Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision for Stage II/III Left-Sided Colon Cancers: A Prospective Study and Comparison with D3 Lymph Node Dissection

Short- and long-term outcomes of preservation versus ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery in laparoscopic D3 lymph node dissection for descending colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic D3 lymph node (LN) dissection between ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) (LIMA) and preservation of the IMA (PIMA) for descending colon cancer using propensity score-matched analysis.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 101 patients with stage I-III descending colon cancer who underwent laparoscopic D3 LN dissection with LIMA (n = 60) or PIMA (n = 41) at a single center between January 2005 and March 2022. After propensity score matching, 64 patients (LIMA, n = 32; PIMA, n = 32) were included in the analysis. The primary endpoint was the long-term outcomes, and the secondary endpoint was the surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

In the matched cohort, no significant difference was noted in the surgical outcomes, including the operative time, estimated blood loss, number of harvested LNs, number of harvested LN 253, and complication rate. The long-term outcomes were also not significantly different between the LIMA and PIMA groups (3-year recurrence-free survival, 72.2% vs. 75.6%, P = 0.862; 5-year overall survival, 69.8% vs. 63.4%, P = 0.888; 5-year cancer-specific survival, 84.2% vs. 82.8%, P = 0.607). No recurrence of LN metastasis was observed around the IMA root.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic D3 dissection in PIMA was comparable to that in LIMA regarding both short- and long-term outcomes. The optimal LN dissection for descending colon cancer should be investigated in future large-scale studies.

Extended Versus Standard Complete Mesocolon Excision in Sigmoid Colon Cancer: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether extended complete mesocolic excision (e-CME) for sigmoid colon cancer improves oncological outcomes without compromising morbidity or functional results.

BACKGROUND

In surgery for cancer of the sigmoid colon and upper rectum, s-CME removes the lymphofatty tissue surrounding the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA), but not the lymphofatty tissue surrounding the portion of the inferior mesenteric vein that does not run parallel to the IMA. Evidence about the safety and efficacy of extending CME to include this tissue is lacking.

METHODS

This single-blind study randomized sigmoid cancer patients at 4 centers to undergo e-CME or s-CME. The primary outcome was the total number of lymph nodes harvested. Secondary outcomes included disease-free and overall survival at 2 years, morbidity, and bowel and genitourinary function. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03107650.

RESULTS

We analyzed 93 patients (46 e-CME and 47 s-CME). Perioperative outcomes were similar between groups. No differences between groups were found in the total number of lymph nodes harvested [21 (interquartile range, IQR, 14-29) in e-CME vs 20 (IQR, 15-27) in s-CME, P = 0.873], morbidity (P = 0.829), disease-free survival (P = 0.926), or overall survival (P = 0.564). The extended specimen yielded a median of 1 lymph node (range, 0-6), none of which were positive.Bowel function recovery was similar between arms at all timepoints. Males undergoing e-CME had worse recovery of urinary function (P = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Extending lymphadenectomy to include the IMV territory did not increase the number of lymph nodes or improve local recurrence or survival rates.

Right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision is safe, leads to an increased lymph node yield and to increased survival: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The introduction of complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right colon cancer has raised an important discussion in relation to the extent of colic and mesenteric resection, and the impact this may have on lymph node yield. As uncertainty remains regarding the usefulness of and indications for right hemicolectomy with CME and the benefits of CME compared with a traditional approach, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the two procedures in terms of safety, lymph node yield and oncological outcome.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature from 2009 up to March 15th, 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two hundred eighty-one publications were evaluated, and 17 met the inclusion criteria and were included. Primary endpoints analysed were anastomotic leak rate, blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, 3- and 5-year oncologic outcomes. Secondary outcomes were operating time, conversion, intraoperative complications, reoperation rate, overall and Clavien-Dindo grade 3-4 postoperative complications.

RESULTS

In terms of safety, right hemicolectomy with CME is not inferior to the standard procedure when comparing rates of anastomotic leak (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.38-1.79), blood loss (MD -32.48, 95% CI -98.54 to -33.58), overall postoperative complications (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67-1.00), Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV postoperative complications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.82-2.28) and reoperation rate (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26-1.75). Traditional surgery is associated with a shorter operating time (MD 16.43, 95% CI 4.27-28.60) and lower conversion from laparoscopic to open approach (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.00-2.96). In terms of oncologic outcomes, right hemicolectomy with CME leads to a higher lymph node yield than traditional surgery (MD 7.05, 95% CI 4.06-10.04). Results of statistical analysis comparing 3-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival were better in the CME group, RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.27-0.66 and RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.56, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Right hemicolectomy with CME is not inferior to traditional surgery in terms of safety and has a greater lymph node yield when compared with traditional surgery. Moreover, right-sided CME is associated with better overall and disease-free survival.

Brazilian society of surgical oncology: Guidelines for the surgical treatment of mid-low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer in North America, Western Europe, and Brazil, and represents an important public health problem. It is estimated that approximately 30% of all the CRC cases correspond to tumors located in the rectum, requiring complex multidisciplinary treatment. In an effort to provide surgeons who treat rectal cancer with the most current information based on the best evidence in the literature, the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO) has produced the present guidelines for rectal cancer treatment that is focused on the main topics related to daily clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES

The SBCO developed the present guidelines to provide recommendations on the main topics related to the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer based on current scientific evidence.

METHODS

Between May and June 2021, 11 experts in CRC surgery met to develop the guidelines for the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer. A total of 22 relevant topics were disseminated among the participants. The methodological quality of a final list with 221 sources was evaluated, all the evidence was examined and revised, and the treatment guideline was formulated by the 11-expert committee. To reach a final consensus, all the topics were reviewed via a videoconference meeting that was attended by all 11 of the experts.

RESULTS

The prepared guidelines contained 22 topics considered to be highly relevant in the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer, covering subjects related to the tests required for staging, surgical technique-related aspects, recommended measures to reduce surgical complications, neoadjuvant strategies, and nonoperative treatments. In addition, a checklist was proposed to summarize the important information and offer an updated tool to assist surgeons who treat rectal cancer provide the best care to their patients.

CONCLUSION

These guidelines summarize concisely the recommendations based on the most current scientific evidence on the most relevant aspects of the treatment of mid-low rectal cancer and are a practical guide that can help surgeons who treat rectal cancer make the best therapeutic decision.

Pathological features of lymph nodes around inferior mesenteric artery in rectal cancer: a retrospective study

Objective

This study aimed to explore the pathological characteristics of lymph nodes around inferior mesenteric artery in rectal cancer and its risk factors and its impact on tumor staging.

Methods

485 rectal cancer patients underwent proctectomy surgery were collected in this study. Clinical features of patients, including gender, age, BMI, tumor size, pathological type, differentiation, nerve invasion, lymph nodes, tumor marker, and pathological examinations, were analyzed.

Results

A total of 485 cases were included in this study. There were 29 cases with IMA-LN metastasis; the metastasis rate was 5.98% (29/485). Positive IMA-LNs were associated with distance from anal verge, CEA, pathological type, differentiation, nerve invasion, T stage, and N stage. Multivariate analysis showed that distance from anal verge, CEA level, differentiation, and T stage were independent risk factors for positive IMA-LNs.

Conclusion

Distance from anal verge, CEA level, differentiation, and T stage were independent risk factors for positive IMA-LNs. No skip metastasis occurred in IMA-LNs. We should choose the appropriate surgical methods to achieve better oncological results and reduce the incidence of postoperative complications.

Impact factors of lymph node retrieval on survival in locally advanced rectal cancer with neoadjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

Conventional clinical guidelines recommend that at least 12 lymph nodes should be removed during radical rectal cancer surgery to achieve accurate staging. The current application of neoadjuvant therapy has changed the number of lymph node dissection.

AIM

To investigate factors affecting the number of lymph nodes dissected after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer and to evaluate the relationship of the total number of retrieved lymph nodes (TLN) with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

A total of 231 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer from 2015 to 2017 were included in this study. According to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)/Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) classification system and the NCCN guidelines for rectal cancer, the patients were divided into two groups: group A (TLN ≥ 12, n = 177) and group B (TLN < 12, n = 54). Factors influencing lymph node retrieval were analyzed by univariate and binary logistic regression analysis. DFS and OS were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

The median number of lymph nodes dissected was 18 (range, 12-45) in group A and 8 (range, 2-11) in group B. The lymph node ratio (number of positive lymph nodes/total number of lymph nodes) (P = 0.039) and the interval between neoadjuvant therapy and radical surgery (P = 0.002) were independent factors of the TLN. However,TLN was not associated with sex, age, ASA score, clinical T or N stage, pathological T stage, tumor response grade (Dworak), downstaging, pathological complete response, radiotherapy dose, preoperative concurrent chemotherapy regimen, tumor distance from anal verge, multivisceral resection, preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level, perineural invasion, intravascular tumor embolus or degree of differentiation. The pathological T stage (P < 0.001) and TLN (P < 0.001) were independent factors of DFS, and pathological T stage (P = 0.011) and perineural invasion (P = 0.002) were independent factors of OS. In addition, the risk of distant recurrence was greater for TLN < 12 (P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

A shorter interval to surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer under indications may cause increased number of lymph nodes harvested. Tumor shrinkage and more extensive lymph node retrieval may lead to a more favorable prognosis.

Predictive value of the sentinel lymph node procedure in the staging of non-metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Despite the recent growing interest of the scientific community, there is still no consensus on the actual applicability and effectiveness of sentinel lymph node (SL) procedure in colon cancers. This study aims to quantify feasibility, detection rate, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the SL identified with fluorescent dye in early colon cancers (ECC).

METHODS

This study conducted a consecutive sampling of 95 patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer who have been treated with laparoscopic colon resection and complete mesocolic excision after a 25-mg indocyanine green peritumoral laparoscopic injection and SL identification with a near-infrared camera. The SL was later isolated and sent to ultra-staging.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients with an average age of 71 (range 37-90) and a mean BMI of 25 (range 18-39) have been recruited. On the patient sample (92 Pts), an average of 1.49 SL (range 1-5) and a mean time of 4 min were identified. The detection rate was 96.8% and the negative predictive value and accuracy rates were 96.2% and 93.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Mapping the SL with fluorescent dye can play an important role in the treatment of colon cancers, particularly those at early stages, and can lead to ultra-conservative surgery.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Complete Mesocolon Excision in Right Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic complete mesocolon excision (LCME) for right colonic cancer improves oncological outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare intraoperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes after LCME and open total mesocolon excision (OCME) for right-sided colonic cancers.

METHODS

Literature searches of electronic databases and manual searches up to January 31, 2019, were performed. Random-effects meta-analysis model was used. Review Manager Version 5.3 was used for pooled estimates.

RESULTS

After screening 1334 articles, 10 articles with a total of 2778 patients were eligible for inclusion. Compared to OCME, LCME improves results in terms of overall morbidity (OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.80, p = 0.0001), blood loss (MD = 56.56, 95% CI 19.05 to 94.06, p = 0.003), hospital stay (MD = 2.18 day, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.83, p = 0.009), and local (OR = 2.12, 95% CI 1.09 to 4.12, p = 0.03) and distant recurrence (OR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.23-2.16, p = 0.0008). There was no significant difference regarding mortality, anastomosis leakage, number of harvested lymph nodes, and 3-year disease-free survival. Open approach was significantly better than laparoscopy in terms of operative time (MD = - 34.76 min, 95% CI - 46.01 to - 23.50, p < 0.00001) and chyle leakage (OR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.96, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that LCME in right colon cancer surgery is superior to OCME in terms of overall morbidity, blood loss, hospital stay, and local and distant recurrence with a moderate grade of recommendation due to the retrospective nature of the included studies.

Laparoscopic colectomies associated with decreased retrieval of 12 or more lymph nodes compared to open in elective colon cancer surgery

Background

Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide. Lymph node (LN) retrieval is a key factor for pathologic staging and prognosis of colorectal cancer. Increase in number of LNs removal suggests improvement in tumour clearance and decrease in metastatic spread. Studies have suggested that excising 12 or more LNs during colectomy in patients with colon cancer is associated with improved survival. To date, there have been no studies to determine whether minimally invasive surgery affects the ability to retrieve 12+ LNs in elective colon cancer surgery. Therefore, we elected to determine whether a difference exists on the ability to retrieve 12+ nodes in elective colon cancer colectomies performed open versus laparoscopic.

Methods

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Procedure Specific Colectomy database was analysed for the year 2014–2015. Inclusion criteria were colon cancer (ICD-9 Code 153.9), age greater than 18 years. Exclusion criteria were missing data. Data abstracted included patient demographics, type of operation performed and number of LNs retrieved. The patients were categorised based on their elective colon cancer colectomies such as laparoscopic or open. Binary logistic regression was used to identify confounding variables in the retrieval of 12+ LNs.

Results

After accounting for missing cases, a total of 18,792 patients with a diagnosis of colon cancer were analysed. Twelve or more LNs were retrieved in 88% (16,538) of patients, Among them, 2,516 patients underwent laparoscopic colectomy and 5,284 patients underwent open colectomy. The difference was not statistically significant for the average number of LNs retrieved among both the groups. Open operative approach compared to the laparoscopic approach was associated with 15% greater odds of retrieval of >12 LNs (OR 1.148; 95% CI (1.035–1.272); p = 0.008).

Conclusion

The majority of colectomies such as open or laparoscopic are able to retrieve 12 or more LNs. However, there are greater odds of retrieving more than 12 LNs with the open approach compared to the laparoscopic approach. By allowing for more LN retrieval, open colectomies suggest improvement in tumour clearance and decrease metastatic spread. Additional research is needed to further investigate the specific factors influencing the ability to retrieve an adequate number of LNs, such as viewing angles provided with an open approach versus laparoscopic approach.

Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes Between 3D and 2D Imaging Laparoscopic Colectomy with D3 Lymphadenectomy for Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional (3D) imaging for laparoscopy was introduced to overcome the limitations of conventional two-dimensional (2D) imaging that lacked depth perception and spatial orientation. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of 3D imaging in laparoscopic colectomy with D3 lymphadenectomy for colon cancer.

METHODS

From February 2014 to October 2016, the prospective database of 278 consecutive patients with colon cancer was analyzed retrospectively; these patients underwent laparoscopic surgery with 2D (n = 111) and 3D (n = 167) imaging, with curative intent.

RESULTS

No difference was found in sex, body mass index, history of abdominal surgery, and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade between the 3D and 2D groups. The estimated blood loss was less in the 3D group than in the 2D group (50 mL [30-100 mL] versus 100 mL [50-100 mL], P < .001). The number of resected lymph nodes was higher in the 3D group (n = 47 [37.5-60] versus 41 [32-51.5], P = .001). However, a difference in operative time was not observed in both groups (150 minutes [125-175 minutes] versus 155 minutes [135-177.5 minutes], P = .186). Postoperative morbidity was similar in both groups (7.8% versus 8.1%, P = 1.000). Time to pass first flatus (3 days [2-4 days] versus 3 days [3-4 days], P = .746) and postoperative hospital stay (6 days [6-8 days] versus 6 days [6-7 days], P = .087) were also similar.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that laparoscopic colectomy with D3 lymphadenectomy for colon cancer using 3D laparoscopic systems appears to be beneficial, with less blood loss, which should be addressed in prospective studies.

Laparoscopic vs open complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation for colon cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (L-CME) with its open (O-CME) counterpart.

METHODS

We conducted an electronic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trails, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, SciELO, and Korean Journal databases from their inception until May 2017. We considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that included patients with colonic cancer comparing L-CME and O-CME. Primary outcomes included the quality of the resected specimen (lymph nodes retrieved, complete mesocolic plane excision, tumor to arterial high tie, resected mesocolon surface). Secondary outcomes included the three-year and five-year overall and disease-free survival rates, recurrence of the disease, surgical data, and postoperative morbidity and mortality. Two authors of the review screened the methodological quality of the eligible trials and independently extracted data from individual studies.

RESULTS

A total of one RCT and eleven CCTs (four from Europe and seven from Asia) met the inclusion criteria for the current meta-analysis. These studies involved 1619 patients in L-CME and 1477 patients in O-CME. The L-CME was associated with the same quality of the resected specimen, with no differences regarding the retrieved lymphnodes (MD = -1.06, 95%CI: -3.65 to 1.53, P = 0.42), and tumor to high tie distance (MD = 14.26 cm, 95%CI: -4.30 to 32.82, P = 0.13); the surface of the resected mesocolon was higher in the L-CME group (MD = 11.75 cm², 95%CI: 9.50 to 13.99, P < 0.001). The L-CME was associated with a lower rate of blood transfusions (OR = 0.45, 95%CI: 0.27 to 0.75, P = 0.002), faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, and less postoperative overall complication rate. The L-CME approach was associated with a statistical significant better three-year overall (OR = 2.02, 95%CI: 1.31 to 3.12, P = 0.001, I² = 28%) and disease-free (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.00 to 2.10, P = 0.05, I² = 0%) survival.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach offers the same quality of the resected specimen as the open approach in complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation for colon cancer. The laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation is superior in all perioperative results and at least non-inferior in long-term oncological outcomes.

Safety, quality and effect of complete mesocolic excision vs non-complete mesocolic excision in patients with colon cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis

AIM

The application of complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer is controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the safety, quality and effect of CME with non-complete mesocolic excision (NCME) in patients with colon cancer.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, the Cochrane Library and Scopus to identify studies comparing CME with NCME in colon cancer. We focused on three study outcome areas: safety (operation time, blood loss, complications, mortality); quality (large bowel length, distance from the tumour to the high vascular tie, area of mesentery, total lymph nodes); and effect (long-term survival).

RESULTS

A total of 8586 patients from 12 studies were included in the meta-analysis. CME was associated with greater intra-operative blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD) 79.87, 95% CI: 65.88-93.86], more postoperative surgical complications (relative risk 1.23, 95% CI: 1.08-1.40), longer large bowel resection (WMD 47.06, 95% CI: 10.49-83.62), greater distance from the tumour to the high vascular tie (WMD 17.51, 95% CI: 15.16-19.87), larger area of mesentery (WMD 36.09, 95% CI: 18.06-54.13) and more lymph nodes (WMD 6.13, 95% CI: 1.97-10.28) than NCME. CME also had positive effects on 5-year survival [hazard ratio (HR) 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13-0.81], 3-year survival (HR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.39-0.86) and 3-year survival for Stage III disease (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.60-0.80) compared with NCME.

CONCLUSION

Limited evidence suggests that CME is a more effective strategy for improving specimen quality and survival but with a higher complication rate.