Minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer. Initial follow-up

A case of vaginal recurrence following laparoscopic left-sided colon cancer resection combined with transvaginal specimen extraction

Here, we presented a case of laparoscopic colon cancer resection who developed vaginal recurrence after transvaginal specimen extraction. To our knowledge, this is the first case report on natural orifice specimen extraction-site cancer recurrence. A 59-year-old female underwent laparoscopic left hemicolectomy due to left-sided colon adenocarcinoma, and the specimen was removed through the vagina. She was admitted to the hospital with the complaint of vaginal discharge after 1 year. Tumoural infiltration on the posterior vaginal wall was diagnosed, and biopsy was reported as adenocarcinoma. The patient underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection, total abdominal hysterectomy, bilateral salpingooferectomy and en bloc resection of the posterior vaginal wall due to the local recurrence of colon cancer. She had no recurrence or metastasis within the 3^rd year after primary tumour surgery. Recurrence at the specimen extraction site after natural orifice surgery should be considered among the complications. For this reason, incision-preserving methods should not be neglected.

Extensive regeneration of the stomach using bioabsorbable polymer sheets

BACKGROUND

The growing prevalence of endoscopic surgery in recent years has led to the minimization of postoperative scarring. However, this procedure does not allow for the regeneration of the resected digestive tract, which compromises the postoperative maintenance of digestive function. In this preliminary study, we developed an artificial gastric wall (AGW) using bioabsorbable polymer (BAP), and evaluated the ability of this BAP patch to repair and regenerate a widely defective gastric wall in an animal model.

METHODS

Pigs were laparotomized under general anesthesia. An 8 × 8-cm, round portion of the anterior gastric wall was excised and replaced by an AGW. The AGW was composed of a copolymer comprising 50% lactic acid and 50% caprolactone. The animals were relaparotomized 4, 8, or 12 weeks after implantation, after which they underwent resection of the entire stomach for gross and histologic evaluation of the graft sites.

RESULTS

All recipient pigs survived until killing. By 4-8 weeks, the graft site revealed progressively fewer mucosal defect after each day. Moreover, the grafted area was indistinguishable from the native stomach 12 weeks after AGW implantation. The structures of the regenerated mucous membrane and muscle layers were identical to those of the native stomach. Furthermore, proton pumps were found in the regenerated tissue.

CONCLUSION

The BAP sheets helped to restore extensive gastric defects without causing any deformation. The use of BAP sheets may become a new therapeutic method that prevents alterations of gastric volume after extensive gastrectomy for stomach cancer and other diseases.

A meta-analysis of laparoscopy compared with open colorectal resection for colorectal cancer

The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of the overall complication, mortality, and recurrence rate between laparoscopic resection and open surgery for colorectal cancer. We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library and systematically reviewed the randomized controlled trials by comparing the overall complication, mortality, and recurrence rate between laparoscopic resection and open surgery for colorectal cancer. Fifteen trials with 4,207 patients who reported long-term outcomes of the overall complication, mortality, and recurrence rate were included. The combined results of the individual trials showed no statistically significant difference in the odds ratio (OR) for overall recurrence (OR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.77-1.11, P=0.34), local recurrence (OR 0.81, 95% CI, 0.59-1.12, P=0.20), distant metastasis (OR 1.01, 95% CI, 0.78-1.30, P=0.95), wound-site recurrence (OR 1.97, 95% CI, 0.77-5.02, P=0.16), colorectal cancer-related mortality (OR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.66-1.02, P=0.07), colon cancer-related mortality (OR 0.85, 95% CI, 0.66-1.09, P=0.20), rectal cancer-related mortality (OR 0.76, 95% CI, 0.53-1.11, P=0.16), and overall mortality (OR 0.87, 95% CI, 0.73-1.73, P=0.11) between the laparoscopic surgery and open surgery groups. The overall complications in the laparoscopic surgery group were much lower than that in the open surgery group (OR 0.71, 95% CI, 0.58-0.87, P=0.001). This meta-analysis showed that the successful laparoscopic colorectal resection for colorectal cancer was as effective as open surgery in terms of the oncological outcomes, thereby suggesting that laparoscopic surgery can be continued in patients with colorectal cancer.

Long-term outcomes for laparoscopic versus open resection of nonmetastatic colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Skepticism prevails over the role of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Long-term data on the safety and efficacy of this technique remain scarce. A nonrandomized, prospective comparison of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery (LS) with open surgery (OS) was undertaken to evaluate long-term survival.

METHODS

A total of 233 patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer underwent either a laparoscopic (n = 116) or an open (n = 117) potentially curative resection. Almost all patients between July 1996 and December 2002 were randomized within two consecutive trials; however, prior to this, a significant proportion of patients received open surgery. The primary endpoints were overall survival, disease-free survival, and cumulative disease recurrence. Analysis was by intention to treat.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 40 months for the LS group and 58 months for the OS group. No statistically significant difference was found between the LS and OS groups regarding overall survival (P = 0.603 for colon cancer and P = 0.841 for rectal cancer), disease-free survival (P = 0.684 for colon cancer and P = 0.625 for rectal cancer), and overall recurrence (P = 0.383 for colon cancer and P = 0.166 for rectal cancer). Cumulative recurrence rate in colon cancer favors OS (P = 0.018). In rectal cancer, this did not differ between the two treatment modalities (P = 0.965). Tumor resection margins and lymph node harvest were similar in the two surgery groups. Perioperative mortality in the LS group was also no different from the OS group (P = 0.644 for 30-day mortality and P = 0.692 for in-hospital mortality).

CONCLUSION

Long-term survival data support LS as a safe, effective alternative to conventional surgery for treating potentially curative colorectal cancer. However, the higher cumulative recurrence associated with LS in the colonic cancer group needs further research into its underlying cause.

The role of clinical trials in the development of novel surgical techniques

The new paradigm and standard for medicine and surgery is the evidence-based practice for which the randomized controlled trial is fundamental. Despite the early involvement of surgeons in clinical trials, randomized trials testing novel surgical therapies are not common. Indeed, only 24% of surgical patients are managed based on level 1 evidence. This chapter details how randomized controlled trial methodologies facilitate the development of level 1 evidence in support of minimally invasive colon cancer surgery.

Laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection for cancer: a meta-analysis of results of randomized controlled trials on recurrence

AIMS

Laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer remains controversial. This is because it is uncertain whether recurrence rates after laparoscopic-assisted surgery is comparable to those reported after open surgery. We performed a meta-analysis of the published literature in an attempt to answer this question.

METHODS

Eligible articles were identified by searches of MEDLINE, EMBase and the Cochrane database. Prospective randomized clinical trials were eligible if they included patients with colorectal cancer treated by laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery and followed for recurrence.

RESULTS

Ten trials with information on disease recurrence on 2474 patients were included. In the combined results, no statistically significant difference in the OR for overall recurrence between the laparoscopic surgery and open surgery group was found (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71-1.21, P=0.58). Stratified by recurrence type, the combined results of the individual reports show no statistically significant difference for local recurrence (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.50-1.29, P=0.36), distant metastases (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.62-1.29, P=0.56) and port or wound-site recurrence (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.18-6.03, P=0.97) between the two surgical techniques.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis supports that the recurrence rates for patients with colorectal cancer treated by laparoscopic surgery do not differ from those for open surgery. Longer follow-up studies will further define outcomes, comparing the two techniques in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Colorectal cancer: the role of laparoscopy

Since the first report in 1991 the laparoscopic resection of colon cancer is progressing slowly and just in the last 2-3 years is becoming more popular. The resistance to its use by some general and colo-rectal surgeons is receding. The explanations are that technology is evolving quickly and there is a worldwide diffusion of more sophisticated surgical instruments. Moreover several randomized trials have been published showing that the outcomes of laparoscopic colon surgery are similar or better than those of conventional surgery and the early reports suggesting the tumour dissemination were not confirmed. The revolution in oncological surgery that we are observing in these last decades with the introduction and diffusion of mini-invasive approach is comparable to that regarding conventional surgery during the period of Halsted. Therefore the principles of surgery accepted during the years must not be forgotten.

Robotic total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer

Robotic techniques have been developed to facilitate endoscopic surgery and to overcome its disadvantages. Thus, we performed robotic total mesorectal excison (TME) in a patient with rectal cancer, using the da Vinci^® Surgical System. To our knowledge, this is the first robotic low anterior resection, based on standard TME principles, with pelvic autonomic nerve preservation. In conclusion, this robotic system is an excellent instrument for performing the standard TME procedure in rectal cancer patients.

Three-dimensional computed tomography in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal carcinoma

AIM

To evaluate the usefulness of three-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal carcinoma.

METHODS

Seventy-two patients with colorectal cancer who underwent curative operation at our hospital were enrolled in this study. They were classified into two groups by operative procedures. Sixteen patients underwent laparoscopic surgery, laparoscopic group (LG), while 56 patients underwent conventional open surgery, open group (OG). At our institution, contrast-enhanced CT is routinely performed as part of intra-abdominal screening and the 3D images of the major regional vessels are described. We have previously described about the preoperative visualization of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) by 3DCT. This time we newly acquired 3D images of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA)/superior mesenteric vein (SMV), ileocecal artery (ICA), middle colic artery (MCA), and inferior mesenteric vein (IMV). We have compared our two study groups with regard to five items, including clinical anastomotic leakage. We have discussed here the role of 3DCT in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal carcinoma.

RESULTS

The mean length of the incision in LG was 4.625+/-0.89 cm, which was significantly shorter than that in OG (P<0.001). The association between ICA and SMV and SMA was described in the right-sided colectomy. The preoperative imaging of IMA and IMV was created in the rectosigmoidectomy. There was no significant difference in anastomotic leakage between the two groups, but no patients in LG experienced anastomotic leakage.

CONCLUSION

Most of the patients are satisfied with the shorter incisional length following laparoscopic surgery. Preoperative visualization of the major regional vessels may be helpful for the secure treatment of the anastomosis in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal carcinoma.

Data validation in an economic evaluation of surgery for colon cancer

Objectives:This study aimed to validate the accuracy of data retrieved in a prospective multicenter trial, the purpose of which was an economic evaluation of two techniques of surgery for colon cancer.

Methods:Within the Swedish contribution of the COLOR trial (Colon Cancer Open or Laparoscopic Resection), an economic evaluation of open versus laparoscopic surgical techniques was conducted. Data were collected by case record forms (CRF), patient diaries, and telephone surveys every 2 weeks. The study period was 12 weeks, and the perspective was societal. Data from the first consecutive forty patients to complete the health economic study protocol were validated. Retrieved data were compared with data from medical records and data from local social security offices for agreement.

Results:Statistically significant differences were found for duration of anesthesia, length of surgery, number of outpatient consultations by doctors and district nurses, complication rate, and the use of central venous lines. No significant differences were observed concerning length of hospital stay, disposable instruments cost, and time off work, all of which heavily influence total costs.

Conclusions:The present method of data collection regarding resources used in this setting seems to produce accurate data for economic evaluation; however, relative to complication rates, the method did not retrieve accurate data.

Laparoscopic-assisted colon resections: long-term results and survival

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the long-term results and patient survival for laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal malignancies. The place of laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal carcinomas is controversial. The techniques and expected surgical outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted colectomies are being defined as these procedures become more acceptable and reach parity with, or even surpass, results of traditional operations. Anecdotal reports in the literature describe port-site and incisional tumor implantation in patients undergoing laparoscopic-assisted colectomies for colorectal malignancies. This raises concerns about whether these incisional tumor sites are more common in these patients and whether their survival is compromised by the laparoscopic technique.

METHODS

The authors reviewed data from 110 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted colectomies for colorectal cancer to determine the long-term results and survival and to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic-assisted colectomy to the safety and efficacy of open colectomy. Between July 1991 and June 1999, 350 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted colectomies. Of these, 110 patients had colorectal malignancies. Survival rates and patterns of recurrence were compared within the various TNM stages and compared with conventional data after open surgery. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging for colorectal carcinomas and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to determine the survival curves.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic-assisted colon resections for colorectal malignancies were performed in 110 patients. Fifty-one percent of the patients were women, and 49% percent were men, with a mean age of 78.17 years. The mean follow-up was 43 months. Thirteen patients were converted to open operation due to various difficulties encountered during the procedure. Mean operative time was 128.16 minutes, and mean hospital stay was 6.91 days. Perioperative mortality was 2.77%. There were 4 local recurrences. The ten-year survival rates for the various stages were 78% for stage I, 33% for stage II, 30% for stage III, and 0% for stage IV. No port-site implantations occurred.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic-assisted colon resection of colorectal carcinomas is technically feasible and safe. It allows earlier postoperative recovery and a shorter hospital stay. The long-term survival is also satisfactory. The incidence of port-site implants is no more than that with the conventional open technique. Determination of any benefits over the conventional open technique, however, still await prospective randomized trials.

Current status of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer

GOALS

To define the current role of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND

Perhaps in no other field has so much controversy been generated by laparoscopy as in its application to curative resection of cancer of the colon and rectum. The main controversy centers around the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resections. The 3 major issues are: the adequacy of oncologic resection, recurrence rates and patterns, and the long-term survival.

STUDY

A review of published data by search of Medline database with focus on clinical studies.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic colectomy is feasible and safe. Modest benefits in the quality of life are observed. Same oncologic resection can be performed laparoscopically with no adverse influence on the recurrence rates. In particular, wound recurrences are not a specific complication of laparoscopic technique. At least equivalent survival is obtained by laparoscopic colectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy does not seem to adversely affect chance of cure of colorectal cancer.

Laparoscopic resection of colon Cancer: Consensus of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES)

BACKGROUND

The European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) initiated a consensus development conference on the laparoscopic resection of colon cancer during the annual congress in Lisbon, Portugal, in June 2002.

METHODS

A systematic review of the current literature was combined with the opinions, of experts in the field of colon cancer surgery to formulate evidence-based statements and recommendations on the laparoscopic resection of colon cancer.

RESULTS

Advanced age, obesity, and previous abdominal operations are not considered absolute contraindications for laparoscopic colon cancer surgery. The most common cause for conversion is the presence of bulky or invasive tumors. Laparoscopic operation takes longer to perform than the open counterpart, but the outcome is similar in terms of specimen size and pathological examination. Immediate postoperative morbidity and mortality are comparable for laparoscopic and open colonic cancer surgery. The laparoscopically operated patients had less postoperative pain, better-preserved pulmonary function, earlier restoration of gastrointestinal function, and an earlier discharge from the hospital. The postoperative stress response is lower after laparoscopic colectomy. The incidence of port site metastases is <1%. Survival after laparoscopic resection of colon cancer appears to be at least equal to survival after open resection. The costs of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer are higher than those for open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection of colon cancer is a safe and feasible procedure that improves short-term outcome. Results regarding the long-term survival of patients enrolled in large multicenter trials will determine its role in general surgery.

Port site metastases

BACKGROUND

Concerns about port site metastases have limited the application of minimally invasive surgery for intra-abdominal malignancies. The purpose of this review article was to summarize the current literature regarding port site metastases.

METHODS

A Medline search identified >100 articles in English published during the last 15 years regarding the history, incidence, etiology, and prevention of port site metastases. These articles were reviewed and are summarized.

RESULTS

The incidence of port site metastases, initially thought to be as high as 21%, is now thought to be closer to the incidence of wound metastases after open surgery. Multiple etiologic factors have been studied including direct wound contamination, surgical technique, effects of carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum, and changes in host immune response. Various preventive measures have been proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

Port site metastases are a well-documented and devastating complication after laparoscopic resection of intra-abdominal malignancies. Although the etiology is not yet understood, a number of factors are contributory. All efforts should be made to prevent port site metastases.

Laparoscopic colon resection for colon cancer

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic colon resection for cancer is as yet an unproven operation. This review article summarizes current data on the topic.

METHODS

A Medline review identified articles published since 1990 summarizing patients with potentially curable colon cancer who underwent a laparoscopic-assisted colon resection. Only articles that were randomized or had a control group with historical or matched open cases were used.

RESULTS

Very few prospective randomized controls exist. Several clinical trials are under way with one completed. Data thus far support some patient benefits with a laparoscopic approach. No differences in morbidity, oncologic data, or survival appear to exist.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of ongoing clinical trials are still needed to further evaluate the role of laparoscopic assisted colon resection in patients with potentially curable colon cancer.

Randomized clinical trial of the costs of open and laparoscopic surgery for colonic cancer

BACKGROUND

There has been no randomized clinical trial of the costs of laparoscopic colonic resection (LCR) compared with those of open colonic resection (OCR) in the treatment of colonic cancer.

METHODS

A subset of Swedish patients included in the Colon Cancer Open Or Laparoscopic Resection (COLOR) trial was included in a prospective cost analysis; costs were calculated up to 12 weeks after surgery. All relevant costs to society were included. No effects of the procedures, such as quality of life or survival, were taken into account.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ten patients were included in the primary analysis, 98 of whom had LCR and 112 OCR. Total costs to society did not differ significantly between groups (difference in means for LCR versus OCR euro1846; P = 0.104). The cost of operation was significantly higher for LCR than for OCR (difference in means euro1171; P < 0.001), as was the cost of the first admission (difference in means euro1556; P = 0.015) and the total cost to the healthcare system (difference in means euro2244; P = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Within 12 weeks of surgery for colonic cancer, there was no difference in total costs to society incurred by LCR and OCR. The LCR procedure, however, was more costly to the healthcare system.

Single-surgeon surgery in laparoscopic colonic resection

PURPOSE

Short-term benefits have been demonstrated for laparoscopic-assisted colectomy. However, minimally invasive surgery is still in an evolutionary phase. In demonstrating that robotic devices also are useful in laparoscopic colonic surgery, it is fundamental to prove that a single surgeon can perform almost the entire operation on his own.

METHODS

A single surgeon performed forty-one, laparoscopic-assisted, colorectal resections with the assistance of a robotic device (Automated Endoscopic System for Optimal Positioning, Computer Motion) maneuvering the laparoscope. A surgical assistant was included only for the open part of the operation. Main outcome measures were conversion rate, total operating time, and percentage of assistance by a second surgeon.

RESULTS

There were no intraoperative complications, one case of conversion to open surgery, and three postoperative complications. The total operating time ranged from 126 to 252 minutes. A single surgeon with the assistance of a robotic device was able to perform approximately 70 percent of an ileocecal resection, 70 percent of a right hemicolectomy, 80 percent of a sigmoid resection, and 85 percent of a anterior rectal resection without further help of a surgeon.

CONCLUSIONS

A single surgeon with the assistance of a computerized robotic system can complete at least two-thirds of a laparoscopic-assisted, colorectal resection on his own. The use of a robotic device in laparoscopic-assisted, colonic surgery is safe, efficient, and feasible, and will prove even more so in future. This also will result in a patient-driven demand for high-standard, minimally invasive surgery.

Prospective evaluation of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction for mid and low rectal cancers

BACKGROUND

Results of laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision and colonic J-pouch reconstruction are few. The aim of this study was to examine outcomes after this procedure.

METHODS

Patients with mid or low rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with construction of a colonic J pouch, performed by a single surgeon. The patients were evaluated prospectively.

RESULTS

From March 1999 to January 2002, 44 patients underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction. There were 21 men and 23 women of median age 65.5 years. The median operating time was 180 min and median blood loss 80 ml. There was no conversion to an open procedure. The median distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge was 4 cm. No procedure-related death occurred. Four patients developed significant complications that required reoperation. With a median follow-up period of 15 months, no port-site recurrence was noted. Five patients developed distant metastases, and two had local recurrence in the pelvis. Bowel function was satisfactory at 6, 12 and 18 months after ileostomy closure.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with colonic J-pouch reconstruction is safe, with a reasonable operating time. Early results suggest satisfactory oncological control and functional outcomes.

Tumor cell dissemination during laparoscopy: prevention and therapeutic opportunities

Port-site recurrences (PSRs) are abdominal wall recurrences that occur in the subcutaneous tissue within a trocar site after cancer laparoscopy and are not associated with peritoneal carcinomatosis. In order to develop PSRs, viable tumor cells must be liberated from the primary tumor, be transported to a wound, and find there a favorable environment for growth. The short clinical delay in the occurrence of PSRs and their size suggest massive cell seeding into the abdominal wall. Traumatic handling of the tumor, slipping of trocars, liquid projection, as well as poor extraction techniques can all cause implantation of malignant cells into the subcutaneous tissue. Such contact can also occur postoperatively if the trocar channels remain open. Some histologies (e.g. gallbladder adenocarcinoma), the presence of ascites and advanced tumor stage are risk factors for PSRs. Further conditions--including the use of gas--might also play a limited role. The first preventive measure is the correct indication for a laparoscopic approach. Several techniques have been demonstrated to prevent PSRs in the animal model: (a) fixation of trocars to the abdominal wall; (b) prevention of leakage; (c) careful specimen handling; (d) reducing trauma to the abdominal wall; (e) specimen isolation before extraction from the abdominal cavity; (f) trocar-site irrigation with a cytotoxic solution, and (g) closure of peritoneum. Further innovative therapies are currently under investigation. In the clinical setting, correct indication, surgical expertise and application of prophylactic measures seem to be the best way to prevent the occurrence of PSRs.

Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection with coloplasty and coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The feasibility of laparoscopic rectal resection in patients with mid or low rectal cancer was studied prospectively with regard to quality of mesorectal excision, autonomic pelvic nerve preservation and anal sphincter preservation.

METHODS

Laparoscopic rectal excision was performed in 32 patients (21 men) with rectal carcinoma located 5 cm from the anal verge. Most patients had T3 disease and received preoperative radiotherapy. The surgical procedure was performed 6 weeks after radiotherapy and included total mesorectal excision, intersphincteric resection, transanal coloanal anastomosis with coloplasty and loop ileostomy.

RESULTS

Three patients needed conversion to a laparotomy. Postoperative morbidity occurred in ten patients, related mainly to coloplasty. Macroscopic evaluation showed an intact mesorectal excision in 29 of 32 excised specimens; microscopically, 30 of the 32 resections were R0. Sphincter preservation was achieved in 31 patients. The hypogastric nerves and pelvic plexuses were identified and preserved in 24 of the 32 patients. Sexual function was preserved in ten of 18 evaluable men.

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic approach can be considered in most patients with mid or low rectal cancer.

Care of the laparoscopic colectomy patient

Laparoscopic bowel surgery has demonstrated patient care benefits of decreased duration of hospital stay, smaller incisions, lower risk of cardiopulmonary complications, and reduced risk of small-bowel obstruction. Resection of complicated diverticular disease and inflammatory bowel disease can be technically challenging and may be associated with higher conversion rates. The applicability of these techniques to colon cancer is supported by a growing body of evidence that demonstrates similar survival and recurrence rates obtained by open resection and the exaggeration of the risk of port site recurrences. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has also challenged much of the standard postoperative care plans used for colectomy. Optimal postoperative care of the laparoscopic colectomy patient requires an appreciation of the faster recovery enjoyed by these patients and the fact that ambulation and dietary advancement need to be accelerated. Coordination between the surgical team and the postoperative care team is essential to obtain all the benefits associated with this new approach to the management of colorectal disease.

The role of laparoscopy in the multimodality treatment of colorectal cancer

Ten years after the first reports of laparoscopic techniques in colorectal surgery the precise role for these approaches in future colorectal practice as still to be defined. However, it seems most unlikely that the application is going to disappear. Laparoscopic colectomy is undoubtedly a complex. time-consuming procedure and it is clear that the technique is intolerant of difficult cases and will likely remain thus. Therefore. the potential advantages of laparoscopy do not as yet appear to be attainable across the board in colorectal resection. Such generalized advantage may, however, be tantalizingly close. Although many studies have failed to show major benefits for laparoscopy in terms of postoperative recovery, it must be remembered that most of these have been of insufficient statistical power to settle the issue. What is clear to all involved in the field is that very many patients do gain major benefit from the minimally invasive approach. The challenge for the future lies in developing the technology to such a point that these benefits for patients are more reproducible. The requirement for a significant abdominal incision to deliver an intact specimen represents a significant hurdle in this regard. The importance of pathological staging for colorectal cancer at present mandates retrieval of an intact specimen. It is of course possible that radiological staging may develop to such a point that surgeons need only remove the lesion with minimal attention to lymphadenectomy. Alternatively, new adjuvant therapies may arrive that, by virtue of increased efficacy and low side-effect profiles, may be applicable to all but the earliest lesions. Finally, increasing health awareness and application of screening programs may lead to a preponderance of large polyps and preinvasive lesions for which a more limited resection may be appropriate. Obviously these scenarios remain almost entirely speculative. However, the trend towards less invasive local therapy for colorectal cancer seems inexorable, and we firmly believe that laparoscopy will come to play an increasing role. Finally, we suggest that the oncological safety of laparoscopy is of less concern than was the case some years ago. The specter of port-site metastasis, once so alarming, has faded. It is now apparent from all of the larger scale studies that port-site metastases are not a significant issue in the presence of adequate training and laparoscopic skills. Almost without exception, the accumulating evidence seems to point to equivalence in terms of disease-specific recurrence and survival between patients treated using conventional and laparoscopic techniques. We foresee these findings being confirmed by the North American and European trials.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery For Colorectal Carcinoma

The role of laparoscopic resection in the management of colorectal cancer is still unclear. It has been shown that laparoscopic colectomies can be accomplished with acceptable morbidity. Major concerns are port-site recurrences and neoplastic dissemination. The aims of this study were to compare perioperative results and long-term outcomes in a prospective, nonrandomized study of patients treated by laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection for cancer. In particular, the effects of an initial laparoscopic approach on survival and recurrence were examined. One hundred fifty-seven patients with colorectal carcinoma were included in the prospective trial: 74 underwent laparoscopic resection and 83 underwent conventional open surgery. The two groups were comparable in terms of characteristics, demographic data, stage of disease, and use of adjuvant or palliative chemoradiotherapy. All patients were observed at 1.3- and 6-month intervals. The median duration of follow-up was 60 months (range, 10-125 months). The mean operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group. Six conversions (8.1%) were necessary. The passage of flatus and the restarting of oral intake (P = 0.0001) occurred earlier in the laparoscopic surgery group than in the open conventional surgery group. The mean postoperative stay was significantly shorter in the former group (P = 0.005), as was the length of the scar (P = 0.001). There were no deaths in either group. The overall morbidity was significantly lower (13% versus 33.7%; P = 0.001) in patients treated laparoscopically. No significant differences were observed between the groups in the length of specimens, the size of the tumor, or the number of nodes removed. Late complications were more frequent after open resection (12% versus 5.4%; P = 0.01). Two port-site metastases (2.6%) were seen in stage III and IV locally advanced carcinoma. There was no significant difference in recurrent disease between the groups (24.3% versus 25%) during the 60-month follow-up. Stage-for-stage comparisons showed that disease recurrence rates and crude death rates were comparable.

Laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal malignancies: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal malignancies with open colectomy.

METHODS

Two search strategies were devised to retrieve literature from the Medline, Current Contents, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases until July 1999. Inclusion of papers was determined using a predetermined protocol, independent assessments by two reviewers, and a final consensus decision. English language papers were selected. Acceptable study designs included randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, case series, or case reports. Fifty-two papers met the inclusion criteria. They were tabulated and critically appraised in terms of methodology and design, outcomes, and the possible influence of bias, confounding, and chance.

RESULTS

Little high-level evidence was available. Laparoscopic resection of colorectal malignancy was more expensive and time-consuming, but little evidence suggests high rates of port site recurrence. The new procedure's advantages revolve around early recovery from surgery and reduced pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal malignancies is inadequate to determine the procedure's safety and efficacy. Because of inadequate evidence detailing circumferential marginal clearance of tumors and the necessity of determining a precise incidence of cardiac and other major complications, along with wound and port site recurrence, it is recommended that a controlled clinical trial, ideally with random allocation to an intervention and control group, be conducted. Long-term survival rates need to be a primary aim of such a trial.

Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer: an oncologic feasible option

The conventional and accepted treatment for curative resection of colon cancer is laparotomy with hemicolectomy for right or left sided lesions. The technique of colon resection through an open laparotomy incision is well known. Over the past several years, laparoscopically assisted colectomy has been developed and studied, following the explosion of laparoscopic technology from the cholecystectomy experience and with acquisition of advanced general laparoscopic techniques. The right, left or sigmoid colon can be mobilized and regional lymphadenectomy performed using laparoscopic instruments and video-imaging equipment. The advantage of laparoscopic colectomy is the use of small abdominal port site and wound incisions which translate to reduced postoperative pain and analgesic requirement, earlier return of bowel function and normal physical activities, and shorter hospital stay without increasing health care costs. Laparoscopic colectomy compares favorably with open colectomy in terms of surgical morbidity and mortality. The laparoscopic approach has been shown to be technically and oncologically feasible with equivalent lymph node harvest from mesenteric lymphadenectomy and achieves adequate proximal and distal margins of colonic resection. Despite initial early anecdotal reports of port site cancer recurrence in laparoscopically assisted colectomy, port site recurrence is rare and its incidence is similar to incisional recurrences in conventional open colectomy. Recent prospective comparative studies have demonstrated equivalent patient survival and equivalent local or distant colon cancer recurrences for open versus laparoscopic curative resection of colon cancer.

Port site recurrences after laparoscopic surgery. A review

Port site metastasis has been a surprising event after laparoscopic procedures in cancer patients. No clear data exist about this phenomenon. The aim of this study is to summarize current epidemiologic knowledge about the risk of this complication. A review of all case reports about port site recurrences was undertaken. To date, 164 cases of port site metastases after videoscopic procedures have been reported in 90 papers. We found 108 cases of implantation after laparoscopy for digestive tumors, 23 after thoracoscopy, 29 after gynecological and 4 after urological laparoscopy. Analysis of the current literature confirms that laparoscopy is associated with abdominal cell mobilization to the trocars and instruments. Also low-staged and highly differentiated tumors have been reported to cause post-laparoscopy tumor seeding. The temporary data of the CAE registry 'port site metastases' (Workgroup for Surgical Endoscopy of the German Society of Surgery) are also reported. The analysis of 80 histologically confirmed cases of port site recurrence shows a particular frequency after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for unsuspected gallbladder cancer (n = 59). Postoperative specimen examination revealed a T1 carcinoma in 9 cases (15%), T2 carcinoma in 33 (21%), T3 in 3 (5%) and T4 in 1 case (1.7%). The mean time to clinical tumor relapse was 6 months. Similar patterns were found in a lower number of port site metastases after laparoscopy for colon cancer (n = 2) and for other cancers (n = 9). Clinical evidence that laparoscopy with CO2 pneumoperitoneum can enhance tumor dissemination is given. Port site metastases seem to be secondary to multiple factors including the gas used, local trauma, tumor manipulation, biologic properties of the tumor, and individual surgical skills.

Laparoscopic colectomy

The unique challenges of a laparoscopic approach to colorectal surgery have delayed its widespread adoption into clinical practice. Advances in instrumentation, modifications of technique, and an unequivocal demonstration of its safety undoubtedly will increase its popularity in the future.

Patterns of recurrence and survival after laparoscopic and conventional resections for colorectal carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether survival and recurrence after laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer is compromised by an initial laparoscopic approach.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Laparoscopic colorectal resection for malignancy remains controversial 8 years after its first description. Fears regarding compromised oncologic principles and early recurrence (particularly the phenomenon of port-site metastases) have tempered enthusiasm for this approach. Long-term follow-up data are at present scarce.

METHODS

A prospective comparative trial was undertaken between December 1993 and May 1996, during which 114 patients had laparoscopic-assisted resection by a single laparoscopic colorectal surgeon or conventional open surgery by a second specialist colorectal surgeon. Intensive follow-up for at least 2 years is available on 109 patients. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

Recurrent disease has developed in 27 patients (25%), 16 of 57 in the laparoscopic group (28%) and 11 of 52 in the conventional group (21%). Crude death rates are 26/57 (46%) in the laparoscopic group and 24/52 (46%) in the conventional group. No port-site metastases have occurred; however, wound metastases associated with disseminated disease have developed in three patients in the open group and one in the laparoscopic group. Stage-for-stage survival and recurrence figures are comparable.

CONCLUSION

Oncologic outcome at a minimum of 2 years is not compromised by the laparoscopic approach. Wound recurrences are a feature of laparoscopic and conventional surgery for advanced disease.

Laparoscopic colectomy for Dukes A colon cancer

The use of laparoscopic surgery to treat colon cancer has been well studied; however, the specific use of laparoscopic colectomy for Dukes A colon cancer has not been evaluated. The data of laparoscopic colectomy were compared with those of conventional open colectomy, and the surgical results of patients who underwent surgery for Dukes A colon cancer were evaluated. Between November 1993 and October 1997, 20 patients underwent laparoscopic colectomy for Dukes A colon cancer. Operation time, blood loss, first passage of flatus, day of resumption of oral intake, length of hospital stay after surgery, and number of dissected lymph nodes were compared between 20 patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy and 23 patients who underwent conventional open colectomy for Dukes A colon cancer. In patients with laparoscopic colectomy, when compared with those with conventional open colectomy, mean blood loss was less (103 g vs. 318 g), flatus returned more quickly (3.5 days vs. 4.2 days), oral intake resumed earlier (3.7 days vs. 4.7 days), and postoperative hospital stay was shorter (16.4 days vs. 24.6 days). The mean number of dissected lymph nodes was not different between the two groups (9.2 vs. 9.2 for D2 dissection). No patient had port-site metastasis or recurrence during a follow-up period from 13 to 60 months (median, 38 months). Review of the literature and the authors' findings indicated that none of the 142 reported patients had port-site metastasis after laparoscopic colectomy for Dukes A colon cancer. The results indicate that laparoscopic colectomy is safe and useful when applied to patients with Dukes A colon cancer and performed carefully by trained surgeons.

Laparoscopic surgery for the cure of colorectal cancer: results of a German five-center study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for the cure of colorectal cancer with emphasis on oncologic follow-up in particular.

METHODS

A study was performed of patients with colorectal cancer treated by laparoscopy in five German centers between May 1991 and September 1997. Surgical and pathologic data were recorded in an anonymous registry database and analyzed by type of resection. Standard procedures were sigmoid or left colectomy, anterior resection, abdominoperineal resection, and right hemicolectomy. Follow-up information included incidence of local, distant, and port site recurrence and cancer-related death.

RESULTS

A total of 399 patients (212 females) with a mean age of 66.6 years underwent laparoscopic curative resections (sigmoid resection, 89; left colectomy, 11; anterior resection, 157; abdominoperineal resection, 102; right hemicolectomy, 40). Conversion was necessary in 6.3 percent (n = 25). Complications requiring reoperation occurred in 9 percent (n = 35). Complications that were treated conservatively occurred in 27.6 percent (n = 110). Thirty-day mortality was 1.8 percent (n = 7). First bowel movements resumed on the third postoperative day; patients did not use analgesics after a mean of five days. Mean postoperative hospitalization was two weeks. According to International Union Against Cancer classification, 147 patients had Stage I cancer, 35 had Stage II cancer, and 217 underwent curative resection for Stage III cancer. Mean number of lymph nodes resected was 12.1. At a mean follow-up of 30 months, one port site recurrence was documented. No local recurrence was observed after curative resection of Stage I colorectal cancer. Of 399 patients, local recurrence occurred in 6 patients (Stage II, 2; Stage III, 4), and distant metastases were documented in 25 patients (Stage I, 3; Stage II, 3; Stage III, 19). The highest incidence of cancer-related death occurred after abdominoperineal resection (4.9 percent).

CONCLUSION

To assess the role of laparoscopic colorectal surgery for the cure of cancer objectively, prospective randomized trials are necessary.

Staging of rectosigmoid neoplasia with colonoscopic endoluminal ultrasonography

BACKGROUND

The accurate staging of colorectal neoplasia may aid the stratification of patients for adjuvant treatment. At present the mural extent of neoplasia proximal to the mid rectum is difficult to determine. Prediction of mural invasion could help identify patients suitable for radical resection, minimal access surgery or endoscopic treatment. Colonoscopic endoluminal ultrasonography (EUS) was used in a prospective study to determine the stage of rectosigmoid neoplasia in 121 patients.

METHODS

Mural tumour (T) stage was designated by EUS as uT0/1-uT4 in 121 patients. Nodal (N) staging was performed in 39 cases. EUS staging was compared with histological stage (pT and pN) in 93 patients who underwent resection.

RESULTS

Mural staging of disease using colonoscopic EUS showed good correlation with histo-pathological stage (kappa = 0.85 (95 per cent confidence interval 0.76-0.95)). Overall pT and pN stage accuracy of EUS was 92 and 65 per cent respectively.

CONCLUSION

EUS accurately assessed tumour stage although node staging remained suboptimal. Colonoscopic EUS may aid the selection of treatment in patients with rectosigmoid neoplasia.

Is the port site really at risk? Biology, mechanisms and prevention: a critical view

Early case reports of port site tumour implants led to debate regarding the appropriateness of laparoscopic techniques for abdominal malignancies. Review of clinical, animal and cell culture studies addresses the relationships between tumour staging and shed cell behaviour that contributes to the peri-operative spread of tumours. In addition, a porcine model was used to test tumour cell distribution after laparoscopic and open colonic resections. Clinical evidence indicate that wound recurrence rates are 0.60 and 0.85% for open and laparoscopic colon cancer operations, respectively. Tumour staging and operative techniques are the most important factors determining wound implantation. Port site and open wounds are at equal risk of tumour implantation.

Port-site metastasis after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign disease

We describe the case history of a patient presenting with a port-site metastasis from an occult pancreatic malignancy after laparoscopy for benign gallbladder disease. While port-site recurrence is well recognized after laparoscopy for malignant disease, its presentation after laparoscopy for benign disease is rare, this being only the third such case to be reported in the literature. It emphasizes that all pathology localizing to port sites after surgery should be investigated, as it may represent the earliest sign of a hitherto occult intra-abdominal malignancy.

Laparoscopic resection does not adversely affect early survival curves in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To determine the survival curves for laparoscopic resection (LR) of colorectal cancer.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Laparoscopic resection for cure of colorectal cancer is controversial, and survival curves have not been determined.

METHODS

A prospective database of 177 consecutive LRs of colorectal cancers performed between November 1991 and 1997 was reviewed. The TNM classification (stage 0, I, II, III, and IV) for colorectal cancers and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to determine survival curves.

RESULTS

Of the 177 patients, 5 were excluded for not having adenocarcinomas. Twenty-five patients (14.5%) had conversion to open surgery; most of these patients had rectal cancer or tumor invasion to adjacent organs. Twelve patients were lost to follow-up. All 135 remaining patients had follow-up. Overall, 28 deaths occurred during the follow-up period, 15 of which were cancer-related. The median follow-up was 24 months for patients with stage I, II, and III disease and 9 months for patients with stage IV disease. Observed 2-year survival rates were 100% stage I, 88.7% stage II, 80.6% stage III, and 28.6% stage IV. Survival rates at 4 years were 100% stage I, 79.5% stage II, 53.7% stage III, and 0% stage IV. No trocar site recurrence was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Early survival curves for patients with colorectal cancer who underwent LR do not differ negatively from historical controls for conventional surgery. Further validation is needed.