Laparoscopy in colorectal surgery

The Impact of Conversion to Laparotomy in Rectal Cancer : A National Cancer Database Analysis of 57 574 Patients

BACKGROUND

Data regarding the effect of conversion from minimally invasive surgery (MIS) to laparotomy in rectal cancer is limited. This study examines the impact of conversion from laparoscopic or robotic-assisted techniques to open resection on oncologic outcomes in a large population database.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2016 was reviewed for all cases of invasive adenocarcinoma of the rectum or rectosigmoid junction managed surgically. Patients were divided into 3 cohorts by approach: laparoscopic/robotic (MIS), converted proctectomy (CP), and open proctectomy (OP). Kaplan-Meier estimation was used for unadjusted survival analysis, followed by adjusted multivariable Cox-Proportional Hazards regression. Secondary outcomes were analyzed by multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria identified 57 574 patients cases of adenocarcinoma of the rectum managed surgically. Of these patients, 23 579 (41.0%) underwent MIS, 3591 (6.2%) CP, and 30 404 (52.8%) OP. Five-year overall survival was greater in the MIS (70.4%) versus CP and OP (64.4% and 61.4%). No differences were detected for positive margins, 30-day, or 90-day mortality between CP and OP. MIS and CP approaches were significantly associated with increased odds of 12 or more regional lymph nodes examined and decreased overall mortality hazard compared with OP (all respective significant P < .05).

DISCUSSION

While similar odds of positive margins and short-term mortality is seen in patients whose procedure converts to laparotomy compared with planned laparotomy, both short-term and long-term oncologic benefit is seen in those who undergo a minimally invasive approach. Thus, a minimally invasive approach should be attempted for patients with rectal cancer.

Impact of Timing of Conversion to Open Surgery on Short-Term and Oncologic Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

To evaluate the influence of timing of open conversion on short-term and oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer. Six hundred forty-six consecutive patients were enrolled. All patients converted to open surgery were classified into early (n = 10) or late (n = 67) groups based on conversion timing using a 60-minute cutoff. A comparison of early conversion and nonconverted groups showed that history of prior abdominal surgery and pT4 tumor was more common in the early conversion group. Mean operative time was longer in the early conversion group. Rates of 30-day postoperative complications (30% vs 27%), time to soft diet (5 days vs 5 days), and hospital stay (12 days vs 12 days) were not different. A comparison of the late and nonconverted groups showed that history of prior abdominal surgery was more common in the late conversion group. Mean operative time was longer in the late conversion. Rates of 30-day postoperative complications (42% vs 27%), Clavien–Dindo score ≥3 (22% vs 11%), intensive care unit care (31% vs 15%), and transfusion (37% vs 21%) were significantly higher in the late conversion group. Time to soft diet (6 days vs 5 days) and hospital stay (15 days vs 12 days, P = 0.037) were longer in the late conversion group. Cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival rates did not differ among the early, late conversion, and nonconverted groups. Decisions about open conversion need be made within 60 minutes of the beginning of surgery as early conversion does not worsen short-term and oncologic outcomes.

Differences in clinical features between laparoscopy and open resection for primary tumor in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To identify differences in clinical features between laparoscopy and open resection for primary tumor in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer. We also evaluated short-term and oncologic outcomes after laparoscopy and open surgery.

METHODS

A total of 100 consecutive stage IV patients undergoing open (n=61) or laparoscopic (n=39) major resection were analyzed. There were four cases (10%) of conversion to laparotomy in the laparoscopy group.

RESULTS

Pathological T4 tumors (56% vs 26%), primary colon cancers (74% vs 51%), and larger tumor diameter (6 vs 5 cm) were more commonly managed with open surgery. Right colectomy was more common in the open surgery group (39%) and low anterior resection was more common in the laparoscopy group (39%, P=0.002). Hepatic metastases in segments II, III, IVb, V, and VI were more frequently resected with laparoscopy (100%) than with open surgery (56%), although the difference was not statistically significant. In colon and rectal cancers, mean operative time and 30-day complication rates of laparoscopy and open surgery did not differ. In both cancers, mean time to soft diet and length of hospital stay were shorter in the laparoscopy group. Mean time from surgery to chemotherapy commencement was significantly shorter with laparoscopy than with open surgery. In colon and rectal cancers, 2-year cancer-specific and progression-free survival rates were similar between the laparoscopy and open surgery groups.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings, laparoscopy can be selected as an initial approach in patients with a primary tumor without adjacent organ invasion and patients without primary tumor-related symptoms. In selected stage IV patients, tumor factors such as primary rectal tumor, peritoneal carcinomatosis, or liver metastasis may not be absolute contraindications for a laparoscopic approach.

Impact of Prior Abdominal Surgery on Rates of Conversion to Open Surgery and Short-Term Outcomes after Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

Purpose

To evaluate the impact of prior abdominal surgery (PAS) on rates of conversion to open surgery and short-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for colon and rectal cancers.

Methods

We compared three groups as follows: colon cancer patients with no PAS (n = 272), major PAS (n = 24), and minor PAS (n = 33), and rectal cancer patients with no PAS (n = 282), major PAS (n=16), and minor PAS (n = 26).

Results

In patients with colon and rectal cancers, the rate of conversion to open surgery was significantly higher in the major PAS group (25% and 25%) compared with the no PAS group (8.1% and 8.9%), while the conversion rate was similar between the no PAS and minor PAS groups (15.2% and 15.4%). The 30-day complication rate did not differ among the three groups (28.7% and 29.1% in the no PAS group, 29.2% and 25% in the major PAS group, and 27.3% and 26.9% in the minor PAS group). The mean operative time did not differ among the three groups (188 min and 227 min in the no PAS group, 191 min and 210 min in the major PAS group, and 192 min and 248 min in the minor PAS group). The rate of conversion to open surgery was significantly higher in patients with prior gastrectomy or colectomy compared with the no PAS group, while the conversion rate was similar between the no PAS group and patients with prior radical hysterectomy in patients with colon and rectal cancers.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that colorectal cancer patients with minor PAS or patients with prior radical hysterectomy can be effectively managed with a laparoscopic approach. In addition, laparoscopy can be selected as the primary surgical approach even in patients with major PAS (prior gastrectomy or colectomy) given the assumption of a higher conversion rate.