Laparoscopic colon resection early in the learning curve: what is the appropriate setting?

Cost-effectiveness comparison of minimally invasive, robotic and open approaches in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

This study compares the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic (LAP), laparoscopic-assisted (LAPA), hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL), and robotic colorectal surgery using a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the cost-effectiveness of comparing the five different approaches in colorectal surgery were included in a literature search until September 2022. Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted, and surface under cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) values, odds ratio (OR), and 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were reported for total costs, surgical costs, operating time, length of stay (LOS), and postoperative outcomes. Cluster analysis was performed to examine the similarity and classification of surgical approaches into homogeneous clusters. The cophenetic correlation coefficient (cc) was evaluated to identify the most cost-effective clustering method. The primary outcomes assessed were: costs-morbidity, costs-mortality, and costs-efficacy, measuring total costs against postoperative complications, mortality rate, and LOS, respectively.

RESULTS

22 RCTs with 4239 patients were included. Open surgery had the lowest total costs, surgical costs, and operating time but the longest LOS and most postoperative complications. LOS was significantly decreased in LAP compared to open surgery (OR 0.67, 95% CrI 0.46-0.96). Robotic surgery resulted in the highest total costs, surgical costs, and most extended operative duration but the shortest LOS and lowest mortality. LAPA and robotic surgery were superior in the costs-morbidity analysis. HAL was associated with the worst costs-mortality profile. LAP, LAPA, and HAL were better in terms of costs-efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Overall, LAP and LAPA are the most cost-effective approaches for colorectal surgery in terms of overall postoperative complications, mortality, and LOS.

Oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic versus open multivisceral resection for local advanced colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis

Laparoscopic (lap) colectomies for advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) often require resection of other organs. We systematically reviewed currently available literature on lap multi-visceral resection for CRC, with regard to short- and long-term oncological outcomes, and compared them with open procedures. We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and PubMed from inception to November 30, 2020. The aim of this study was to synthesize short-term and oncological outcomes associated with laparoscopic versus open surgery. Pooled proportions and risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using an inverse variance method. We included six observational cohort studies published between 2012 and 2020 (lap procedures: n = 262; open procedures: n = 273). Collectively, they indicated that postoperative complications were significantly more common after open surgeries than lap surgeries (RR: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-0.72; P < 0.00001), but the two approaches did not significantly differ in positive resection margins (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.38-1.50; P = 0.42), local recurrence (RR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.28-1.62; P = 0.37), or (based on two evaluable studies) 5-year OS (RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.46-1.04; P = 0.08) or 5-year DFS (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.67-1.11) for T4b disease. In conclusion, laparoscopic and open multi-visceral resections for advanced CRC have comparable oncologic outcomes. Although a randomized study would be ideal for further research, no such studies are currently available.

Minimally Invasive Transpedicular Screw Fixation: Review of 152 Cases in a Single Institution. Steep or Shallow Learning Curve?

BACKGROUND

 In this study, we analyze our institutional experience and personal impressions using minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) to describe our learning curve and how experience influenced different parameters of the surgical procedure.

METHODS

 The study was conducted prospectively and included the first consecutive 152 patients treated with MISS techniques. Patient demographics, surgical data, length of hospital stay, and clinical outcome were reviewed. The cohort was divided into consecutive quarters. Comparison between the quarters and timeline analysis were made to assess the learning curve.

RESULTS

 Only percutaneous transpedicular screw fixation was performed in 65 cases, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) in 70 cases, and vertebral body replacement in 4 cases. The average blood loss was 113.3, 115, 106.6, and 107.1 mL for each quarter. The average operative time was 155.0, 143.2, 134.5, and 133.8 minutes for the four quarters, whereas the average radiation exposure time was 105.4, 85.3, 46.2, and 45.2 seconds. Differences in the operative time and radiation exposure time between the first to third and the first to fourth quarters were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

 Some advantages of MISS techniques could be observed with the very first cases and were not related significantly with the surgeon's experience with MISS. With the acquisition of more experience, some disadvantages of MISS techniques such as longer operative time and longer X-ray exposure can be substantially reduced. Surgical experience, familiarity of the team with the MISS instrumentation, and good patient selection are crucial for achieving all the benefits of MISS.

Robotic versus open total pancreatectomy: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Robotic total pancreatectomy (RTP), although considered safe and feasible, has rarely been reported. This study aimed to evaluate whether RTP has advantages over open TP (OTP).

METHODS

Demographics and perioperative outcomes among patients who underwent RTP (n=14) versus OTP (n=15) between May 2015 and September 2020 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

RTP reduced the operative time (307.2 vs. 382.0 min, p=0.01) and estimated blood loss (EBL) (200 vs. 700 ml, p=0.002) compared to those of OTP. The patients in the RTP group got out of their beds and stood, received their first liquid, and took oral diets earlier (2.0 vs. 3.0 days, p=0.002; 2.0 vs. 4.0 days, p=0.009; 3.0 vs. 5.0 days, p=0.006) and experienced a shorter postoperative hospital stay (PHS) (9.0 vs. 12.0 days, p=0.03). There were no significant differences in the rates of spleen preservation, splenic vessel preservation, bile leakage, delayed gastric emptying, morbidity, or the number of lymph nodes harvest between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that RTP is safe and feasible in selected patients with different indications in experienced robotic center. RTP was associated with a shorter operative time, lower EBL, and shorter PHS than OTP.

Cognitive load and performance in immersive virtual reality versus conventional virtual reality simulation training of laparoscopic surgery: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Virtual reality simulators combined with head-mounted displays enable highly immersive virtual reality (VR) for surgical skills training, potentially bridging the gap between the simulation environment and real-life operating room conditions. However, the increased complexity of the learning situation in immersive VR could potentially induce high cognitive load thereby inhibiting performance and learning. This study aims to compare cognitive load and performance in immersive VR and conventional VR simulation training.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial of residents (n = 31) performing laparoscopic salpingectomies with an ectopic pregnancy in either immersive VR or conventional VR simulation. Cognitive load was estimated by secondary-task reaction time at baseline, and during nonstressor and stressor phases of the procedure. Simulator metrics were used to evaluate performance.

RESULTS

Cognitive load was increased by 66% and 58% during immersive VR and conventional VR simulation, respectively (p < 0.001), compared to baseline. A light stressor induced a further increase in cognitive load by 15.2% and a severe stressor by 43.1% in the immersive VR group compared to 23% (severe stressor) in the conventional VR group. Immersive VR also caused a significantly worse performance on most simulator metrics.

CONCLUSION

Immersive VR simulation training induces a higher cognitive load and results in a poorer performance than conventional VR simulation training in laparoscopy. High extraneous load and element interactivity in the immersive VR are suggested as mechanisms explaining this finding. However, immersive VR offers some potential advantages over conventional VR such as more real-life conditions but we only recommend introducing immersive VR in surgical skills training after initial training in conventional VR.

Oncological outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery in pT4 colon cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Widespread adoption of minimally invasive surgery for colon cancer has achieved improved short-term benefits and better long-term oncological outcomes compared with open surgery. However, it is still controversial whether laparoscopic surgery is suitable for patients with stage T4 colon cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare short- and long-term oncological outcomes associated with laparoscopic and conventional open surgery for pT4 colon cancer.

METHODS

Published studies from 2003 to 2018 comparing oncological outcomes following laparoscopic and open surgery for pT4 colon cancer were systematically searched. Data on conversion rate, R0 resection rate, number of harvested lymph nodes, morbidity and mortality, and overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were subjected to meta-analysis using fixed-effect and random-effect models.

RESULTS

Twelve observational studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 2396 cases (1250 laparoscopic and 1146 open). There was no significant difference in R0 resection rate [relative risk (RR) = 1.007; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.935-1.085; P = 0.850], number of harvested lymph nodes (MD = 0.004; 95% CI = -0.139 to 0.148; P = 0.951), mortality (RR = 0.509; 95% CI = 0.176-1.470; P = 0.212), and 3-year OS (RR = 1.056; 95% CI = 0.939-1.188; P = 0.360), 5-year OS (RR = 1.003; 95% CI = 0.883-1.139; P = 0.966), 3-year DFS (RR = 1.032; 95% CI = 0.903-1.179; P = 0.642), and 5-year DFS (RR = 0.995; 95% CI = 0.868-1.140; P = 0.973) between the groups. The rate of conversion from laparoscopic to open procedures was 10.7% (95% CI = 0.090-0.124). There was a significant difference in incidence of complications within 30 postoperative days between laparoscopic and open surgery (RR = 0.703; 95% CI = 0.564-0.876; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery is safe and feasible in pT4 colon cancer, oncological outcomes are similar, and more importantly, there are fewer postoperative complications compared with open surgery.

An Extended Chemical Plant Environmental Protection Game on Addressing Uncertainties of Human Adversaries

Chemical production activities in industrial districts pose great threats to the surrounding atmospheric environment and human health. Therefore, developing appropriate and intelligent pollution controlling strategies for the management team to monitor chemical production processes is significantly essential in a chemical industrial district. The literature shows that playing a chemical plant environmental protection (CPEP) game can force the chemical plants to be more compliant with environmental protection authorities and reduce the potential risks of hazardous gas dispersion accidents. However, results of the current literature strictly rely on several perfect assumptions which rarely hold in real-world domains, especially when dealing with human adversaries. To address bounded rationality and limited observability in human cognition, the CPEP game is extended to generate robust schedules of inspection resources for inspection agencies. The present paper is innovative on the following contributions: (i) The CPEP model is extended by taking observation frequency and observation cost of adversaries into account, and thus better reflects the industrial reality; (ii) Uncertainties such as attackers with bounded rationality, attackers with limited observation and incomplete information (i.e., the attacker’s parameters) are integrated into the extended CPEP model; (iii) Learning curve theory is employed to determine the attacker’s observability in the game solver. Results in the case study imply that this work improves the decision-making process for environmental protection authorities in practical fields by bringing more rewards to the inspection agencies and by acquiring more compliance from chemical plants.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus laparoscopic right colectomy: a meta-analysis

Objective

The objective of this study is to systematically assess the clinical efficacy of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC).

Methods

The randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were collected by searching electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library). The outcomes included intraoperative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, postoperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed using of RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

A total of five studies involving 438 patients were finally included, with 202 cases in HALS group and 236 cases in LRC group. Results of meta-analysis showed that there was no statistical difference between HALS and LRC in terms of conversion rate, length of hospital stay, reoperation rate, postoperative morbidity, and oncologic outcomes. The operative time was 6.5 min shorter in HALS group; however, it was not a clinically significant difference. Although the incision length was longer in HALS, it did not influence the postoperative recovery.

Conclusions

HALS can be considered an alternative to LRC which combines the advantages of open as well as laparoscopic surgery.

Patient-specific mental rehearsal with interactive visual aids: a path worth exploring?

Background

Surgeons of today are faced with unprecedented challenges; necessitating a novel approach to pre-operative preparation which takes into account the specific tests each case poses. In this study, we examine patient-specific mental rehearsal for pre-surgical practice and assess whether this method has an additional effect when compared to generic mental rehearsal.

Methods

Sixteen medical students were trained how to perform a simulated laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC). After baseline assessments, they were randomised to two equal groups and asked to complete three SLCs involving different anatomical variants. Prior to each procedure, Group A practiced mental rehearsal with the use of a pre-prepared checklist and Group B mental rehearsal with the checklist combined with virtual models matching the anatomical variations of the SLCs. The performance of the two groups was compared using simulator provided metrics and competency assessment tool (CAT) scoring by two blinded assessors.

Results

The participants performed equally well when presented with a “straight-forward” anatomy [Group A vs. Group B—time sec: 445.5 vs. 496 p = 0.64—NOM: 437 vs. 413 p = 0.88—PL cm: 1317 vs. 1059 p = 0.32—per: 0.5 vs. 0 p = 0.22—NCB: 0 vs. 0 p = 0.71—DVS: 0 vs. 0 p = 0.2]; however, Group B performed significantly better [Group A vs. B Total CAT score—Short Cystic Duct (SCD): 20.5 vs. 26.31 p = 0.02 η² = 0.32—Double cystic Artery (DA): 24.75 vs. 30.5 p = 0.03 η² = 0.28] and committed less errors (Damage to Vital Structures—DVS, SCD: 4 vs. 0 p = 0.03 η²=0.34, DA: 0 vs. 1 p = 0.02 η² = 0.22). in the cases with more challenging anatomies.

Conclusion

These results suggest that patient-specific preparation with the combination of anatomical models and mental rehearsal may increase operative quality of complex procedures.

Development of a proficiency-based virtual reality simulation training curriculum for laparoscopic appendicectomy

BACKGROUND

Proficiency-based virtual reality (VR) training curricula improve intraoperative performance, but have not been developed for laparoscopic appendicectomy (LA). This study aimed to develop an evidence-based training curriculum for LA.

METHODS

A total of 10 experienced (>50 LAs), eight intermediate (10-30 LAs) and 20 inexperienced (<10 LAs) operators performed guided and unguided LA tasks on a high-fidelity VR simulator using internationally relevant techniques. The ability to differentiate levels of experience (construct validity) was measured using simulator-derived metrics. Learning curves were analysed. Proficiency benchmarks were defined by the performance of the experienced group. Intermediate and experienced participants completed a questionnaire to evaluate the realism (face validity) and relevance (content validity).

RESULTS

Of 18 surgeons, 16 (89%) considered the VR model to be visually realistic and 17 (95%) believed that it was representative of actual practice. All 'guided' modules demonstrated construct validity (P < 0.05), with learning curves that plateaued between sessions 6 and 9 (P < 0.01). When comparing inexperienced to intermediates to experienced, the 'unguided' LA module demonstrated construct validity for economy of motion (5.00 versus 7.17 versus 7.84, respectively; P < 0.01) and task time (864.5 s versus 477.2 s versus 352.1 s, respectively, P < 0.01). Construct validity was also confirmed for number of movements, path length and idle time. Validated modules were used for curriculum construction, with proficiency benchmarks used as performance goals.

CONCLUSION

A VR LA model was realistic and representative of actual practice and was validated as a training and assessment tool. Consequently, the first evidence-based internationally applicable training curriculum for LA was constructed, which facilitates skill acquisition to proficiency.

Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis

INTRODUCTION

Robotic colorectal surgery is being increasingly adopted. Our objective was to compare early postoperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic colectomy in a nationally representative sample.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Colectomy Targeted Dataset from 2012 to 2014 was used for this study. Adult patients undergoing elective colectomy with an anastomosis were included. Patients were stratified based on location of colorectal resection (low anterior resection (LAR), left-sided resection, or right-sided resection). Bivariate data analysis was performed, and logistic regression modeling was conducted to calculate risk-adjusted 30-day outcomes.

RESULTS

There were a total of 25,998 laparoscopic colectomies (30 % LAR's, 45 % left-sided, and 25 % right-sided) and 1484 robotic colectomies (54 % LAR's, 28 % left-sided, and 18 % right-sided). The risk-adjusted overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality were similar between laparoscopic and robotic approaches in all anastomotic groups. Patients undergoing robotic LAR had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.47, 95 % CI 1.20-1.76) and postoperative sepsis rate (OR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.29-0.85) but a higher rate of diverting ostomies (OR 1.45, 95 % CI 1.20-1.76). Robotic right-sided colectomies had significantly lower conversion rates (OR 0.58, 95 % CI 0.34-0.96). Robotic colectomy in all groups was associated with a longer operative time (by 40 min) and a decreased length of stay (by 0.5 days).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationally representative sample comparing laparoscopic and robotic colectomies, the overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality between groups are similar while length of stay was shorter by 0.5 days in the robotic colectomy group. Robotic LAR was associated with lower conversion rates and lower septic complications. However, robotic LAR is also associated with a significantly higher rate of diverting ostomy. The reason for this relationship is unclear. Surgeon factors, patient factors, and technical factors should be considered in future studies.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic vs open colectomy: an assessment from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program procedure-targeted cohort

BACKGROUND

Perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted colorectal laparoscopic (HALS) vs open colectomy were compared using recently released procedure-targeted database.

METHODS

Review was conducted using the 2012 colectomy-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to final surgical approach: HALS vs open (planned). Groups were matched (1:1) based on age, gender, body mass index, surgical procedure, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and wound classification. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted for group comparison.

RESULTS

Of 7,303 patients, 1,740 patients were matched in each group. Open group had higher proportion of patients with preoperative dyspnea (P = .01), ascites (P = .01), weight loss (P < .001), smoking history (P = .04), and increased work relative value units (P < .001). After adjusting for difference in baseline comorbidities, overall morbidity, superficial, deep, and organ-space surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, ileus, reoperation, readmission, and hospital stay were significantly higher in open group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted-data demonstrated several advantages of HALS compared with open colonic resection including shorter hospital stay and lower complication rate. Further adoption of HALS technique as a bridge to straight laparoscopy or tool in difficult cases can positively impact the short-term outcomes after colectomy when compared with open technique.

Comparison of straight vs hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: an assessment from the NSQIP procedure-targeted cohort

BACKGROUND

The perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent straight laparoscopic (LAP) vs hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALS) surgery were compared using a recently released procedure-targeted database.

METHODS

The 2012 colectomy-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used and patients were classified into 2 groups according to the final surgical approach: LAP vs HALS. Demographics, comorbidities, and 30-day outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 7,843 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 4,656 (59%) patients in LAP colectomy and 3,187 (41%) in HALS colectomy groups. Groups were comparable in terms of preoperative characteristics and demographics. Mean operative time was slightly longer in LAP group (178 ± 86 vs 171 ± 84 minutes, P < .001). After covariate-adjustment analysis, the overall morbidity, superficial surgical site infection, and ileus rates remained slightly higher in HALS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both straight laparoscopic and hand-assisted approaches are used in colorectal surgery and may complement each other in challenging cases. Implementing the best approach to decrease postoperative complication rates and increase use of minimally invasive techniques may play a role in improving patient care and overall quality.

Hand-Assisted versus Straight-Laparoscopic versus Open Proctosigmoidectomy for Treatment of Sigmoid and Rectal Cancer: A Case-Matched Study of 100 Patients

To assess the efficacy of laparoscopic proctosigmoidectomy for cancer treatment, 25 patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic resection during the study period (9/2006 - 7/2012) were matched to 25 straight-laparoscopic and 50 open-surgery cases. The patients who underwent hand-assisted resection had higher rates of preoperative cardiac disease and hypertension than did the straight-laparoscopy and open-surgery groups. Straight-laparoscopic surgery seems to provide faster convalescence compared with open surgery and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery.

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer: Current immediate clinical and oncological outcomes

Laparoscopic rectal surgery continues to be a challenging operation associated to a steep learning curve. Robotic surgical systems have dramatically changed minimally invasive surgery. Three-dimensional, magnified and stable view, articulated instruments, and reduction of physiologic tremors leading to superior dexterity and ergonomics. Therefore, robotic platforms could potentially address limitations of laparoscopic rectal surgery. It was aimed at reviewing current literature on short-term clinical and oncological (pathological) outcomes after robotic rectal cancer surgery in comparison with laparoscopic surgery. A systematic review was performed for the period 2002 to 2014. A total of 1776 patients with rectal cancer underwent minimally invasive robotic treatment in 32 studies. After robotic and laparoscopic approach to oncologic rectal surgery, respectively, mean operating time varied from 192-385 min, and from 158-297 min; mean estimated blood loss was between 33 and 283 mL, and between 127 and 300 mL; mean length of stay varied from 4-10 d; and from 6-15 d. Conversion after robotic rectal surgery varied from 0% to 9.4%, and from 0 to 22% after laparoscopy. There was no difference between robotic (0%-41.3%) and laparoscopic (5.5%-29.3%) surgery regarding morbidity and anastomotic complications (respectively, 0%-13.5%, and 0%-11.1%). Regarding immediate oncologic outcomes, respectively among robotic and laparoscopic cases, positive circumferential margins varied from 0% to 7.5%, and from 0% to 8.8%; the mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was between 10 and 20, and between 11 and 21; and the mean distal resection margin was from 0.8 to 4.7 cm, and from 1.9 to 4.5 cm. Robotic rectal cancer surgery is being undertaken by experienced surgeons. However, the quality of the assembled evidence does not support definite conclusions about most studies variables. Robotic rectal cancer surgery is associated to increased costs and operating time. It also seems to be associated to reduced conversion rates. Other short-term outcomes are comparable to conventional laparoscopy techniques, if not better. Ultimately, pathological data evaluation suggests that oncologic safety may be preserved after robotic total mesorectal excision. However, further studies are required to evaluate oncologic safety and functional results.

[Treatment reality with respect to laparoscopic surgery of colonic cancer in Germany]

BACKGROUND

Prospective randomized studies and meta-analyses have shown that laparoscopic resection for colonic cancer is equivalent to open resection with respect to the oncological results and has short-term advantages in the early postoperative outcome. The aim of this study was to investigate whether laparoscopic colonic resection has become established as the standard in routine treatment.

METHODS

Data from the multicenter observational study "Quality assurance colonic cancer (primary tumor)" from the time period from 1 January 2009 to 21 December 2011 were evaluated with respect to the total proportion of laparoscopic colonic cancer resections and tumor localization and specifically for laparoscopic sigmoid colon cancer resections. A comparison between low and high volume clinics (< 30 versus ≥ 30 colonic cancer resections/year) was carried out.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic colonic cancer resections were carried out in 12 % versus 21.4 % of low and high volume clinics, respectively (p < 0.001) with a significant increase for low volume clinics (from 8.0 % to 15.6 %, p < 0.001) and a constant proportion in high volume clinics (from 21.7 % to 21.1 %, p = 0.905). For sigmoid colon cancer laparoscopic resection was carried out in 49.7 % versus 47.6 % (p = 0.584). Differences were found between low volume and high volume clinics in the conversion rates (17.3 % versus 6.6 %, p < 0.001), the length of the resected portion (Ø 23.6 cm versus 36.0 cm, p < 0.001) and the lymph node yield (Ø n = 15.7 versus 18.2, p = 0.008). There were no differences between the two groups of clinics regarding postoperative morbidity and mortality. The postoperative morbidity and length of stay were significantly lower for laparoscopic sigmoid resection than for conventional sigmoid resection.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic access route for colonic cancer resection is not the standard approach in the participating clinics. The laparoscopic access route has the highest proportion for sigmoid colon resection. The differences in the conversion rates, length of the resected portion and the number of lymph nodes investigated between the low volume and high volume clinics must be viewed critically and must be interpreted in connection with the long-term oncological results.

Surgeon volume and elective resection for colon cancer: an analysis of outcomes and use of laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

Surgeon volume may be an important predictor of quality and cost outcomes. We evaluated the association between surgeon volume and quality and cost of surgical care in patients with colon cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent resection for colon cancer, using data from the University HealthSystem Consortium from 2008 to 2011. Outcomes evaluated included use of laparoscopy, ICU admission, postoperative complications, length of stay, and total direct hospital costs by surgeon volume. Surgeon volume was categorized according to high (HVS), medium (MVS), and low (LVS) average annual volumes.

RESULTS

A total of 17,749 patients were included in this study. The average age of the cohort was 65 years and 51% of patients were female. After adjustment for potential confounders, compared with LVS, HVS and MVS were more likely to use laparoscopy (HVS, odds ratio [OR] 1.27, 95% CI 1.15, 1.39; MVS, OR 1.16 95% CI 1.65, 1.26). Postoperative complications were significantly lower in patients operated on by HVS than LVS (OR 0.77 95% CI 0.76, 0.91). The HVS patients were less likely to require reoperation than those in the LVS group (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53, 0.92) Total direct costs were $927 (95% CI -$1,567 to -$287) lower in the HVS group compared with the LVS group.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher quality, lower cost care was achieved by HVS in patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer. An assessment of differences in processes of care by surgeon volume may help further define the mechanism for this observed association.

Annual case volume has no impact on patient outcomes in laparoscopic partial colectomy

OBJECTIVES

Surgeon case volume has been utilized in the credentialing process as a surrogate for surgeon skill. The purpose of this study was to compare objective outcome measures of laparoscopic partial colectomies performed by laparoscopically skilled surgeons with varying annual case census.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort review of all patients (n = 255) undergoing elective laparoscopic partial colectomy. Patients were grouped according to surgeon's annual case volume as low annual case volume (LV; n = 48) and high annual case volume (HV; n = 207). HV is defined as performing >20 total cases and >25 cases per year. All demographic and clinical variables were evaluated with univariate logistic regression followed by a multivariate logistic regression model for variables approaching significance.

RESULTS

Demographic variables were found to be similar between groups. Only median estimated blood loss (100 vs. 150 mL for HV; p = 0.040) was found to be significantly different between groups. However, this was clinically insignificant, as it did not lead to an increased rate of blood transfusions (0.0 vs. 3.9 % for HV surgeons; p = 0.184). All other variables were similar in both univariate and multivariate logistic regression models.

CONCLUSIONS

Among surgeons with advanced laparoscopic training, the data suggest that LV surgeons are able to achieve similar outcomes as those who perform the operation routinely. Annual case volume should not be given undue emphasis when deciding whether to award privileges for laparoscopic partial colectomy.

Medial versus lateral approach in laparoscopic colorectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of the medial approach (MA) and the lateral approach (LA) in the treatment of colorectal disease.

METHODS

Studies published since 1994 that compared MA versus LA in laparoscopic colorectal resection were collected. Data on conversion rate, operative time, blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, hospital stay, complications, mortality, rate of recurrence, and hospitalization costs for MA and LA were meta-analyzed using fixed-effect and random-effect models.

RESULTS

Five cohort studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 3 retrospective studies) that included 881 patients were studied. Of these patients, 475 and 582 had undergone laparoscopic colorectal resection via MA and LA, respectively. There were significant reductions in conversion rate and operative time and possible reductions in blood loss and hospitalization costs for MA compared to LA; however, there were fewer harvested lymph nodes for MA compared with LA, which remains to be further studied. Other outcome variables such as postoperative complications, postoperative immune function, mortality, and rate of recurrence were not found to be statistically significant for either group. Sensitivity analysis on the pooled data from randomized controlled trials showed that the conversion rates were not significantly different between MA and LA.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the lateral approach, the medial approach has the advantages of shorter operative time and possibly lower conversion rate; it also can be as safe as the lateral approach. Whether the MA has less blood loss and lower hospitalization costs remains to be confirmed, and its oncological safety and long-term prognosis are not clear. Due to insufficient data from a limited number of studies, inadequate assessment of the results may arise.

The role of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery in total colectomy for colonic inertia: a retrospective study

Purpose

To compare and assess the efficacy, safety and utility of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) with open surgery (OS) in total colectomy with ileorectal for colonic inertia.

Methods

From January 2001 to February 2012, 56 patients diagnosed with colonic inertia who failed to respond to medical treatments underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis. Another 68 patients underwent laparotomy. Main parameters such as clinical manifestations, conversion to open procedure, operative time, incision length, pain score, intraoperative blood loss, time to first flatus and hospitalization, early postoperative complications and hospitalization cost were retrospectively analyzed. Postoperative defecating frequencies were followed up in both groups.

Results

All patients received successful operation, no surgical mortality happened and none of the patients required conversion to an exploratory laparotomy in HALS group. The clinical features, the estimated blood loss, incision length, pain score, first passing flatus time, and postoperative hospitalization time were superior in HALS group (P < 0.05). The early postoperative complications and frequency of defecation were similar. However, the mean operative time was longer and hospitalization cost was higher in HALS group than those in OS group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

HALS total colectomy can be a safe and efficient technique in the treatment of colonic inertia. HALS can result in a better cosmetic result and a quicker postoperative recovery, but requires higher direct cost.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopic versus open colectomy with end ileostomy for non-toxic colitis

BACKGROUND

This review compared short-term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open subtotal colectomy for acute, colitis medically refractory.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was carried out using MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane databases. Overall study quality was assessed by the modified Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). Meta-analysis was performed for conversion, reoperation, wound infection, ileus, gastrointestinal bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative length of stay and mortality.

RESULTS

The search identified nine non-randomized studies: six cohort studies and three case-matched series, comprising 966 patients in total. The pooled conversion rate was 5·5 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 3·6 to 8·4) per cent in the laparoscopic group. The pooled risk ratio of wound infection was 0·60 (95 per cent c.i. 0·38 to 0·95; P = 0·03) and that of intra-abdominal abscess was 0·27 (0·08 to 0·91; P = 0·04), both in favour of laparoscopic surgery. Pooled risk ratios for other complications showed no significant differences. Length of stay was significantly shorter after laparoscopic subtotal colectomy, with a pooled mean difference of 3·17 (95 per cent c.i. 2·37 to 3·98) days (P < 0·001).

CONCLUSION

Where the procedure can be completed laparoscopically, there may be short-term benefits over open colectomy for colitis. These results cannot be generalized to critically ill patients in need of an emergency subtotal colectomy.

Safe laparoscopic colorectal surgery performed by trainees

OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is safe, but there have been hesitations to implement the technique in all departments. One of the reasons for this may be suboptimal learning possibilities since supervised trainees have not been allowed to do the operations to an adequate extent for the technique to spread. We routinely plan all operations as laparoscopic procedures and most cases are done by supervised trainees. The present study therefore presents the results of operations performed by trainees compared with results obtained by experienced laparoscopic surgeons.

DESIGN

Data for all patients who underwent elective colorectal cancer surgery in 2009 were recorded. Surgeries performed by laparoscopic inexperienced surgeons were compared with the outcome of surgery performed by laparoscopic experienced surgeons. These results were also compared with nationwide data extracted from the national database.

SETTING

A university teaching department of surgery.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 131 patients underwent colorectal elective surgery in 2009 in the department.

RESULTS

Of the 131 operations, 60% were performed by trainees supervised by experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeons. The trainees performed a total of 70% of all colonic procedures and 43% of all rectal resections. There were no statistically significant differences between the inexperienced and experienced laparoscopic surgeons with regards to short-term outcome other than increased duration of surgery for colonic resections (198 vs 140 min, p = 0.005). Thus, we found no difference regarding length of stay, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative bleeding or complications, postoperative complications, or 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer can be performed safely by supervised trainees with good short term results. Therefore, a high volume of operations with an educational potential can easily be maintained when going from open to laparoscopic surgery as the standard operative technique for colorectal cancer in a university department of surgery.

Short Hospital Stay after Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery without Fast Track

Purpose. Short hospital stay and equal or reduced complication rates have been demonstrated after fast track open colonic surgery. However, fast track principles of perioperative care can be difficult to implement and often require increased nursing staff because of more concentrated nursing tasks during the shorter hospital stay. Specific data on nursing requirements after laparoscopic surgery are lacking. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effect of operative technique (open versus laparoscopic operation), but without changing nurse staffing or principles for peri- or postoperative care, that is, without implementing fast track principles, on length of stay after colorectal resection for cancer. Methods. Records of all patients operated for colorectal cancer from November 2004 to December 2008 in our department were reviewed. No specific patients were selected for laparoscopic repair, which was solely dependent on the presence of two specific surgeons at the same time. Thus, the patients were not selected for laparoscopic repair based on patient-related factors, but only on the simultaneous presence of two specific surgeons on the day of the operation. Results. Of a total of 540 included patients, 213 (39%) were operated by a laparoscopic approach. The median hospital stay for patients with a primary anastomosis was significantly shorter after laparoscopic than after conventional open surgery (5 versus 8 days, P < 0.001) while there was no difference in patients receiving a stoma (10 versus 10 days, ns), with no changes in the perioperative care regimens. Furthermore there were significant lower blood loss (50 versus 200 mL, P < 0.001) and lower complication rate (21% versus 32%, P = 0.006) in the laparoscopic group. Conclusion. Implementing laparoscopic colorectal surgery in our department resulted in shorter hospital stay without using fast track principles for peri- and postoperative care in patients not receiving a stoma during the operation. Consequently, we aimed to reduce hospitalisation without increasing cost in nursing staff per hospital bed. Length of stay was not reduced in patients receiving a stoma pointing at this group for specific intervention in the future. Furthermore, the complication rate was reduced in the laparoscopic group.

Clinical application of hand-assisted laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: An analysis of 56 cases

AIM: To explore the clinical value of hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALS) right hemicolectomy.

METHODS: The clinical data for 56 patients who underwent HALS right hemicolectomy were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS: One case required conversion to open surgery due to abnormal blood vessels and bleeding, and all the others successfully recovered after HALS surgery. No operative deaths occurred. Operative time ranged from 90 to 150 min, with a mean value of 136 min. Operative blood loss ranged from 20 to 230 mL, with an average of 87 mL. Postoperative hospital stay was 4-10 d. Postoperative pain was mild. The patients progressed to a liquid diet 2 d postoperatively and underwent removal of stitches and extubation on postoperative day 7. Two patients developed postoperative mechanical intestinal obstruction but recovered after receiving treatment.

CONCLUSION: HALS right hemicolectomy is a safe treatment with fewer traumas, less bleeding, and faster recovery, in line with the concept of fast track surgery.

Conventional laparoscopic versus single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a case cohort comparison of short-term outcomes in 144 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a recent development of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal disease. The literature comparing it against conventional laparoscopic colectomy remains limited.

METHODS

A retrospective case-cohort study compared the benefits and outcomes of SILS right hemicolectomy (SRH) with those of conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH). The medical records of consecutive patients from a prospectively collected database were reviewed. Demographic data, operative details, recovery parameters, and details of resected specimens were obtained and analyzed in an intention-to-treat manner.

RESULTS

From January 2006 to March 2011, 104 elective LRHs (72 %) and 40 elective SRHs (28 %) were performed. The demographics for these two groups were comparable in terms of gender, age, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities and American Society of Anesthesiology score. As the records showed, 62 % of the LRHs and 57 % of the SRHs were performed for malignancies (p = 0.536). Seven of the LRH cases (7 %) were converted to open procedure, whereas two of the SILS cases (5 %) were converted. Three SILS cases (7 %) were completed with additional laparoscopic ports. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of wound length, mean operative time, lymph node clearance, or margins of resected specimen. The recovery parameters (pain score, hospital length of stay, and complications rate) also were equivalent between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

As a feasible and safe procedure with early postoperative outcomes equivalent to those for LRH, SRH is a suitable alternative. The possible advantages of SILS over conventional laparoscopic surgery may be validated only with randomized controlled trials in the future.

Outcomes for case-matched single-port colectomy are comparable with conventional laparoscopic colectomy

AIM

With the introduction of single-port surgery, expected advantages are improved cosmesis, decrease of pain and shorter length of stay. The aim of this study was to compare early outcomes of single-port colectomy with those of conventional laparoscopic colectomy.

METHOD

All consecutive patients undergoing single-port colectomy between January and June 2010 were identified from a prospective database. They were matched for age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiology score and type of resection with patients who had conventional laparoscopic colectomy. All perioperative data, analgesic requirement, pain scores and inflammatory response were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank and McNemar tests.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients [five men, nine women; median age (interquartile range) 56 (30-73) years, body mass index (interquartile range) 22 (20-24) kg/m2] underwent single-port colectomy and were matched with patients who had conventional laparoscopic colectomy. Median operating times, estimated blood loss, pain scores, analgesic requirement, inflammatory response and length of hospital stay were similar. Median increase in incision length was significantly higher in the single-port group (P=0.004), but maximal incision length for specimen extraction was comparable. There were no anastomotic leaks, wound infections or 30-day readmissions.

CONCLUSION

In a case-matched setting with a small sample size, single-port laparoscopic colectomy has comparable outcomes to conventional laparoscopic colectomy.

Colorectal surgery in a community hospital setting: have attitudes changed because of laparoscopy? A general surgeons' last 5 years experience review

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy is rapidly emerging as the preferred surgical approach to a number of different diseases because it permits a correct diagnosis and accurate treatment; however, it is not yet being applied in a widespread manner in the management of benign or malignant colorectal disease. The aim of this work is to illustrate retrospectively the results of our experience of laparoscopic colorectal surgery carried out in a community hospital over the last 5 years to document its feasibility, safety, and benefits when carried out by general surgeons in this setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2003 and December 2007 a total of 628 patients underwent a colorectal procedure. Among them, 328 (52.2%) were operated on with a laparoscopic approach.

RESULTS

In 12 cases, we had to convert to the open approach. Major complications occurred in 3.6% whereas minor occurrences occurred in up to 10%.

CONCLUSIONS

Even if limited by its retrospective design, our experience exhibits that the laparoscopic may well be a safe and effective approach to colon pathology in a community hospital setting. Such features make laparoscopy a challenging alternative to open surgery in the approach to colon disease and it can be proven to be cost-effective without undue risk, as long adequate laparoscopic training is undertaken by the surgeon and proper preparation observed.

Surgical and pathological outcomes after right hemicolectomy: case-matched study comparing robotic and open surgery

OBJECTIVE

To compare the surgical and pathological outcomes of patients with right-sided colon cancers operated on by means of open and robotic surgery with extracorporeal anastomosis.

METHODS

Thirty-three consecutive patients who underwent robotic right hemicolectomy due to right-sided colon cancer were retrospectively well matched with 102 patients operated on by the open approach. Data were included in a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was longer in the robotic group (P < 0.001), 191.7 min (134-250) versus 136.2 (45-240) min in the open group. Estimated intraoperative blood loss was less in the robotic group, which presented a mean of 6.1 ml versus 94.8 ml in the open group (P < 0.001). Despite the similar length of the surgical specimen and number of lymph nodes retrieved between both groups, 15 or more lymph nodes were found in the specimen in 90 out of 102 patients (88.2%) operated on by the open technique versus 33 out of 33 patients (100%) who underwent robotic hemicolectomy (P = 0.038). The median length of postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the robotic group, 5 versus 8 days (P < 0.001). No other statistically significant difference was observed in terms of pathological and postoperative results.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic right hemicolectomy is an oncologically safe and effective procedure. The number of lymph nodes retrieved in the robotic group compared with the open group of our series was more homogeneous, and none of the patients operated on with this technique had a suboptimal lymphadenectomy. Further clinical trials are needed to confirm current evidence and determine whether this can influence the prognosis.

Laparoscopic colectomy: does the learning curve extend beyond colorectal surgery fellowship?

Colorectal fellowship training adequately surpasses the learning curve with regard to safety and outcome; however, the surgeon continues to increase operative efficiency during the first year of practice.

Background and Objectives:

As minimally invasive colon and rectal resection has become increasingly prevalent over the past decade, the role that fellowship training plays has become an important question. This analysis examines the learning curve of one fellowship-trained colorectal surgeon in his first 100 cases.

Methods:

This was a prospectively collected retrospective analysis of the first 100 laparoscopic colon and rectal resections performed between July 2007 and July 2008 by a colorectal (CRS) fellowship trained surgeon at a Veteran's Administration (VA) and county hospital. Included were all emergent and nonemergent laparoscopic cases.

Results:

Mean age was 63(range, 36 to 91). The 100 resections included 42 right, 6 left, 32 sigmoid, 13 rectal, and 7 total abdominal colectomies. Indications were 55% cancer, 20% unresectable polyp, 18% diverticular, 4% inflammatory, and 3% other. Overall mortality was 3%. Overall morbidity including wound infection was 24%. Early and late groups were similar in age, ASA score, and indication. Conversion rate was 4%. No statistical difference was seen in mortality, morbidity, EBL, LOS, margin, lymph nodes, or conversions between the first and second 50 cases (P<0.05). Right and sigmoid colectomy operative time decreased by 40.0% and 19.6%, respectively.

Conclusion:

Prior investigators have demonstrated a significant learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. In the first 100 cases, there is no difference in mortality or morbidity between early and late cases. Alternatively, operative times decreased with experience. Laparoscopic training during CRS fellowship surpasses the learning curve in regard to safety and outcome, whereas operative efficiency improves over the first year of practice.

Controversy of hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Laparoscopically assisted colorectal procedures are time-consuming and technically demanding and hence have a long steep learning curve. In the technical demand, surgeons need to handle a long mobile organ, the colon, and have to operate on multiple abdominal quadrants, most of the time with the need to secure multiple mesenteric vessels. Therefore, a new surgical innovation called hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) was introduced in the mid 1990s as a useful alternative to totally laparoscopic procedures. This hybrid operation allows the surgeon to introduce the non-dominant hand into the abdominal cavity through a special hand port while maintaining the pneumoperitoneum. A hand in the abdomen can restore the tactile sensation which is usually lacking in laparoscopic procedures. It also improves the eye-to-hand coordination, allows the hand to be used for blunt dissection or retraction and also permits rapid control of unexpected bleeding. All of those factors can contribute tremendously to reducing the operative time. Moreover, this procedure is also considered as a hybrid procedure that combines the advantages of both minimally invasive and conventional open surgery. Nevertheless, the exact role of HALS in colorectal surgery has not been well defined during the advanced totally laparoscopic procedures. This article reviews the current status of hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery as a minimally invasive procedure in the era of laparoscopic surgery.

Single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a safe alternative to conventional laparoscopy

PURPOSE

Single-port laparoscopic surgery has evolved from an effort to minimize tissue trauma, limit morbidity, and maximize cosmesis. Limited data exist comparing single-port with conventional laparoscopy for right colectomy. Our aim is to compare single-port with laparoscopic colectomy with regard to safety and feasibility. We assert that this approach can be adopted in a safe and efficacious manner while using standard laparoscopic instrumentation.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively gathered data regarding 16 single-port and 27 conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomies performed by a single surgeon between January 2008 and February 2009. Demographics, operative outcomes, and morbidity were included and analyzed using either Student t test or Fisher exact probability test.

RESULTS

Single-port and conventional laparoscopic groups were similar with regard to age, gender, body mass index, prior abdominal surgery, and co-morbidity. Seventy-five percent and 70% of the operations were performed for malignancy in the single-port and the conventional laparoscopy group, respectively (P = .69). Operative duration was 106 minutes in the single-port group vs 100 minutes in the conventional group (P = .64). Blood loss was 54 mL and 90 mL, respectively (P = .07). No conversions or additions of ports occurred. Hospital stay was 5.3 days in the single-port group vs 6 days in the conventional group (P = .53). Margins were negative in both groups. Mean lymph node number was 18 and 16 nodes (P = .92). There was one death in the conventional group (P = .44). Morbidity including wound infection was 18.8% and 14.9%, respectively (P = .73).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support single-port right colectomy as a safe and efficacious approach to right colon resections in patients eligible for laparoscopy with minimal additional equipment or learning curve for experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeons. The single port was undertaken without an increase in morbidity or mortality. There was no increase in operative time with use of the single-port approach. Finally, adequate lymph node harvest and margin clearance was maintained.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy: the learning curve is for operative speed, not for quality

AIM

We aimed to define the learning curve for hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (HALC).

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of prospectively recorded data was performed. Consecutive segmental and total HALC performed by a single surgeon with no prior HALC experience was included. Operative time and quality-related outcomes, including conversions, operative and postoperative complications, length of stay, reoperations and readmissions were compared for consecutive cohorts of 25 HALC. A subgroup analysis of right, left, total and proctocolectomy performed in each cohort of 25 HALC was also performed.

RESULTS

From December 2005 to February 2009, 200 HALC were performed. When evaluated in cohorts of 25 consecutive cases, operative times (155-206 min), operative complications (4-12%), postoperative complications (8-36%), length of stay (4-5 days), reoperations (0-8%) and readmissions (0-16%) were similar. In the subgroup analysis, there were no changes in the quality-related measures for any colectomy type or the operative time for right and proctocolectomy as experience was gained. Operative time decreased for left (183-127 min) and total HALC (259-218 min) after experience with 50 cases (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

HALC operative times decreased with surgeon experience. For quality-related outcomes, there was no learning curve for HALC.

Teaching colorectal surgery in the laparoscopic era; is it safe?

OBJECTIVES

With the introduction of laparoscopic colorectal surgery, the question is raised as to whether laparoscopic colectomies can safely be performed by surgical registrars, when supervised by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. In this study we have compared surgical outcomes of surgical registrars, fellows, and staff surgeons in a Dutch teaching hospital.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Using a prospective database, the surgical outcomes of staff surgeons, fellows, and surgical registrars were compared. Pre- and postoperative complications were evaluated, including anastomotic failure. The percentage of reintervention, mortality, readmission, total hospital stay, and operating time were evaluated. The quality of the surgical resection was assessed by comparing the number of resected lymph nodes in malignant cases and the percentage of patients with adequate resection margins.

RESULTS

Analysis was performed in 420 patients. The majority of surgery was performed by staff surgeons. Outcomes of surgery for staff surgeons, fellows, and surgical registrars were comparable with respect to complications, percentage of conversions, and oncological adequacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive training as a colorectal surgeon should include competence in laparoscopic resections. Our results show that laparoscopic colorectal surgery can safely be performed by surgical registrars with no increase of the number of conversions to laparotomy or the number of complications.

Accelerated learning curve for colorectal resection, open versus laparoscopic approach, can be attained with expert supervision

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colorectal resection (LCR) is gaining popularity. Nonetheless, open surgery remains an important technique. Thus, surgeons should be technically proficient in both open and laparoscopic surgery. One question however remains unanswered: Can training for open and LCR occur simultaneously? The objective of this paper is to review the learning curve for open and laparoscopic colon resection of one surgeon who underwent a rigorous training program.

METHODS

A review of consecutive patients who underwent surgery for colon and rectosigmoid junction cancers by one trainee surgeon was performed. This surgeon had completed his basic surgical residency but had limited experience in colorectal cancer surgery. In total, 75 patients were included in this study. All operations were supervised by at least one staff surgeon with experience of more than 300 LCR cases. The trainee surgeon was allowed to train in both laparoscopic and open colorectal resection simultaneously.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients underwent laparoscopic resection, while 32 patients underwent open surgery. Age, gender, mean body mass index (BMI), preoperative risk, and history of past abdominal surgery showed no significant difference between laparoscopic and open groups. There were no differences in tumor stage [International Union against Cancer (UICC)] or tumor size (p = 0.068 and 0.228, respectively). The morbidity rate for open and laparoscopic surgery was 3.1% (1/32) and 4.7% (2/43), respectively (p = 0.484). Operation time decreased with increasing experience, and plateaued after 25 cases in the laparoscopic group and 22 cases in the open group. The learning curve for open cases was 11 cases, and 7 for laparoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons who have completed a basic surgical residency but have limited colorectal surgery experience can learn both open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery simultaneously in an effective manner under supervision by well-experienced surgeons.

A systematic review of techniques and interventions for improving adherence to inclusion and exclusion criteria during enrolment into randomised controlled trials

Background

Enrolment of patients into a randomised controlled trial (RCT) in violation of key inclusion or exclusion criteria, may lead to excess avoidable harm. The purpose of this paper was to systematically identify and review techniques and interventions proven to prevent or avoid inappropriate enrolment of patients into RCTs.

Methods

EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Methodology Register, online abstract repositories, and conference websites were searched. Experts were contacted and bibliographies of retrieved papers hand-searched. The search cut-off date was 31 August 2009.

Results

No primary publications were found. We identified one study in the grey literature (conference abstracts and presentations) reporting the results of an evaluation of the effectiveness of an intervention designed to prevent or avoid inappropriate enrolment of patients into an RCT. In the context of a multicentre trial, use of a dummy enrolment run-in phase was shown to reduce enrolment errors significantly (P < 0.001), from 16.1% during the run-in phase to < 1% after trial initiation.

Conclusions

Our systematic search yielded only one technique or intervention shown to improve adherence to eligibility criteria during enrolment into RCTs. Given the potential harm involved in recruiting patients into a clinical trial in violation of key eligibility criteria, future research is needed to better inform those conducting clinical trials of how best to prevent enrolment errors

The adoption of laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a national survey of general surgeons

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery may become the standard of care for the treatment of colorectal disease. Little is known regarding North American patterns of practice or the limiting factors and strategies for adoption among surgeons.

METHODS

We sent a 28-item questionnaire to all general surgeon members of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. We derived descriptive and correlative information using chi(2), Wilcoxon rank sum and Student t tests and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The return rate was 55% (694/1266). A total of 67% (462/694; 95% confidence interval 63%-70%) of respondents perform colorectal surgery. Of these, 54% perform laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Multivariate logistic regression identified 5 factors related to performing laparoscopic colorectal surgery: fewer years in practice (p < 0.001), male sex (p = 0.015), practising in the province of Quebec (p = 0.005), university-hospital affiliation (p = 0.034) and minimally invasive surgery fellowship training (p = 0.023). Lack of adequate operating time and formal training were the main reasons cited by surgeons not offering laparoscopic colon resections. Most surgeons (67%) felt that site visits from a minimally invasive surgeon would represent the most effective training method for acquiring advanced laparoscopic skills.

CONCLUSION

About half of Canadian general surgeons offer laparoscopic colorectal resections. Recent graduation, male sex, practice location, university-hospital affiliation and minimally invasive surgery training are significant predictors for offering a laparoscopic approach. Lack of operative time and formal training are the main barriers to adoption of the technique. Site visits by trained laparoscopic surgeons is the preferred method of acquiring advanced skills.

Development of a virtual reality training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background

Training within a proficiency-based virtual reality (VR) curriculum may reduce errors during real surgical procedures. This study used a scientific methodology for development of a VR training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

Inexperienced (had performed fewer than ten laparoscopic cholecystectomies), intermediate (20–50) and experienced (more than 100) surgeons were recruited. Construct validity was defined as the ability to differentiate between the three levels of experience, based on simulator-derived metrics for nine basic skills, four procedural tasks and full laparoscopic cholecystectomy on a high-fidelity VR simulator. Inexperienced subjects performed ten repetitions for learning curve analysis. Proficiency measures were based on the performance of experienced surgeons.

Results

Thirty inexperienced, 11 intermediate and 16 experienced operators were recruited. Eight of nine basic skills and three of four procedural tasks were found to be construct valid. The full procedure revealed significant intergroup differences for time (1541, 673 and 816 s; P = 0·002), movements (1021, 595 and 638; P = 0·006) and path length (2038, 1235 and 1303 cm; P = 0·033). Learning curves plateaued between the second and ninth sessions.

Conclusion

This study shows that it is possible to define and develop a whole-procedure VR training curriculum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy using structured scientific methodology.

Conversion from laparoscopic to open colonic cancer resection - associated factors and their influence on long-term oncological outcome

PURPOSE

Comparisons of open and laparoscopic colon cancer resection have shown that laparoscopy offers an oncologically safe option. However, there are no data on long-term influence of converted resection, despite conversion rates of up to 30% and the general observation that short-term outcome is significantly worsened. The aim was to compare the long-term results of primary open resection (OR), purely laparoscopic resection (LR-p) and converted resection (LR-c).

METHODS

In a prospective study at 282 German hospitals demographic, tumor- and treatment-related data and disease-free survival were compared in the three groups.

RESULTS

8015 of 8307 patients with OR, 280 of 290 patients with LR-p and 55 of 56 patients with LR-c were followed for 39.5 months (median). Overall, no statistically significant differences were seen for five-year DFS (74.8%, 81.3% and 65.6%). However, for patients in stage II with conversion, the five-year DFS was significantly poorer (43.3%) than for OR (80.5%; p=0.003) and LR-p patients (92.5%; p=0.001). For stages I and III no differences were observed.

CONCLUSION

Conversion of laparoscopic colon cancer resection worsens DFS in locally advanced stage II carcinoma. There is a need to reduce the conversion rate by adequate patient selection for laparoscopic resection by experienced surgeons.

In-house colorectal laparoscopic preceptorship: a model for changing a unit's practice safely and efficiently

PURPOSE

There has been steady increase in demand for laparoscopic colonic resection as benefits are manifold compared to open and include smaller incisions, less pain, quicker recovery and convalescence, reduced morbidity and reduced analgesic demands. We devised a preceptorship programme with the aim of all four coloproctologists in our unit becoming proficient colorectal laparoscopic surgeons over a period of 12 months.

METHOD

The surgeon in the unit with significant experience of laparoscopic colorectal surgery acted as a preceptor to the remaining three. A prospective database was set up to allow analysis of the impact of the preceptorship on the units' elective practice and outcomes from January 2006.

RESULTS

Results were analysed 106 cases to assess the success of this novel method and were more than encouraging. During this period, 57 laparoscopic resections were performed compared 49 open resections. The proportion of patients undergoing laparoscopic resection had risen from 20% to 80% (p = 0.000). This was associated with a significant drop in post-operative stay from 14 to 4 days (p = 0.000). Analysis of patient demographics, pathology and type of resection found there to be no significant difference between the open and laparoscopic groups. The conversion rate was acceptably low (10.5%) and there were no re-admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

For hospitals with the facilities and an appropriately experienced preceptor, we offer this as a patient-safe, cost-neutral method of significantly increasing a units' laparoscopic practice over a relatively short period of time.

Proficiency-gain curve for an advanced laparoscopic procedure defined by observation clinical human reliability assessment (OCHRA)

BACKGROUND

There is no established method for defining when a surgeon reaches the proficiency plateau in performing a specific operation. The published literature refers to "learning curves" based on retrospective evaluation of operative time, conversion rates, morbidity etc., which lack objectivity and do not address individual human factors. A more useful study of the gain in proficiency by the individual surgeon for a particular operation may be obtained using observational clinical-human reliability assessment (OCHRA).

METHODS

Following an 8-month fellowship in advanced laparoscopic surgery, the surgeon M.T. performed, independently at his own hospital, a prospective series of 20 palliative bypass operations for advanced gastric or pancreatic cancer. Unedited videotapes of gastro-jejunostomy (GJ) or cholecysto-jejunostomy (CJ) were analyzed independently in the training institution by the OCHRA technique.

RESULTS

For this surgeon proficiency in executing laparoscopic palliative bypass was reached after the 14th anastomosis when efficient execution (reduction in operative time) was accompanied by significant reduction in technical errors and improved economy of movement (reduction of the economy of movement index from 7-5 to 3-2). The majority of errors were enacted in component tasks associated with intracorporeal suturing. The declining incidence of these errors with experience was an integral component of the proficiency-gain curve. The important performance-shaping factors identified were: concentration lapses (n=1,321), misjudgments (n=209), poor camera work (n=193), fatigue (n=128), and impaired coordination (n=108).

CONCLUSIONS

This study has confirmed that OCHRA can describe quantitatively the proficiency-gain curve for a laparoscopic operation and indicate the plateau stage when the individual surgeon attains maximal performance in the execution of a specific procedure.