Laparoscopic colon resection for cancer

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.

Minimally invasive surgery improves short-term outcomes in elderly colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal resection has been shown to improve short-term outcomes compared with open surgery in patients with colorectal cancer. Currently, there is a paucity of data demonstrating similar efficacy between MIS and open colorectal resection in the elderly population. We hypothesized that minimally invasive surgery provides improved short-term outcomes in elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

A review of 242 consecutive elderly (≥ 65 y of age) patients who underwent either open or MIS colorectal resection for adenocarcinoma at one institution was conducted. Short-term and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Continuous variables were analyzed by the Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables were compared by χ(2) tests. Survival was compared by the Kaplan-Meier method using the log rank test for comparison.

RESULTS

Of the 242 elderly patients with colorectal cancer (median American Society of Anesthesiology score (ASA) scores of 3), 80% (n = 195) of patients underwent open and 20% (n = 47) had MIS colorectal cancer resections. Patients undergoing MIS had a faster return of bowel function, decreased days to nasogastric tube removal, decreased days to flatus and bowel movement, and quicker advancement to clear liquid and regular diets. The overall length of hospital stay in the MIS group was decreased by 40% as well as a trend towards a 50% decrease in SICU stay. Additionally, there was 66% decrease in cardiac complications in the MIS group. When evaluating for oncologic adequacy as measured by number of lymph nodes and surgical resection margins, MIS surgery offered equivalent results as open resection. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in overall survival for MIS versus open colorectal surgery.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive colorectal cancer resection leads to improved short-term outcomes as demonstrated by decreased length of hospital stay and faster return of bowel function. Additionally, there appears to be no difference in oncologic outcomes in the elderly. On the basis of our data, age alone should not be a contra-indication to laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is safe in the high-risk patient: a NSQIP risk-adjusted analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colectomy was considered initially to be contraindicated in patients at high risk for operative morbidity and mortality. We hypothesized that this procedure is safe to perform in high-risk patients, stratifying this risk using National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) algorithms.

METHODS

A case-matched, comparative study was performed for high-risk veteran patients who underwent colectomy during the period October 2002-September 2004. Consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy were matched to patients who underwent open colectomy during the same period for age, body mass index (BMI), procedure, and NSQIP-predicted risk. The groups were compared for risk-stratified, 30-day morbidity/mortality, length of stay (LOS), and operating time.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients (23 laparoscopic and 22 open cases) were defined as at high risk for complications (predicted complication >0.15). The rate of major complications was significantly less in the laparoscopic group. There were 4 (18%) cases of postoperative respiratory failure in the open group and none in the laparoscopic group. There was no surgically related mortality in the laparoscopic group, compared with 2 deaths in the open group (P = .5). Median LOS was less in the laparoscopic group (5 days) compared with open (8 days) (P = .001). There were no significant differences in operating time or the number of minor complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the laparoscopic approach to colorectal diseases is safe in the population of patients at high risk for operative morbidity and mortality. Rather, this approach may represent a safer alternative to open access.