Hybrid Laparoendoscopic Approaches to Endoscopically Unresectable Colon Polyps

Colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection for colonic neoplasms: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The current literature describes a variety of techniques detailed under the name of combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) procedures. This systematic review of literature assessed the outcomes of colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic-wedge resection (CAL-WR) in particular to evaluate its feasibility to remove colonic lesions that do not qualify for endoscopic resection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane) were searched for studies evaluating CAL-WR for the treatment of colonic lesions. Studies with missing full text, language other than English, systematic reviews, and studies with fewer than ten patients were excluded. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Out of 68 results, duplicate studies (n = 27) as well as studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria (n = 32) were removed. Nine studies were included, encompassing 326 patients who underwent a CAL-WR of the colon. The technical success rate varied from 93 to 100%, with an R0 resection rate of 91-100%. Morbidity ranged from 6% to 20%. The quality of the included studies was rated as low to moderate and contained heterogeneous terminology, methodology, and outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient high-quality data and substantial variation in outcome measures to draw firm conclusions regarding the value of CAL-WR. Although CAL-WR is a promising local resection technique for endoscopically unremovable neoplasms of the colon, further investigation of this technique in well-designed prospective, multicenter studies with predefined outcome measures is required.Trial registration: A protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO with the number CRD42023407966.

Combined Endoscopic Robotic Surgery for Complex Colon Polyps

BACKGROUND

Combined endoscopic robotic surgery is a surgical technique that modifies traditional endoscopic laparoscopic surgery with robotic assistance to aid in the removal of complex colonic polyps. This technique has been described in the literature but lacks patient follow-up data.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and outcomes of combined endoscopic robotic surgery.

DESIGN

A retrospective review of a prospective database.

SETTING

East Jefferson General Hospital, Metairie, Louisiana.

PATIENTS

Ninety-three consecutive patients who underwent combined endoscopic robotic surgery from March 2018 to October 2021 were included in the study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Operative time, intraoperative complication, 30-day postoperative complication, hospital length of stay, and follow-up pathology report results were the main outcome measures.

RESULTS

Combined endoscopic robotic surgery was completed in 88 of 93 participants (95%). Among the 88 participants who completed combined endoscopic robotic surgery, the average age was 66 years (SD = 10), BMI was 28.8 kg/m 2 (SD = 6), and history of previous abdominal surgeries was 1 (SD = 1). Median operative time was 72 minutes (range, 31-184 minutes) and polyp size was 40 mm (range, 5-180 mm). The most common polyp locations were the cecum, ascending colon, and transverse colon (31%, 28%, 25%). Pathology mainly demonstrated tubular adenoma (76%). Data on 40 patients who underwent follow-up colonoscopy were available. The average follow-up time was 7 months (range, 3-22 months). One patient (2.5%) had polyp recurrence at the resection site.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations for our study include a lack of randomization and follow-up rate to assess for recurrence. The low compliance rate may be due to procedure cancelations/difficulty scheduling because of changing coronavirus disease 2019 guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to literature-reported statistics for its laparoscopic counterpart, combined endoscopic robotic surgery was associated with decreased operation times and resection site polyp recurrence. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C208 .

CIRUGA ROBTICA ENDOSCPICA COMBINADA PARA PLIPOS DE COLON COMPLEJOS

ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada es una técnica quirúrgica que modifica la cirugía laparoscópica endoscópica tradicional con asistencia robótica para ayudar en la extracción de pólipos colónicos complejos. Esta técnica está previamente descrita en la literatura, pero carece de datos de seguimiento de los pacientes.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la seguridad y los resultados de la cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva de una base de datos prospectiva.AJUSTE:Hospital General East Jefferson, Metairie LouisianaPACIENTES:Noventa y tres pacientes consecutivos y sometidos a cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada por un solo cirujano colorrectal desde marzo de 2018 hasta octubre de 2021.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tiempo operatorio, complicación intraoperatoria, complicación posoperatoria a los 30 días, duración de la estancia hospitalaria y resultados del informe patológico de seguimiento.RESULTADOS:La cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada se completó en 88 de 93 (95%). Entre los 88 participantes que completaron la cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada, la edad promedio fue de 66 años (desviación estándar = 10), índice de masa corporal de 28,8 (desviación estándar = 6) y el historial de cirugías abdominales previas de 1 (desviación estándar = 1). La mediana del tiempo operatorio y el tamaño de los pólipos fueron 72 minutos (rango 31-184 minutos) y 40 milímetros (rango 5-180 milímetros), respectivamente. Las ubicaciones de pólipos más comunes fueron el ciego, colon ascendente y transverso (31%, 28%, 25%). La patología demostró principalmente adenoma tubular (76%). Los datos de 40 pacientes sometidos a una colonoscopia de seguimiento estaban disponibles. El tiempo medio de seguimiento fue de 7 meses (rango 3-22 meses). Un paciente (2,5%) presentó recurrencia polipoidea en el sitio de resección.LIMITACIONES:Las limitaciones de nuestro estudio incluyeron la falta de aleatorización y la tasa de seguimiento para evaluar la recurrencia. La baja tasa de seguimiento puede deberse a la renuencia del paciente en hacerse una colonoscopia o cancelaciones de procedimientos por la dificultad para programar debido a cambios de COVID-19.CONCLUSIÓN:En comparación con las estadísticas reportadas en la literatura para su contraparte laparoscópica, la cirugía robótica endoscópica combinada se asoció con reducción en tiempos de operación y recurrencia de pólipos en el sitio de resección. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C208 . (Traducción - Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy ).

Colonoscopic-Assisted Laparoscopic Wedge Resection for Colonic Lesions: A Prospective Multicentre Cohort Study (LIMERIC-Study)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic wedge resection.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The use of segmental colectomy in patients with endoscopically unresectable colonic lesions results in significant morbidity and mortality. CAL-WR is an alternative procedure that may reduce morbidity.

METHODS

This prospective multicentre study was performed in 13 Dutch hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were (1) colonic lesions inaccessible using current endoscopic resection techniques (judged by an expert panel), (2) non-lifting residual/recurrent adenomatous tissue after previous polypectomy or (3) an undetermined resection margin after endoscopic removal of a low-risk pT1 colon carcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, technical success rate and radicality were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 118 patients included (56% male, mean age 66 years, SD ± 8 years), 66 (56%) had complex lesions unsuitable for endoscopic removal, 34 (29%) had non-lifting residual/recurrent adenoma after previous polypectomy and 18 (15%) had uncertain resection margins after polypectomy of a pT1 colon carcinoma. CAL-WR was technically successful in 93% and R0 resection was achieved in 91% of patients. Minor complications (Clavien-Dindo I-II) were noted in 7 patients (6%) and an additional oncologic segmental resection was performed in 12 cases (11%). Residual tissue at the scar was observed in 5% of patients during endoscopic follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

CAL-WR is an effective, organ-preserving approach that results in minor complications and circumvents the need for major surgery. CAL-WR therefore deserves consideration when endoscopic excision of circumscribed lesions is impossible or incomplete.

Large polyps: Pearls for the referring and receiving endoscopist

Polyps are precursors to colorectal cancer, the third most common cancer in the United States. Large polyps, i.e.,, those with a size ≥ 20 mm, are more likely to harbor cancer. Colonic polyps can be removed through various techniques, with the goal to completely resect and prevent colorectal cancer; however, the management of large polyps can be relatively complex and challenging. Such polyps are generally more difficult to remove en bloc with conventional methods, and depending on level of expertise, may consequently be resected piecemeal, leading to an increased rate of incomplete removal and thus polyp recurrence. To effectively manage large polyps, endoscopists should be able to: (1) Evaluate the polyp for characteristics which predict high difficulty of resection or incomplete removal; (2) Determine the optimal resection technique (e.g., snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, etc.); and (3) Recognize when to refer to colleagues with greater expertise. This review covers important considerations in this regard for referring and receiving endoscopists and methods to best manage large colonic polyps.

Full-Thickness Laparoendoscopic Excision for Management of Complex Colon Polyps

BACKGROUND

Benign colon polyps are increasingly being detected because of improved colonoscopic screening and early detection of masses on the adenoma-to-carcinoma pathway. Full-thickness laparoendoscopic excision is a colon-preserving technique for endoscopically unresectable polyps consisting of endoscopically guided nonanatomic wedge colectomy.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and success of full-thickness laparoendoscopic excision compared to segmental colectomy for complex polyps not amenable to endoscopic resection.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective case-control study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a tertiary academic center.

PATIENTS

A prospectively maintained institutional database identified 22 patients with benign complex polyps managed with full-thickness laparoendoscopic excision from 2015 to 2020. These patients were compared with 22 propensity score-matched controls from the same database that underwent laparoscopic segmental colectomy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was inpatient length of stay. Secondary outcomes included operative details and postoperative morbidities.

RESULTS

Full-thickness laparoendoscopic excision was successful in all patients. Patients had a median age of 64 years (41-85), and 82% were men. Final pathology revealed complete excision of benign lesions in 20 of 22 patients and adenocarcinoma in 2 of 22. For the adenocarcinomas, 1 patient underwent subsequent elective colectomy without complications, and 1 patient declined surgery. Propensity score matching was successful for age, sex, BMI, ASA score, colon location, and prior abdominal surgery. Compared with controls, cases had significantly shorter operative time (89.5 minutes (46-290) vs 122 minutes (85-200), p = 0.009), length of stay (1 day (0-17) vs 3 days (1-8), p < 0.001), and reduced blood loss (5 mL (2-15) vs 25 mL (10-150), p < 0.001). Thirty-day morbidity (9.1% vs 27.3%, p = 0.240) was not significantly different. An unplanned 30-day reoperation was performed in 1 patient for suspected small-bowel obstruction. There was 1 mortality due to decompensated cirrhosis in the treatment group.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its single-institution retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

Full-thickness laparoendoscopic excision is safe and successful compared with corresponding segmental colectomy for complex polyps. Favorable postoperative outcomes, including decreased operative time, length of stay, and blood loss, make it a useful approach for managing complex polyps throughout the colon.

Combined Endoscopic-Robotic Resection of a Giant Polyp to Avoid Colorectal Resection

Colorectal cancer prevention relies on effective screening through colonoscopy and polypectomy. Several techniques and methods have been described to manage complex colonic polyps such as the ones that are endoscopically unresectable. Across time, we have been able to perform less invasive techniques that include different types of colonic resections, ranging from partial thickness, full-thickness and, segmental colectomies, however, none has proven to be the treatment of choice for these lesions. The technique presented here is an attractive alternative to segmental colectomy using a robotic platform to perform a full-thickness resection.

Variation in colectomy rates for benign polyp and colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Removal of pre-cancerous polyps on screening colonoscopy is a mainstay of colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention. Complex polyps may require surgical removal with colectomy, an operation with a 17% morbidity and 1.5% mortality rate. Recently, advanced endoscopic techniques have allowed some patients with complex polyps to avoid the morbidity of colectomy. However, the rate of colectomy for benign polyp in the United States is unclear, and variation in this rate across geographic regions has not been studied. We compared regional variation in colectomy rates for CRC versus benign polyp.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective population-based study of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing colectomy for CRC or benign polyp, using the 100% Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files from 2010 to 2015. We used multivariable linear regression to obtain population-based colectomy rates for CRC and benign polyp at the hospital referral region (HRR) level, adjusted for age, sex, and race.

RESULTS

Of 280,815 patients, 157,802 (65.8%) underwent colectomy for CRC compared to 81,937 (34.2%) for benign polyp. Across HRRs, colectomy rates varied 5.8-fold for cancer (0.32-1.84 per 1000 beneficiaries). However, there was a 69-fold variation for benign polyp (0.01-0.69). While the rate of colectomy for CRC was correlated with the rate of colectomy for benign polyp (slope = 0.61, 95% CI 0.48-0.75), HRRs with the lowest or highest rates of colectomy for CRC did not necessarily have similarly low or high rates for benign polyp.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of colectomy for benign polyp is much more variable compared to CRC, suggesting overuse of colectomy for benign polyp in some regions. This variation may stem from provider-level differences, such as endoscopists' referral practice or skill or surgeons' decision to perform colectomy, or from limited access to advanced endoscopists. Interventions to increase endoscopic resection of benign polyps may spare some patients the morbidity and cost of surgery.

Simultaneous Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Combined Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgery for an Endoluminal Tumor of the Sigmoid Colon: A Case Report

Patient: Female, 70

Final Diagnosis: An endoluminal tumor

Symptoms: Abdominal pain

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: —

Specialty: Gastroenterology and Hepatology

Combined endo-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) for benign colon polyps: a single institution cost analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic removal of benign colon polyps is not always possible, even with advanced endoscopic techniques. Segmental colectomy has been the traditional therapy but is associated with an increased risk of complications and may be unnecessary since fewer than 20% of these polyps harbor malignancy. Combined endo-laparoscopic surgery (CELS) has emerged as an alternative method to address these polyps. While feasibility, safety, and improved short-term patient outcomes have been demonstrated, there has never been an evaluation of cost comparing these two approaches within a single institution.

METHODS

In this observational cohort study, we compared short-term outcomes and costs of 11 patients who underwent CELS for right colon polyps with 11 patients who underwent a laparoscopic right colectomy between April 2014 and November 2017. The cost analysis covered the perioperative period from operating room to hospital discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 11 patients underwent an attempted CELS procedure for right colon polyps with a success rate of 90% (10/11). The median length of stay (LOS) for CELS patients was 1 day. LOS for patients who underwent a laparoscopic right colectomy at TMC was 3.82 days. The median OR time for CELS was 166.73 (± 57.88) min, compared to 204.73 (± 51.49) min for a laparoscopic right colectomy. The calculated total cost for a CELS patient was $5523.29, compared to $12,626.33 for a laparoscopic right colectomy, for a cost-savings of $7103.04 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

CELS procedures are associated with good short-term outcomes and are performed at a lower cost compared to traditional laparoscopic colectomy, with the most significant cost saver being shorter hospital LOS. This is the first study to directly compare the cost of CELS to traditional laparoscopic colectomy in the surgical management of benign colon polyps within a single institution.

Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery for gastric tumors: Perspective for actual practice and oncological benefits

Laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (LECS) is a surgical technique that combines laparoscopic partial gastrectomy and endoscopic submucosal dissection. LECS requires close collaboration between skilled laparoscopic surgeons and experienced endoscopists. For successful LECS, experience alone is not sufficient. Instead, familiarity with the characteristics of both laparoscopic surgery and endoscopic intervention is necessary to overcome various technical problems. LECS was developed mainly as a treatment for gastric submucosal tumors without epithelial lesions, including gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). Local gastric wall dissection without lymphadenectomy is adequate for the treatment of gastric GISTs. Compared with conventional simple wedge resection with a linear stapler, LECS can provide both optimal surgical margins and oncological benefit that result in functional preservation of the residual stomach. As technical characteristics, however, classic LECS involves intentional opening of the gastric wall, resulting in a risk of tumor dissemination with contamination by gastric juice. Therefore, several modified LECS techniques have been developed to avoid even subtle tumor exposure. Furthermore, LECS for early gastric cancer has been attempted according to the concept of sentinel lymph node dissection. LECS is a prospective treatment for GISTs and might become a future therapeutic option even for early gastric cancer. Interventional endoscopists and laparoscopic surgeons collaboratively explore curative resection. Simultaneous intraluminal approach with endoscopy allows surgeons to optimizes the resection area. LECS, not simple wedge resection, achieves minimally invasive treatment and allows for oncologically precise resection. We herein present detailed tips and pitfalls of LECS and discuss various technical considerations.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal polyps: experience of ten years

Background. Laparoscopy or its combination with endoscopy is the next step for “difficult” polyps. The purpose of the paper was to review the outcomes of the laparoscopic approach to the management of “difficult” colorectal polyps.

Materials and methods. From 2006 to 2016, 58 patients who underwent laparoscopic treatment for “difficult” polyps that could not be treated by endoscopy at the National Cancer Institute, Lithuania, were included. The demographic data, the type of surgery, length of post-operative stay, complications, and final pathology were reviewed prospectively.

Results. The mean patient was 65.9 ± 8.9 years of age. Laparoscopic mobilization of the colonic segment and colotomy with removal of the polyp was performed in 15 (25.9%) patients, laparoscopic segmental bowel resection in 41 (70.7%) cases: anterior rectal resection with partial total mesorectal excision in 18 (31.0%), sigmoid resection in nine (15.5%), left hemicolectomy in seven (12.1%), right hemicolectomies in two (3.4%), ileocecal resection in two (3.4%), resection of transverse colon in two (3.4%), and sigmoid resection with transanal retrieval of specimen in one (1.7%). Two patients (3.4%) underwent laparoscopic-assisted endoscopic polypectomy. The mean post-operative hospital stay was 5.7 ± 2.4 days. There were four complications (6.9%). All patients recovered after conservative treatment. The mean polyp size was 3.5 ± 1.9 cm. Final histopathology revealed hyperplastic polyps (n = 2), tubular adenoma (n = 9), tubulovillous adenoma (n = 31), carcinoma in situ (n = 12), and invasive cancer (n = 4).

Conclusions. For the management of endoscopically unresectable polyps, laparoscopic surgery is currently the technique of choice.