Laparoscopic Versus Conventional Open Surgery in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective measurement of retention of laparoscopic skills: a prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

There has been an overall growth of 462% in laparoscopic procedures performed by surgical residents between 2000 and 2018. Therefore, training courses in laparoscopic surgery are advocated in many postgraduate programs. While the immediate effect is determined in some cases, the retention of acquired skills is rarely investigated. The objective of this study was to objectively measure the retention of laparoscopic technical skills to offer a more personalized training program.

METHODS

First year general surgery residents performed two fundamental laparoscopic skills tasks (Post and Sleeve and the ZigZag loop) on the Lapron box trainer. Assessment was performed before, directly after, and 4 months after completing the basic laparoscopy course. Force, motion, and time were the measured variables.

RESULTS

A total of 29 participants were included from 12 Dutch training hospitals and 174 trials were analyzed. The 4 months assessment of the Post and Sleeve showed a significant improvement in force ( P= 0.004), motion ( P ≤0.001), and time ( P ≤0.001) compared to the baseline assessment. The same was true for the ZigZag loop: force ( P ≤0.001), motion ( P= 0.005), and time ( P ≤0.001).Compared to the 4 months assessment, skill deterioration was present for the Post and Sleeve in the mean force ( P= 0.046), max impulse ( P= 0.12), and time ( P= 0.002). For the ZigZag loop, skill decay was observed for force ( P= 0.021), motion ( P= 0.015), and time ( P ≤0.001) parameters.

CONCLUSION

Acquired laparoscopic technical skills decreased 4 months after the basic laparoscopy course. Compared to baseline performance, participants showed significant improvement, however deterioration was observed compared to postcourse measurements. To preserve acquired laparoscopic skills, it is recommended to incorporate maintenance training, preferably with objective parameters, in training curricula.

A Cost Overview of Minimally Invasive Total Mesorectal Excision in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Population-based Cohort in Experienced Centres

Background

Total mesorectal excision has been the gold standard for the operative management of rectal cancer. The most frequently used minimally invasive techniques for surgical resection of rectal cancer are laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and transanal total mesorectal excision. As studies comparing the costs of the techniques are lacking, this study aims to provide a cost overview.

Method

This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent total mesorectal resection between 2015 and 2017 at 11 dedicated centers, which completed the learning curve of the specific technique. The primary outcome was total in-hospital costs of each technique up to 30 days after surgery including all major surgical cost drivers, while taking into account different team approaches in the transanal approach. Secondary outcomes were hospitalization and complication rates. Statistical analysis was performed using multivariable linear regression analysis.

Results

In total, 949 patients were included, consisting of 446 laparoscopic (47%), 306 (32%) robot-assisted, and 197 (21%) transanal total mesorectal excisions. Total costs were significantly higher for transanal and robot-assisted techniques compared to the laparoscopic technique, with median (interquartile range) for laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and transanal at €10,556 (8,642;13,829), €12,918 (11,196;16,223), and € 13,052 (11,330;16,358), respectively (P < 0.001). Also, the one-team transanal approach showed significant higher operation time and higher costs compared to the two-team approach. Length of stay and postoperative complications did not differ between groups.

Conclusion

Transanal and robot-assisted approaches show higher costs during 30-day follow-up compared to laparoscopy with comparable short-term clinical outcomes. Two-team transanal approach is associated with lower total costs compared to the transanal one-team approach.

Trends of sphincter-preserving surgeries for low lying rectal cancer: A 20-year experience in China

Background

Over the last 2 decades, patients with low rectal cancer have had better outcomes from improvements in surgical techniques in sphincter preservation. We aimed to quantify the trends in sphincter-preserving surgeries for low rectal cancer over 20 years in a top tertiary hospital in China.

Methods

Between 1999 and 2021, a cohort of patients with primary malignant rectal tumor ≤5cm from the anal verge and who received elective surgeries at Changhai Hospital, Shanghai, China, was identified. Data were extracted from electronic medical records. A Joinpoint Regression Model was used to analyze trends in surgical procedures by average annual percentage change (AAPC). Adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess overall survival.

Results

Among a total of 4,172 patients during the study period, 3,111 (74.6%) underwent a sphincter-preserving surgery and 1,061 (25.4%) received APR. Sphincter-preserving surgery increased 3.6% per year (95%CI, 2.3-4.9). Low anterior resection was the most performed procedure (86.3%) and maintained a steady trend, while intersphincteric resection increased 49.4% annually (95%CI, 19.5-86.7) after initiation. Laparoscopic techniques increased 15.1% per year (95%CI, 8.4-43.4) after initiation. Sphincter-preserving surgery increased annually for tumors ≤2cm, 2-≤3cm and 3-≤4cm from the anal verge (AAPC 7.1, 4.5-9.8; 4.7, 3.1-6.3; 2.7, 1.7-3.6, respectively). Furthermore, patients with sphincter-preserving surgery had a better overall survival than abdominoperineal resection (APR) patients (adjusted HR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.65-0.93, p=.01).

Conclusions

Utilization of sphincter-preserving surgeries increased significantly over the last 20 years. Patients with low rectal cancer who underwent sphincter preservation had better survival than similar patients who underwent APR.

Updates of Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage after Colorectal Surgery

Anastomotic leakage is a potentially severe complication occurring after colorectal surgery and can lead to increased morbidity and mortality, permanent stoma formation, and cancer recurrence. Multiple risk factors for anastomotic leak have been identified, and these can allow for better prevention and an earlier diagnosis of this significant complication. There are nonmodifiable factors such as male gender, comorbidities and distance of tumor from anal verge, and modifiable risk factors, including smoking and alcohol consumption, obesity, preoperative radiotherapy and preoperative use of steroids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Perioperative blood transfusion was shown to be an important risk factor for anastomotic failure. Recent studies on the laparoscopic approach in colorectal surgery found no statistical difference in anastomotic leakage rate compared with open surgery. A diverting stoma at the time of primary surgery does not appear to reduce the leak rate but may reduce its clinical consequences and the need for additional surgery if anastomotic leakage does occur. It is still debatable if preoperative bowel preparation should be used, especially for left colon and rectal resections, but studies have shown similar incidence of postoperative leak rate.

Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate anus-sparing technique for low rectal cancer and is considered an oncologically safe alternative to abdominoperineal resection. The application of the robotic approach to ISR (RISR) has been described by few specialized surgical teams with several differences regarding approach and technique. This review aims to discuss the technical aspects of RISR by evaluating point by point each surgical controversy. Moreover, a systematic review was performed to report the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of RISR. Postoperative morbidities after RISR are acceptable. RISR allows adequate surgical margins and adequate oncological outcomes. RISR may result in severe bowel and genitourinary dysfunction affecting the quality of life in a portion of patients.

Increased long-term mortality after open colorectal cancer surgery: A multicentre population-based study

AIM

Unlike meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, population-based studies in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients have shown a significant association between open surgery and increased 30- and 90-day mortality compared with laparoscopic surgery. Long-term mortality, however, is scarcely reported. This retrospective population-based study aimed to compare long-term mortality after open and laparoscopic surgery for CRC.

METHOD

The Dutch Colorectal Audit and the Dutch Cancer Centre registry were used to identify patients from three large nonacademic teaching hospitals who underwent curative resection for CRC between 2009 and 2018. Patients with relative contraindications for laparoscopic surgery (cT4 or pT4 tumours, distant metastasis requiring additional resection and emergency surgery) were excluded. Multivariable regression was used to assess the effect of laparoscopic surgery on long-term mortality with adjustment for gender, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, TNM stage, chemoradiation therapy and other confounders.

RESULTS

We included 4531 patients, of whom 1298 (29%) underwent open surgery. The median follow-up was 43 months (interquartile range 23-71 months). Open surgery was associated with an increased risk of long-term mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.45, p = 0.001). Mixed-effects Cox regression with year of surgery as a random effect also showed an increased risk after open surgery (adjusted hazard ratio 1.33, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.52, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Open surgery seems to be associated with increased long-term mortality in the elective setting for CRC patients. A minimally invasive approach might improve long-term outcomes.

Anus-Preserving Surgery in Advanced Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: A Perspective on Oncological Safety of Intersphincteric Resection

The surgical management of low-lying rectal cancer, within 5 cm from the anal verge (AV), is challenging due to the possibility, or not, to preserve the anus with its sphincter muscles maintaining oncological safety. The standardization of total mesorectal excision, the adoption of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the implementation of rectal magnetic resonance imaging, and the evolution of mechanical staplers have increased the rate of anus-preserving surgeries. Moreover, extensive anatomy and physiology studies have increased the understanding of the complexity of the deep pelvis. Intersphincteric resection (ISR) was introduced nearly three decades ago as the ultimate anus-preserving surgery. The definition and indication of ISR have changed over time. The adoption of the robotic platform provides excellent perioperative results with no differences in oncological outcomes. Pushing the boundaries of anus-preserving surgeries has risen doubts on oncological safety in order to preserve function. This review critically discusses the oncological safety of ISR by evaluating the anatomical characteristics of the deep pelvis, the clinical indications, the role of distal and circumferential resection margins, the role of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the outcomes between surgical approaches (open, laparoscopic, and robotic), the comparison with abdominoperineal resection, the risk factors for oncological outcomes and local recurrence, the patterns of local recurrences after ISR, considerations on functional outcomes after ISR, and learning curve and surgical education on ISR.

Latest Advances in Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer

Background

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been a preferable alternative to abdominoperineal resection (APR) for anal preservation in patients with low rectal cancer. Laparoscopic ISR and robotic ISR have been widely used with the proposal of 2 cm or even 1 cm rule of distal free margin and the development of minimally invasive technology. The aim of this review was to describe the newest advancements of ISR.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify studies on ISR techniques, preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT), complications, oncological outcomes, and functional outcomes and thereby to summarize relevant information and controversies involved in ISR.

Results

Although PCRT is employed to avoid positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) and decrease local recurrence, it tends to engender damage of anorectal function and patients' quality of life (QoL). Common complications after ISR include anastomotic leakage (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), urinary retention, fistula, pelvic sepsis, and prolapse. CRM involvement is the most important predictor for local recurrence. Preoperative assessment and particularly rectal endosonography are essential for selecting suitable patients. Anal dysfunction is associated with age, PCRT, location and growth of anastomotic stoma, tumour stage, and resection of internal sphincter.

Conclusions

The ISR technique seems feasible for selected patients with low rectal cancer. However, the postoperative QoL as a result of functional disorder should be fully discussed with patients before surgery.

A controlled study on the efficacy and quality of life of laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) and extralevator abdominoperineal resection (ELAPE) in the treatment of extremely low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to compare the postoperative quality of life (QoL) and survival outcomes in lower rectal cancer (LRC) patients who undergo either laparoscopic- intersphincteric resection or extralevator abdominoperineal excision (L-ELAPE) after long-course neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT).

METHODS

This prospective, single-center, non-randomized, controlled, non-blinded, phase I/II clinical trial is designed to enroll 159 eligible LRC patients who achieved favorable response to long-course nCRT (2 × 25 Gy). After informed consent, the patients will be assigned into the laparoscopic intersphincteric resection group or L-ELAPE group according to their own will. Standard radical laparoscopic surgeries will be performed for every participant. Then every participant will be followed up for 3 years. The primary outcomes are scores of QoL questionnaire-core 30, QoL questionnaire-colorectum 29, Wexner incontinence score, International Prostate Symptom Score (for male), International Index of Erectile Function-5 (for male) and Female Sexual Function Index (for female). The secondary outcomes consist of incomplete circumferential resection margin rate, 3-year local recurrence, 3-year disease-free survival, 3-year overall survival and other surgical outcomes.

DISCUSSION

This is the first prospective clinical controlled trial to assess postoperative QoL and efficacy for LRC patients after favorable long-course nCRT. The result is expected to provide new evidence for a more detailed individualized treatment guideline for LRC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1800017512; ChiCTR.org) on August 2, 2018.

Progress in surgical treatment of familial adenomatous polyposis

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is an autosomal dominant genetic disease with a high tendency to develop colorectal cancer. The timing and choice of preventive surgical interventions should be based on the number, size and severity of adenomas, combined with a variety of considerations, in order to effectively prevent cancer and make patients easy to accept. Total proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedure, which could minimize the residual rectal mucosa and reduce the risk of adenoma recurrence, has become the first choice for patients with FAP. Besides, laparoscopic IPAA has obvious advantages such as cosmetic appearance, quick recovery, little adhesion and high pregnancy rate. Patients with FAP should be managed by experienced surgeons working in specialized medical centers in order to get the most reasonable treatment at the best time and achieve long-term effective outcomes.