consistent gain for the patient. More than 100 robotic hepatic resections have been performed in Italy where important robotic training schools are active.

Robotic liver surgery is feasible and safe in trained and experienced hands. Further evaluation is required to assess the improvement in outcomes and long-term oncologic follow-up.

Robot-assisted surgery: improved tool for major liver resections?

Minimally invasive liver surgery has recently undergone an explosion in reported worldwide experience. Given its comparable outcomes to its open counterpart, high-volume centers are utilizing minimal access liver surgery more frequently under well-defined criteria. The recent introduction of robot-assisted surgery has further revolutionized the field of minimally invasive surgery and has expanded the reach of feasibility. Robot-assisted surgery was developed to help overcome the disadvantages of conventional laparoscopic surgery. As a result, there has been an increase in the reporting of advanced robot-assisted liver resections. A literature review was performed to identify the current manuscripts describing robot-assisted liver surgery. Nine case series were identified, yielding 144 unique patient characteristics. Outcomes indicate that robot-assisted liver resection is feasible and safe for both minor and major liver resections with regard to estimated blood loss, length of stay, and complications. Early data also suggest that robot-assisted liver surgery is efficacious with regard to short-term oncologic outcomes. Future studies will be needed to better evaluate advantages and disadvantages compared to laparoscopic liver resections.

Laparoscopic and open colorectal resections for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the mainstay of treatment for colorectal cancer with curative intent.

AIM

To evaluate the postoperative results of laparoscopic and laparotomic colorectal resections for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective study of a series of 189 patients. The descriptive variables were age and gender, and for outcome were type of resection, number of lymph nodes resected, free margins, the need for colostomy, complications, operative time and hospital stay. They were analyzed using the chi-square, Student t and Mann-Whitney test, with significance level <0.05.

RESULTS

Of the 189 operated patients, 110 met the inclusion criteria, 75 (68.2%) operated by open surgery and 35 (31.8%) by laparoscopic. The sigmoid colon was the most common site presented by neoplasia and rectosigmoidectomy was performed more by open colorectal resection (p = 0.042). The conversion rate was 7.9% (3/38). The patients were operated by open surgery in 81.5% of time less than 180 minutes (p <0.001). In both pathways, the average number of removed lymph nodes was greater than 12, but laparotomy enabled, more frequently, the resection of 12 or more nodes (p = 0.012). No patient had surgical margins involved, but laparotomy allowed a greater number of patients with a margin greater than 5 cm from the tumor (p = 0.036). Increased number of patients treated by open surgery were hospitalized for more than seven days (p <0.001). There were no statistically significant differences regarding the need for ostomies, complications and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic approach was as safe and effective as laparotomy in the treatment of colorectal cancer, and was associated with increased operative time, shorter hospital stay and less morbidity.

A feasibility study to investigate the use of a bupivacaine-collagen implant (XaraColl) for postoperative analgesia following laparoscopic surgery

Background

XaraColl, a collagen-based implant that delivers bupivacaine to sites of surgical trauma, has been shown to reduce postoperative pain and use of opioid analgesia in patients undergoing open surgery. We therefore designed and conducted a preliminary feasibility study to investigate its application and ease of use for laparoscopic surgery.

Methods

We implanted four XaraColl implants each containing 50 mg of bupivacaine hydrochloride (200 mg total dose) in ten men undergoing laparoscopic inguinal or umbilical hernioplasty. Postoperative pain intensity and use of opioid analgesia were recorded through 72 hours for comparison with previously reported data from efficacy studies performed in men undergoing open inguinal hernioplasty. Safety was assessed for 30 days.

Results

XaraColl was easily and safely implanted via a laparoscope. The summed pain intensity and total use of opioid analgesia through the first 24 hours were similar to the values observed in previously reported studies for XaraColl-treated patients after open surgery, but were lower through 48 and 72 hours.

Conclusion

XaraColl is suitable for use in laparoscopic surgery and may provide postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic patients who often experience considerable postoperative pain in the first 24–48 hours following hospital discharge. Randomized controlled trials specifically to evaluate its efficacy in this application are warranted.

Learning curve and case selection in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: systematic review and international multicenter analysis of 4852 cases

BACKGROUND

The learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery has not been conclusively analyzed. No reliable framework for case selection during training is available.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the length of the learning curve of laparoscopic colorectal surgeons and to recommend a case selection framework at the early stage of independent practice.

DATA SOURCES

Medline (1988-2010, October week 4) and Embase (1988-2010) were used for the literature review, databases were retrieved from the authors, and expert opinion was surveyed.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies describing the learning curve of laparoscopic or laparoscopically assisted colorectal surgery were selected.

INTERVENTION

No interventions were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Learning curves were analyzed by using risk-adjusted, bootstrapped cumulative sum curves. Conversions and complications were independent variables in a multilevel random-effects regression model. Recommendations are based on analysis of ORs and a structured expert opinion gauging process.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were identified, showing great disparity on the length of the learning curve. Seven studies, representing 4852 cases (19 surgeons), were analyzed. Risk-adjusted cumulative sum charts demonstrated the length of the learning curves to be 152 cases for conversions, 143 for complications, 96 for operating time, 87 for blood loss, and 103 for length of stay. Body mass index and pelvic dissection (rectum), especially in male patients, independently increased the risk of complication and conversion. The expert survey revealed that increasing T stage and complicated inflammatory disease are likely to increase the complexity of the case. Based on this evidence, a framework for case selection in training was proposed.

LIMITATIONS

The generalizability of the study results maybe reduced because of inconsistent data quality and individual variations in the length of the learning curve

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter database suggests a length of the learning curve of 88 to 152 cases. The use of the suggested framework may prevent high conversion and complication rates during the learning curve.

Expert opinion on laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer parallels evidence from a cumulative meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This study sought to synthesize survival outcomes from trials of laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer surgery, and to determine whether expert acceptance of this technology in the literature has parallel cumulative survival evidence.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of randomized trials was conducted. The primary outcome was survival, and meta-analysis of time-to-event data was conducted. Expert opinion in the literature (published reviews, guidelines, and textbook chapters) on the acceptability of laparoscopic colorectal cancer was graded using a 7-point scale. Pooled survival data were correlated in time with accumulating expert opinion scores.

RESULTS

A total of 5,800 citations were screened. Of these, 39 publications pertaining to 23 individual trials were retained. As well, 414 reviews were included (28 guidelines, 30 textbook chapters, 20 systematic reviews, 336 narrative reviews). In total, 5,782 patients were randomized to laparoscopic (n = 3,031) and open (n = 2,751) colorectal surgery. Survival data were presented in 16 publications. Laparoscopic surgery was not inferior to open surgery in terms of overall survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.80, 1.09). Expert opinion in the literature pertaining to the oncologic acceptability of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer correlated most closely with the publication of large RCTs in 2002-2004. Although increasingly accepted since 2006, laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remained controversial.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer is non-inferior to open surgery in terms of overall survival, and has been so since 2004. The majority expert opinion in the literature has considered these two techniques to be equivalent since 2002-2004. Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been increasingly accepted since 2006, but remains controversial. Knowledge translation efforts in this field appear to have paralleled the accumulation of clinical trial evidence.

Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome

AIM

The study aimed to compare robotic rectal resection with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer. Robotic surgery has been used successfully in many branches of surgery but there is little evidence in the literature on its use in rectal cancer.

METHODS

  We performed a systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. We compared robotic and laparoscopic surgery with respect to twelve end-points including operative and recovery outcomes, early postoperative mortality and morbidity, and oncological parameters. A subgroup analysis of patients undergoing full-robotic or robot-assisted rectal resection and robotic total mesorectal excision was carried out. All aspects of Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis (PRISMA) statement were followed to conduct this systematic review. Comprehensive electronic search strategies were developed using the following electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EBM reviews and CINAHL. Randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer were included. No language or publication status restrictions were imposed. A data-extraction sheet was developed based on the data extraction template of the Cochrane Group. The statistical analysis was performed using the odd ratio (OR) for categorical variables and the weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Eight non randomized studies were identified that included 854 patients in total, 344 (40.2%) in the robotic group and 510 (59.7%) in the laparoscopic group. Meta-analysis suggested that the conversion rate to open surgery in the robotic group was significantly lower than that with laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.12-0.57, P = 0.0007). There were no significant differences in operation time, length of hospital stay, time to resume regular diet, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and the oncological accuracy of resection.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer has a lower conversion rate and a similar operative time compared with laparoscopic surgery, with no difference in recovery, oncological and postoperative outcomes.

The impact of practice environment on laparoscopic colectomy utilization following colorectal residency: a survey of the ASCRS Young Surgeons

AIM

It is often thought that practice patterns are different in private (PP) vs university hospital (UH) settings. We aimed to describe the impact of practice environment on the type of laparoscopic colectomy procedures performed by graduating colorectal surgeons.

METHOD

A review was carried out of prospectively gathered self-reported questionnaire data. Graduates of American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons' (ASCRS)-approved colorectal residencies from 2004 to 2008 underwent an on-line survey, developed by the ASCRS Young Surgeons' Committee.

RESULTS

About 177 (52%) of 342 graduates surveyed responded. Practice setting data were available for 157 (89%) surgeons. Gender, geographical location and age were similar in both cohorts. PP surgeons utilized a laparoscopic approach more often for rectal cancer (37% vs 19%; P=0.003). There was no significant difference in the rate of laparoscopic surgery in colon cancer, diverticular disease, inflammatory bowel disease, Clostridium difficile or emergency surgery. PP surgeons operated more often with a partner (43% vs 8%) or surgical assistant (13% vs 4%; both P<0.001), while UH surgeons had a colorectal resident (10% vs 21%) or general surgery resident (15% vs 55%; both P<0.001). Impediments to performing laparoscopic surgery for PP surgeons included a perceived lack of hospital equipment (33% vs 20%) and support (29% vs 17%; both P<0.05). Perception of personal experience, access to trained assistants, financial reimbursement, length of surgery and patient availability were equivalent in both groups.

CONCLUSION

While differences such as type of assistant and impediments to laparoscopic utilization exist between PP- and UH-based practices, early laparoscopic practice patterns remain similar. PP surgeons more frequently perform laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer and with hand-assistance. Despite differences, newly trained colorectal surgeons in both settings utilize and require laparoscopic skills.

The quality of research synthesis in surgery: the case of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses populate the literature on the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. The utility of this body of work is unclear. The objective of this study was to synthesize all such systematic reviews in terms of clinical effectiveness, to appraise their quality, and to determine whether areas of duplication exist across reviews.

METHODS

Systematic reviews comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer were identified using a comprehensive search protocol (1991 to 2008). The primary outcome was overall survival. The methodological quality of reviews was appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument. Abstraction and quality appraisal was carried out by two independent reviewers. Reviews were synthesized, and outcomes were compared qualitatively. A citation analysis was carried out using simple matrices to assess the comprehensiveness of each review.

RESULTS

In total, 27 reviews were included; 13 reviews included only randomized controlled trials. Rectal cancer was addressed exclusively by four reviews. There was significant overlap between review purposes, populations and, outcomes. The mean AMSTAR score (out of 11) was 5.8 (95% CI: 4.6 to 7.0). Overall survival was evaluated by ten reviews, none of which found a significant difference. Three reviews provided a selective meta-analysis of time-to-event data. Previously published systematic reviews were poorly and highly selectively referenced (mean citation ratio 0.16, 95% CI: 0.093 to 0.22). Previously published trials were not comprehensively identified and cited (mean citation ratio 0.56, 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.65).

CONCLUSIONS

Numerous overlapping systematic reviews of laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer exist in the literature. Despite variable methods and quality, survival outcomes are congruent across reviews. A duplication of research efforts appears to exist in the literature. Further systematic reviews or meta-analyses are unlikely to be justified without specifying a significantly different research objective. This works lends support to the registration and updating of systematic reviews.

Robotic-assisted colon and rectal surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal surgery is one of the most common procedures performed by general surgeons, with an increasing number being performed laparoscopically. Robotic technology is emerging in the ongoing evolution in minimally invasive surgery. This study systematically reviews the literature regarding the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of electronic databases was completed for the period 2000 to 2010. Two independent reviewers assessed the studies for relevance and inclusion, and extracted data.

RESULTS

After an initial screen of 347 titles, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 854 patients were included with a mean age of 61 years and a body mass index of 25.5 kg/m(2) . Major complications included 27 anastamotic leaks (27/766 = 3.5%), 10 post-operative bleeds (1.1%) and 14 post-operative infections (1.6%). There were no mortalities reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrates that robotic-assisted colorectal surgery is emerging as a safe and feasible option in colorectal surgery.

Transvaginal rigid-hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery technique for anterior resection treatment of diverticulitis: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

In laparoscopic anterior resection, minilaparotomy still is required. Recently, transvaginal hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) techniques for cholecystectomy have been described. Reports on operations that require removal of larger specimens, as in anterior resection, are scarce and limited primarily to small case series and case reports. The current study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of transvaginal rigid-hybrid NOTES anterior resection (tvAR) for symptomatic diverticular disease.

METHODS

All female patients presenting with symptomatic diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon were candidates for inclusion in the study. The exclusion criteria specified failure to sign informed consent, previous colorectal resection, anesthesiologic contraindication for pneumoperitoneum, liver failure and coagulopathy, severe acute diverticular bleeding, internal fistula with abscess (Hinchey 2b), perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis (Hinchey 3 or 4), gynecologic or urologic contraindications, and absence of preoperative gynecologic examination. A preoperative and 2-week postoperative gynecologic examination was performed. Quality of life and sexual function were assessed preoperatively and 6 weeks postoperatively.

RESULTS

Of 70 patients, 45 (64.3%) were scheduled for tvAR. Five patients were withdrawn at the beginning of laparoscopy with no transvaginal access performed. Of the remaining 40 patients with attempted tvAR, 4 patients underwent conversion to a minilaparotomy (Pfannenstiel incision) and 2 patients were converted to a total median laparotomy. For 34 patients (85%), the operation was completed transvaginally. A total of 2 major complications and 10 minor complications occurred. No serious postoperative gynecologic morbidity was experienced. At 6 weeks postoperatively, sexual function did not differ significantly from preoperative status.

CONCLUSIONS

For symptomatic diverticular disease, TvAR is feasible, although the presented technique requires laparoscopic expertise and further refinement.

Evaluation of a novel single-port robotic platform in the cadaver model for the performance of various procedures in gynecologic oncology

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this protocol was to evaluate the feasibility and reproducibility of a dedicated da Vinci® single-port robotic platform in cadavers for the performance of various gynecologic oncology procedures.

METHODS

Three fresh frozen female cadavers were used to evaluate the feasibility, reproducibility, and to develop the correct docking of the robotic column and trocars. Procedures performed in this training protocol included (hysterectomy, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, modified radical hysterectomy, six pelvic lymph node dissections, and one para-aortic node dissection). A data set was collected for each procedure, operative times were compared between cases and procedures by use of Wilcoxon rank sum test, a p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

All the procedures were technically successful with no need of additional ports or conversions to a standard laparoscopy. The median time of port insertion and BMI was 6 min range (4-10) and 33 min range (25-56) respectively. The median time for a left and right pelvic lymph node dissection was 22 min range (22-23) and 28 min range (26-38) respectively. There was significant difference in operating times for symmetrical procedures (pelvic lymphadenectomy), p=0.049.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary data demonstrates that the performance of various oncology procedures using the new da Vinci® single-site robotic platform is feasible, and more importantly, reproducible in the cadaver model.

Robotic colorectal surgery: hype or new hope? A systematic review of robotics in colorectal surgery

AIM

Robotic colorectal surgery is an emerging field and may offer a solution to some of the difficulties inherent to conventional laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive and critical analysis of the available literature on the use of robotic technology in colorectal surgery.

METHOD

Studies reporting outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery were identified by systematic searches of electronic databases. Outcomes examined included operating time, length of stay, blood loss, complications, cost, oncological outcome, and conversion rates.

RESULTS

Seventeen Studies (nine case series, seven comparative studies, one randomized controlled trial) describing 288 procedures were identified and reviewed. Study heterogeneity precluded a meta-analysis of the data. Robotic procedures tend to take longer and cost more, but may reduce the length of stay, blood loss, and conversion rates. Complication profiles and short-term oncological outcomes are similar to laparoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic colorectal surgery is a promising field and may provide a powerful additional tool for optimal management of more challenging pathology, including rectal cancer. Further studies are required to better define its role.

Safety and learning curve in robotic colorectal surgery

Robotic surgery has recently started to be used for minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Because of limited access and high cost, very few colorectal units are available in the US. We describe our experience with benign and malignant disease since September 2008 in a dedicated colorectal practice. A prospective collected robotic database was queried for colon and rectal procedures. Anonymized demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data, and pathology information, were collected and analyzed. A total of 48 robotic procedures for colorectal maladies were performed in the study period. There were 35 females and 13 males. The average age was 57 years. Twenty-two cases were performed for diverticulitis, 13 for malignancy (10 distal rectum (<8 cm anal verge), two rectosigmoid, and one ascending colon cancer), 10 for rectal prolapse, two for rectovaginal fistula, and one for incidental appendiceal mucocele found during a gynecologic resection. The average operating room time (OR) was 162 min and there were no conversions to open procedures. Blood loss averaged 104 mL. Mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 5.4 days. Patient readmission occurred in 27.3% of cases. The anastamotic leak rate was 2.1% (one patient). No mortalities were reported. When the analysis was performed for colorectal malignancies (13 procedures), there were nine females and four males. Average age was 59 years. The mean OR time was 191.1 min. Mean intraoperative blood loss was 123 mL and there were no conversions to open surgery. Average LOS was 7.0 days. There was one anastamotic leak (7.7%). The length of stay was increased for the patient with anastamotic leak (18 days) and for a patient with high stoma output and postoperative ileus (17 days). Readmission rate was 30.1%. The total number of lymph nodes retrieved averaged 19.5, with a mean distal margin of 3.0 cm and in all cases negative radial margins. Robotic colorectal surgery for benign and malignant disease is safe, and short-term outcomes are comparable with those of traditional and laparoscopic surgery. Oncologic resections were adequate with excellent lymph node sampling and radial and distal margins.

Population-based trend analysis of 2813 patients undergoing laparoscopic sigmoid resection

BACKGROUND

The use of laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticular disease has become increasingly popular. The objective of this trend analysis was to assess whether clinical outcomes following laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticular disease have improved over the past 10 years.

METHODS

The analysis was based on the prospective database of the Swiss Association of Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery. Some 2813 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticular disease from 1995 to 2006 were included. Unadjusted and risk-adjusted analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Over time, there was a significant reduction in the conversion rate (from 27.3 to 8.6 per cent; P(trend) < 0.001), local postoperative complication rate (23.6 to 6.2 per cent; P(trend) = 0.004), general postoperative complication rate (14.6 to 4.9 per cent; P(trend) = 0.024) and reoperation rate (5.5 to 0.6 per cent; P(trend) = 0.015). Postoperative median length of hospital stay significantly decreased from 11 to 7 days (P(trend) < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This first trend analysis in the literature of clinical outcomes after laparoscopic sigmoid resection, based on almost 3000 patients, has provided compelling evidence that rates of postoperative complications, conversion and reoperation, and length of hospital stay have decreased significantly over the past 10 years.

Evolution of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in Brazil: results of 4744 patients from the national registry

BACKGROUND

Since its introduction, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has raised intense debate and controversies regarding its safety and effectiveness.

METHODS

This multicentric registry reports the experience of 28 Brazilian surgical teams specializing in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

RESULTS

Between 1992 and 2007, 4744 patients (1994 men--42% and 2750 women--58%) were operated upon, with ages ranging from 13 to 94 years (average 57.5 y). Benign diseases were diagnosed in 2356 patients (49.6%). Most diseases were located in 50.7% of the left and sigmoid colon, 28.2% in the rectum and anal canal, 8.0% in the right colon, and diffuse 7.0%. There were 181 (3.8%) intraoperative complications (from 0% to 14%). There were 261 (5.5%) reported conversions to laparotomy (from 0% to 16.5%), mainly during the early experience (n=119 -59.8%). Postoperative complications were registered in 683 (14.5%) patients (from 5.0% to 50%). Mortality occurred in 43 patients (0.8%). Surgeons who performed less than 50 cases reported similar rates of intraoperative (4.2% vs. 3.8%; P=0.7), postoperative complications (20.8% vs. 14.3%; P=0.07), and mortality (1.0% vs. 0.9%; P=0.5), but the conversion rate was higher (10.4% vs. 5.4%; P=0.04). Two thousand three hundred and eighty-nine (50.4%) malignant tumors were operated upon, and histologic classification showed 2347 (98%) adenocarcinomas, 30 (0.6%) spinocelular carcinomas, and 12 (0.2%) other histologic types. Tumor recurrence rate was 16.3% among patients followed more than 1 year. After an average follow-up of 52 months, 19 (0.8%) parietal recurrences were reported, 18 of which were in port sites and 1 in a patient with disseminated disease. There was no incisional recurrence in the ports used to withdraw the pathologic specimen. Compared with other registries, there was a 75% increase in the number of groups performing laparoscopic colorectal surgery and a decrease in conversions (from 10.5% to 5.5%) and mortality (from 1.5% to 0.9%) rates.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) The number of patients operated upon increased expressively during the last years; (2) operative indications for benign and malignant diseases were similar, and diverticular disease of the colon comprised 40% of the benign ones; (3) conversion and mortality rates decreased over time; (4) surgeon's experience did not influence the complication rates, but was associated with a lower conversion; and (5) oncologic outcome expressed by recurrence rates showed results similar to those reported in conventional surgery.

Impact of incision length on the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The recent introduction of hand-assist devices in laparoscopic colorectal surgery has renewed interest in the influence of incision length. This study aimed to define the impact of extraction incision length on the postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic left-sided colon and rectal resections.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic left-sided colorectal resection from 1991 to 2007 were retrieved from a prospectively collected database. The association between incision length and patient characteristics, diagnosis, and perioperative outcomes were analyzed using logistic regression, Spearman correlation, Wilcoxon test, and chi-square test.

RESULTS

A total of 494 laparoscopic colorectal resections (left, sigmoid, anterior, and low anterior resections) were retrieved. Patients with conversions to open surgery (n = 59) and missing data (n = 53) were excluded. As a result, 382 cases were included in the study. A slight majority of the patients had malignant disease (n = 202, 53%). The median incision length was 5 cm (interquartile range, 4-6 cm). Increasing weight was positively correlated with incision length (p = 0.0001). Male patients had modestly larger mean incisions than female patients (5.5 vs. 5.0 cm; p = 0.0075). Age, previous surgery, diagnosis, days to resumption of normal diet, and days to discharge from hospital showed no significant relationship with incision length. No association was observed between the incision length and intraoperative or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery appear to achieve the same perioperative outcomes irrespective of their extraction incision lengths. To maintain the short-term benefits of laparoscopy, surgeons should consider pursuing a minimally invasive technique, even when a larger extraction incision will ultimately be required.

Combined laparoscopic-endoscopic resections of colorectal polyps: 10-year experience and follow-up

BACKGROUND

Large, colorectal polyps or those that are difficult to access may be unamenable to conventional snare polypectomy and may require surgical resection. This study was designed to evaluate the resection of such lesions by the use of combined laparoscopic-endoscopic resections (CLER).

METHODS

Patients who had received CLER for colorectal polyps between January 1997 and December 2006 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients with biopsies consistent with invasive cancer were excluded from the combined approach. Baseline characteristics, surgical, pathological, postoperative, and follow-up data of patients and lesions were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 146 consecutive patients underwent CLER for 154 lesions, and 120 (82%) patients underwent local excision (i.e., laparoscopy-assisted endoscopic resection, endoscopy-assisted wedge resection, and endoscopy-assisted transluminal resection). Twenty-six (18%) patients received endoscopy-assisted segmental colon resection. Conversion rate was 5% and intraoperative complications occurred in two patients (1%). Major postoperative complications occurred in five patients (3%), necessitating surgical reintervention in four of them. Follow-up colonoscopy revealed metachronous adenomas in 33 patients, of which 8 patients showed macroscopic or microscopic characteristics of advanced lesions. One patient, who had been converted to open resection because of incomplete laparoscopic resection of an adenoma, developed relapse of the initial adenoma and was successfully treated with repeat CLER accounting for a local recurrence rate of 0.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined laparoscopic-endoscopic resection is an efficient, safe, and minimally invasive alternative to open resection for selected patients with difficult polyps, but it should be restricted to benign disease.

Combined laparoscopic-endoscopic resections of colorectal polyps: 10-year experience and follow-up

BACKGROUND

Large, colorectal polyps or those that are difficult to access may be unamenable to conventional snare polypectomy and may require surgical resection. This study was designed to evaluate the resection of such lesions by the use of combined laparoscopic-endoscopic resections (CLER).

METHODS

Patients who had received CLER for colorectal polyps between January 1997 and December 2006 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients with biopsies consistent with invasive cancer were excluded from the combined approach. Baseline characteristics, surgical, pathological, postoperative, and follow-up data of patients and lesions were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 146 consecutive patients underwent CLER for 154 lesions, and 120 (82%) patients underwent local excision (i.e., laparoscopy-assisted endoscopic resection, endoscopy-assisted wedge resection, and endoscopy-assisted transluminal resection). Twenty-six (18%) patients received endoscopy-assisted segmental colon resection. Conversion rate was 5% and intraoperative complications occurred in two patients (1%). Major postoperative complications occurred in five patients (3%), necessitating surgical reintervention in four of them. Follow-up colonoscopy revealed metachronous adenomas in 33 patients, of which 8 patients showed macroscopic or microscopic characteristics of advanced lesions. One patient, who had been converted to open resection because of incomplete laparoscopic resection of an adenoma, developed relapse of the initial adenoma and was successfully treated with repeat CLER accounting for a local recurrence rate of 0.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined laparoscopic-endoscopic resection is an efficient, safe, and minimally invasive alternative to open resection for selected patients with difficult polyps, but it should be restricted to benign disease.

Laparoscopic versus Open Total Mesorectal Excision: A Nonrandomized Comparative Prospective Trial in a Tertiary Center in Mexico City

Because definitive long-term results are not yet available, the oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer remains controversial. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) for rectal cancer has been proposed to have several short-term advantages in comparison with open total mesorectal excision (OTME). However, few prospective randomized studies have been performed. The main purpose of our study was to evaluate whether relevant differences in safety and efficacy exist after elective LTME for the treatment of rectal cancer compared with OTME in a tertiary referral medical center. This comparative nonrandomized prospective study analyzes data in 56 patients with middle and lower rectal cancer treated with low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection from November 2005 to November 2007. Follow-up was determined through office charts or direct patient contact. Statistical analysis was performed using χ2 test and Student's t test. Twenty-eight patients underwent LTME and 28 patients were in the OTME group. No conversion was required in the LTME group. Mean operating time was shorter in the laparoscopic group (LTME) (181.3 vs 206.1 min, P < 0.002). Less intraoperative blood loss and fewer postoperative complications were seen in the LTME group. Return of bowel motility was observed earlier after laparoscopic surgery. There was no 30-day mortality and the overall morbidity was 17 per cent in the LTME group versus 32 per cent in the OTME group. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was greater in the laparoscopic group than in the OTME group (12.1 ± 2 vs 9.3 ± 3). Mean follow-up time was 12 months (range 9-24 months). No local recurrence was found. LTME is a feasible procedure with acceptable postoperative morbidity and low mortality, however it is technically demanding. This series confirms its safety, although oncologic results are at present comparable with the OTME published series with the limitation of a short follow-up period. Further randomized studies are necessary to evaluate long-term clinical outcome.

Application of a solid tumor model to evaluate tumor recurrence after an open or laparoscopic rectal resection in rats

PURPOSE

We used a solid tumor model to evaluate the influence of laparotomy versus laparoscopy on tumor growth after curative resection for rectal cancer in rats.

METHODS

Colon tumor cells (DHD/K12/TRb) were administered intraperitoneally in 15 rats, which were used as solid tumor donors. Twenty-one days later, a 20-mg piece was then implanted in the rectal submucosa of the study rats (n=45). Animals were randomized into 3 groups for rectal resection either open or laparoscopic using either carbon dioxide (CO2) or helium for pneumoperitoneum. Autopsy took place 21 days after resection and tumor recurrence was evaluated.

RESULTS

Port-site metastasis was observed after laparoscopy with CO2 (1 animal) and helium (1), whereas intraperitoneal tumor growth was detected in 2 and 3 animals of these groups. No tumor recurrence was observed after open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our solid tumor model is a novel neoplastic model that might simulate the clinical situation of an upper rectal carcinoma. It might be helpful to develop new protocols in studying solid tumor biology and different surgical procedures for cancer to address problematic issues in oncologic research.

Resultados do registro nacional brasileiro em vídeo-cirurgia colorretal - 2007

Este trabalho multicêntrico reúne a experiência de 28 equipes brasileiras em vídeo-cirurgia colorretal. No período de 1992 a 2007 foram operados 5259 pacientes, sendo excluídos 515 (9,8%) doentes devido a dados incompletos. Foram avaliados 4744 pacientes, sendo 1994 homens (41,4%) e 2750 mulheres (58,6%), cuja idade variou de 1 a 94 anos (média de 57,5 anos). Doenças benignas foram diagnosticadas em 2355 pacientes (49,6%). A maioria das afecções (50,7%) localizava-se no cólon esquerdo e sigmóide, 28,2% no reto e 0,3% no canal anal, 8,0% no cólon direito e 7,0% difusa. Ocorreram 29 óbitos (1,6%). Foram operados 2389 (50,4%) pacientes portados de tumores malignos, estando localizados no reto em 48,5%, cólon esquerdo e sigmóide 30,7%, cólon direito 16%, cólon transverso 3,2% e canal anal 0,6%. Os tipos histológicos foram 2347 (98%) adenocarcinomas, 30 (0,6%) carcinomas espinocelulares e outros tipos histológicos em 12 (0,2%) pacientes. A recidiva global foi de 15,3%. Houve 180 (3,8%) complicações intra-operatórias, sendo as mais comuns lesões vasculares de cavidade e lesões de alças intestinais, com incidência de 1%. Foram relatadas 261 (5,5 %) conversões para laparotomia, sendo a causa mais comum a dificuldade técnica em 1,4%. Complicações pós-operatórias foram registradas em 683 (14,5 %). Em período médio de 52 meses de seguimento houve 19 (0,8%) recidivas no local de inserção de trocártes. Não houve recidiva parietal em incisão utilizada para retirada da peça. CONCLUSÕES: 1) Nos últimos anos, a experiência brasileira em vídeo-cirurgia colorretal teve aumento expressivo; 2) As indicações operatórias para câncer e doenças benignas foram semelhantes, sendo que a doença diverticular representou 40 % das doenças benignas tratadas; 3) Os índices de morbi-mortalidade foram baixos e semelhantes aos relatados na literatura; 4) Os resultados oncológicos avaliados demonstram que as ressecções laparoscópicas determinam índices de recidiva parietal semelhantes aos encontrados em operações convencionais.