Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal resection in patients with previous abdominal operations

Impact of previous abdominal surgery on robotic-assisted rectal surgery in patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma: a propensity score matching study

Background

The application of minimally invasive surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) and a history of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) remains controversial. This retrospective study with propensity score matching (PSM) investigated the impact of PAS on robotic-assisted rectal surgery outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT).

Methods

In total, 203 patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent preoperative CCRT and robotic-assisted rectal surgery between May 2013 and December 2019 were enrolled. Patients were categorized into PAS and non-PAS groups based on the PAS history. The PSM caliper matching method with 1-to-3 matches was used to match PAS patients with non-PAS.

Results

Of the 203 enrolled patients, 35 were PAS patients and 168 were non-PAS patients. After PSM, 32 PAS patients and 96 non-PAS patients were included for analysis. No significant between-group differences were noted in the perioperative outcomes, including median console time (165 min (PAS) vs. 175 min (non-PAS), P = 0.4542) and median operation time (275 min (PAS) vs. 290 min (non-PAS), P = 0.5943) after PSM. Postoperative recovery and overall complication rates were also similar (all P > 0.05). Moreover, the between-group differences in pathological or short-term oncological outcomes were also nonsignificant (all P > 0.05). No 30-day postoperative deaths were observed in either group.

Conclusion

The current results indicate that robotic-assisted surgery is safe and feasible for PAS patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing preoperative CCRT. However, future prospective randomized clinical trials are required to verify these findings.

Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery in Patients With Previous Abdominal Surgery: A Single-center Experience and Literature Review

To present the outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in colorectal cancer patients with a previous history of abdominal surgery. Data of a total of 121 patients with primary colorectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic surgery were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into 2 groups as those with previous abdominal surgery (PAS, n=34) and those without (non-PAS, n=87). Gastric and colonic surgeries were the most common procedures in the major PAS group, whereas gynecologic and obstetric surgeries and appendectomy were the most common procedures in the minor PAS group. However, there were statistically significant differences in the overall complication rates, wound complications, and anastomotic leaks, although there were no significant differences in the rates of postoperative ileus, pneumonia, port site herniation, and postoperative bleeding between the groups. Our study results suggest that laparoscopic colorectal surgery can be safely performed in patients with colorectal cancer who underwent abdominal surgery previously.

Robotic surgeries for patients with colorectal cancer who have undergone abdominal procedures: Protocol for meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although the safety and the advantages of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries have been confirmed, the use of both modalities in patients with previous abdominal surgeries (PAS) history remains uncertain. Herein, we perform a meta-analysis to investigate the impact of PAS on perioperative recovery outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.

METHODS

We will search PUBMED, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese Biomedical database (CBM), WanFang data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) up to January 2018. Studies will be screened by title, abstract, and full text independently and in duplicate. Studies that report the impact of PAS on perioperative recovery outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries will be eligible for inclusion. Outcome variables will be assessed included combined resection, conversion, operation time, blood loss, number of retrieved lymph nodes, days to soft diet intake, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Assessment of risk of bias and data synthesis will be performed using STATA SE 12.0. Heterogeneity among studies will be assessed using the I statistic.

RESULTS

Randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and propensity-matched comparative studies will be used for the quantitative synthesis of the meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of PAS on perioperative recovery outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

We aim to draw an objective conclusion of the comparisons in aspects of perioperative outcomes and provide physicians level I evidences for clinical decision makings.

Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgeries for Patients With Colorectal Cancer Who Have Had a Previous Abdominal Surgery

PURPOSE

The impact of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) on surgical outcomes from laparoscopic and robot surgeries is inconclusive. This study aimed to investigate the impact of PAS on perioperative outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.

METHODS

From March 2007 to February 2014, a total of 612 and 238 patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic surgeries, respectively. Patients were divided into 3 groups: those who did not have a PAS (NPAS), those who had a major PAS, and those who had a minor PAS. We further divided the patients so that our final groups for analysis were: patients with NPAS (n = 478), major PAS (n = 19), and minor PAS (n = 115) in the laparoscopy group, and patients with NPAS (n = 202) and minor PAS (n = 36) in the robotic surgery group.

RESULTS

In the laparoscopy group, no differences in the conversion rates between the 3 groups were noted (NPAS = 1.0% vs. major PAS = 0% vs. minor PAS = 1.7%, P = 0.701). In the robotic surgery group, the conversion rate did not differ between the NPAS group and the minor PAS group (1.0% vs. 2.8%, P = 0.390). Among the groups, neither the operation time, blood loss, days to soft diet, length of hospital stay, nor complication rate were affected by PAS.

CONCLUSION

PAS did not jeopardize the perioperative outcomes for either laparoscopic or robotic colorectal surgeries. Therefore, PAS should not be regarded as an absolute contraindication for minimally invasive colorectal surgeries.

Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients with previous abdominal surgery: A systematic review

AIM: To perform a systematic review focusing on short-term outcomes after colorectal surgery in patients with previous abdominal open surgery (PAOS).

METHODS: A broad literature search was performed with the terms “colorectal”, “colectomy”, “PAOS”, “previous surgery” and “PAOS”. Studies were included if their topic was laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients with PAOS, whether descriptive or comparative. Endpoints of interest were conversion rates, inadvertent enterotomy and morbidity. Analysis of articles was made according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

RESULTS: From a total of 394 citations, 13 full-texts achieved selection criteria to be included in the study. Twelve of them compared patients with and without PAOS. All studies were retrospective and comparative and two were case-matched. The selected studies comprised a total of 5005 patients, 1865 with PAOS. Among the later, only 294 (16%) had history of a midline incision for previous gastrointestinal surgery. Conversion rates were significantly higher in 3 of 12 studies and inadvertent enterotomy during laparoscopy was more prevalent in 3 of 5 studies that disclosed this event. Morbidity was similar in the majority of studies. A quantitative analysis (meta-analysis) could not be performed due to heterogeneity of the studies.

CONCLUSION: Conversion rates were slightly higher in PAOS groups, although not statistical significant in most studies. History of PAOS did not implicate in higher morbidity rates.

Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Reoperative Abdomen or Pelvis

Laparoscopy has become widely accepted as the preferred surgical approach in the management of benign and malignant colorectal diseases. Once considered a relative contraindication in patients with prior abdominal surgery (PAS), as surgeons have continued to gain expertise in advanced laparoscopy, minimally invasive approaches have been increasingly incorporated in the reoperative abdomen and pelvis. Although earlier studies have described conversion rates, most contemporary series evaluating the impact of PAS in laparoscopic colorectal resection have reported equivalent conversion and morbidity rates between reoperative and non-reoperative cases, and series evaluating the impact of laparoscopy in reoperative cases have demonstrated improved short-term outcomes with laparoscopy. The data overall highlight the importance of case selection, careful preoperative preparation and planning, and the critical role of surgeons' expertise in advanced laparoscopic techniques. Challenges to the widespread adoption of minimally invasive techniques in reoperative colorectal cases include the longer learning curve and longer operative time. However, with the steady increase in adoption of minimally invasive techniques worldwide, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is likely to continue to be applied in the management of increasingly complex reoperative colorectal cases in an effort to improve patient outcomes. In the hands of experienced MIS surgeons and in carefully selected cases, laparoscopy is both safe and efficacious for reoperative procedures in the abdomen and pelvis, with measurable short-term benefits.

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer patients who underwent previous abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery may be impeded by intraperitoneal adhesions caused by previous abdominal surgery. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of previous abdominal surgery on short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 3188 patients with primary colorectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery between January 2004 and December 2013. Patients with a history of abdominal surgery (n = 593, 18.6 %) were compared to those without such history (n = 2595, 81.4 %).

RESULTS

Patients who had undergone previous abdominal surgery exhibited acceptable intraoperative outcomes, including conversion to open surgery, operative time, estimated blood loss, and the number of harvested lymph nodes. Overall, postoperative complication rates were similar between the groups (10.8 vs. 10.6 %, p = 0.885). Subgroup analysis revealed that patients with history of major abdominal surgery (n = 165) had higher rates of conversion to open surgery (4.2 vs. 1.7 %, p = 0.033), prolonged postoperative ileus (5.5 vs. 2.0 %, p = 0.008), and wound complications (4.2 vs. 1.2 %, p = 0.006), when compared to those without prior abdominal surgery. Previous major abdominal surgery was an independent risk factor for conversion to open surgery [adjusted odds ratio = 2.740; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.197-6.269]. Disease-free survival [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.847; 95 % CI 0.532-1.346] and overall survival (adjusted HR = 0.846; 95 % CI 0.432-1.657) were not observed to differ between the previous major abdominal surgery group and those without previous abdominal surgery.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients with a history of abdominal surgery exhibited acceptable short- and long-term outcomes. Patients with a history of previous abdominal surgery had relatively higher rate of conversion to open surgery as well as higher incidences of prolonged postoperative ileus and wound complications compared to patients without such history.

Current status of laparoscopic surgery for patients with Crohn's disease

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly utilized in treatment for refractory or complicated Crohn's disease, and new developments aim at further reducing the abdominal trauma and improving the outcome. This review evaluates current literature about minimally invasive surgery for patients with Crohn's disease, latest advances in single-incision surgery, and methods of specimen extraction.

METHODS

Literature was reviewed with focus on the following topics: indications, surgical procedures, conversions, complications, and short- as well as long-term outcomes of laparoscopic compared to open surgery for refractory, complicated, and recurrent Crohn's disease.

RESULTS

Short-term benefits such as shorter hospital stay and faster postoperative recovery are accompanied by long-term benefits such as better cosmetic results and lower treatment-associated morbidity. Single-incision surgery and minimally invasive methods of specimen extraction help to further reduce the surgical trauma and are gradually implemented in the treatment.

CONCLUSION

In experienced centers, laparoscopic surgery for Crohn's disease is safe and as feasible as open operations, even for selected cases with operations for complicated or recurrent disease. However, accurate analysis of the data is complicated by the heterogeneity of clinical presentations as well as the variety of performed procedures. Additional long-term data are needed for evaluation of true benefits of the new techniques.