The Learning Curve for the Laparoscopic Approach to Conservative Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: Lessons Drawn From a Single Institution's Experience

A risk-adjusted cumulative sum analysis of the progression from a novice to an expert surgeon at a single institution

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is challenging for novice surgeons because it requires a sharp dissection in a narrow pelvis with visual limitations. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the learning curve and clinical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer performed by a novice surgeon en route to becoming an expert.

METHODS

In total, 119 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer performed by a single surgeon between June 2010 and December 2019 were analyzed. A single hybrid model based on the operative time, open conversion, complications, and resection margin involvement was generated to assess the success of laparoscopic surgery. Furthermore, the learning curve was evaluated using the risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

The learning period was categorized into three phases according to the RA-CUSUM method (phase 1, 1st-33rd cases; phase 2, 34th-84th cases; and phase 3, 85th-119th cases). Tumor size (p = 0.004), distal resection margin (p = 0.003), and the number of harvested lymph nodes (p < 0.001) significantly increased with the learning period. The time to tolerable soft diet became shorter according to the learning period (p = 0.017). Advanced T stage (p = 0.024) and adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.012) were more common in phase 3.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested that the initial technical competence of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer was acquired in the 33rd case. Technical mastery was achieved in the 84th case. After mastering the technique, the surgeon tended to challenge more advanced cases, however, the complication rates did not increase.

Learning curve for robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision: a multicentre, prospective study

AIM

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is becoming increasingly important in colorectal surgery. Recognition of the short, safe learning curve (LC) could potentially improve implementation. We evaluated the extent and safety of the LC in robotic resection for rectal cancer.

METHOD

Consecutive rectal cancer resections (January 2018 to February 2021) were prospectively included from three French centres, involving nine surgeons. LC analyses only included surgeons who had performed more than 25 robotic rectal cancer surgeries. The primary endpoint was operating time LC and the secondary endpoint conversion rate LC. Interphase comparisons included demographic and intraoperative data, operating time, conversion rate, pathological specimen features and postoperative morbidity.

RESULTS

In 174 patients (69% men; mean age 62.6 years) the mean operating time was 334.5 ± 92.1 min. Operative procedures included low anterior resection (n = 143) and intersphincteric resection (n = 31). For operating time, there were two or three (centre-dependent) LC phases. After 12-21 cases (learning phase), there was a significant decrease in total operating time (all centres) and an increase in the number of harvested lymph nodes (two centres). For conversion rate, there were two or four LC phases. After 9-14 cases (learning phase), the conversion rate decreased significantly in two centres; in one centre, there was a nonsignificant decrease despite the treatment of significantly more obese patients and patients with previous abdominal surgery. There were no significant differences in interphase comparisons.

CONCLUSION

The LC for RAS in rectal cancer was achieved after 12-21 cases for the operating time and 9-14 cases for the conversion rate. RAS for rectal cancer was safe during this time, with no interphase differences in postoperative complications and circumferential resection margin.

A novel training program: laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer can be trained simultaneously

Background

Current expectations are that surgeons should be technically proficient in minimally invasive low anterior resection (LAR)-both laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery. However, methods to effectively train surgeons for both approaches are under-explored. We aimed to compare two different training programs for minimally invasive LAR, focusing on the learning curve and perioperative outcomes of two trainee surgeons.

Methods

We reviewed 272 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic LAR by surgeons A and B, who were novices in conducting minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Surgeon A was trained by first operating on 80 cases by laparoscopy and then 56 cases by robotic-assisted surgery. Surgeon B was trained by simultaneously performing 80 cases by laparoscopy and 56 by robotic-assisted surgery. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) method was used to evaluate the learning curves of operative time and surgical failure.

Results

For laparoscopic surgery, the CUSUM plots showed a longer learning process for surgeon A than surgeon B (47 vs. 32 cases) for operative time, but a similar trend in surgical failure (23 vs. 19 cases). For robotic surgery, the plots of the two surgeons showed similar trends for both operative times (23 vs. 25 cases) and surgical failure (17 vs. 19 cases). Therefore, the learning curves of surgeons A and B were respectively divided into two phases at the 47th and 32nd cases for laparoscopic surgery and at the 23rd and 25th cases for robotic surgery. The clinicopathological outcomes of the two surgeons were similar in each phase of the learning curve for each surgery.

Conclusions

For surgeons with rich experience in open colorectal resections, simultaneous training for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted LAR of rectal cancer is safe, effective, and associated with accelerated learning curves.

Simulating complex patient populations with hierarchical learning effects to support methods development for post-market surveillance

BACKGROUND

Validating new algorithms, such as methods to disentangle intrinsic treatment risk from risk associated with experiential learning of novel treatments, often requires knowing the ground truth for data characteristics under investigation. Since the ground truth is inaccessible in real world data, simulation studies using synthetic datasets that mimic complex clinical environments are essential. We describe and evaluate a generalizable framework for injecting hierarchical learning effects within a robust data generation process that incorporates the magnitude of intrinsic risk and accounts for known critical elements in clinical data relationships.

METHODS

We present a multi-step data generating process with customizable options and flexible modules to support a variety of simulation requirements. Synthetic patients with nonlinear and correlated features are assigned to provider and institution case series. The probability of treatment and outcome assignment are associated with patient features based on user definitions. Risk due to experiential learning by providers and/or institutions when novel treatments are introduced is injected at various speeds and magnitudes. To further reflect real-world complexity, users can request missing values and omitted variables. We illustrate an implementation of our method in a case study using MIMIC-III data for reference patient feature distributions.

RESULTS

Realized data characteristics in the simulated data reflected specified values. Apparent deviations in treatment effects and feature distributions, though not statistically significant, were most common in small datasets (n < 3000) and attributable to random noise and variability in estimating realized values in small samples. When learning effects were specified, synthetic datasets exhibited changes in the probability of an adverse outcomes as cases accrued for the treatment group impacted by learning and stable probabilities as cases accrued for the treatment group not affected by learning.

CONCLUSIONS

Our framework extends clinical data simulation techniques beyond generation of patient features to incorporate hierarchical learning effects. This enables the complex simulation studies required to develop and rigorously test algorithms developed to disentangle treatment safety signals from the effects of experiential learning. By supporting such efforts, this work can help identify training opportunities, avoid unwarranted restriction of access to medical advances, and hasten treatment improvements.

Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Rectal Cancer Compared with Open and Laparoscopic Surgery

With increasing trends for the adoption of robotic surgery, many centers are considering changing their practices from open or laparoscopic to robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer. We compared the outcomes of robot-assisted rectal resection with those of open and laparoscopic surgery. We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases until October 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing robotic surgery with open or laparoscopic rectal resection were included. Fifteen RCTs and 11 prospective studies involving 6922 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that robotic surgery has lower blood loss, less surgical site infection, shorter hospital stays, and higher negative resection margins than open resection. Robotic surgery also has lower conversion rates, lower blood loss, lower rates of reoperation, and higher negative circumferential margins than laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery had longer operation times and higher costs than open and laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences in other complications, mortality, and survival between robotic surgery and the open or laparoscopic approach. However, heterogeneity between studies was moderate to high in some analyses. The robotic approach can be the method of choice for centers planning to change from open to minimally invasive rectal surgery. The higher costs of robotic surgery should be considered as a substitute for laparoscopic surgery (PROSPERO: CRD42022381468).

Advantages of ligating the rectum with gauze pad band in laparoscopic anterior resection of rectal cancer: a propensity score matched analysis

Purpose

It is difficult to maintain sufficient tension throughout laparoscopic anterior resection with total mesorectal excision, which causes a decline in surgical quality. We used a soft, inexpensive gauze pad band pulling the rectal tube to analyze the effect of surgery.

Methods

A gauze pad band was positioned at the proximal of the tumor, followed by fastening the rectal tube and ligating the rectum. 233 patients undergoing laparoscopic anterior resection for mid to low rectal cancer were enrolled between January 2018 and December 2020. After propensity score matching, 63 cases were selected in gauze pad band group and 126 cases were selected in traditional group. The two groups were compared in preoperative, intraoperative, and pathological characteristics.

Results

Compared to traditional group, the median operation duration (203 min vs. 233 min, p < 0.001) and the median intraoperative bleeding (48 ml vs. 67 ml, p < 0.001) were lesser in gauze pad band group. A higher percentage of one cartridge transection of rectum (36/63 vs. 51/126, p = 0.030), shorter length of cartridges used (6.88 ± 1.27 cm vs. 7.28 ± 1.25 cm, p = 0.040), and longer distal resection margin (2.74 ± 0.76 cm vs. 2.16 + 0.68 cm, p < 0.001) were found in the gauze pad band group. The completeness of total mesorectal excision (61/63 vs. 109/126, p = 0.022), harvested lymph nodes (19 vs. 17, p < 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (1 vs. 0, p = 0.046) were higher in gauze pad band group.

Conclusion

Ligation of the rectum with a gauze pad band allows for a reduction in operative time and intraoperative bleeding while increasing the rate of one cartridge transection. It also protected the quality of total mesorectal excision and membrane anatomy.

Trial registration: Not applicable.

The taTME learning curve for mid-low rectal cancer: a single-center experience in China

Purpose

As transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is performed worldwide, the optimization of existing training and guidance programs to enhance new taTME learners’ competence in performing this procedure is warranted. This study aimed to evaluate the taTME learning curve in patients with mid-low rectal cancer.

Methods

Patients who underwent taTME for mid-low rectal cancer between October 2015 and August 2021 at a single center were included. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) learning curve analysis was performed with the total operation time as the study outcome. The learning curve was analyzed using risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis, with postoperative complications and anastomotic leakage (AL) as outcomes.

Results

In total, 104 consecutive patients were included in this study. The CUSUM learning curve for total operative time started declining after 42 cases (309.1 ± 84.4 vs. 220.2 ± 46.4, P < 0.001). The risk-adjusted CUSUM (RA-CUSUM) learning curve for postoperative complications fluctuated in cases 44–75 and declined significantly after case 75. The RA-CUSUM learning curve for AL declined after 68 cases.

Conclusions

taTME had learning curves of 42, 75, and 68 cases for total operative time, postoperative complications, and AL, respectively. A surgeon may require 42 and 75 cases to achieve “proficiency” and “mastery” in taTME procedures, respectively.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-022-02763-3.

The learning curve of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excisions: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The standard treatment of rectal carcinoma is surgical resection according to the total mesorectal excision principle, either by open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal technique. No clear consensus exists regarding the length of the learning curve for the minimal invasive techniques. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the current literature regarding the learning curve of minimal invasive TME.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library were searched for studies with the primary or secondary aim to assess the learning curve of either laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal TME for rectal cancer. The primary outcome was length of the learning curve per minimal invasive technique. Descriptive statistics were used to present results and the MINORS tool was used to assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

45 studies, with 7562 patients, were included in this systematic review. Length of the learning curve based on intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, pathological outcomes, or a composite endpoint using a risk-adjusted CUSUM analysis was 50 procedures for the laparoscopic technique, 32-75 procedures for the robot-assisted technique and 36-54 procedures for the transanal technique. Due to the low quality of studies and a high level of heterogeneity a meta-analysis could not be performed. Heterogeneity was caused by patient-related factors, surgeon-related factors and differences in statistical methods.

CONCLUSION

Current high-quality literature regarding length of the learning curve of minimal invasive TME techniques is scarce. Available literature suggests equal lengths of the learning curves of laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal TME. Well-designed studies, using adequate statistical methods are required to properly assess the learning curve, while taking into account patient-related and surgeon-related factors.

Learning Curve of Robotic-Assisted Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer

Background

Although some studies have assessed the learning curve of robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer, most studies included limited sample sizes, no study used postoperative complications as an independent variable to analyze the learning curve of robotic rectal surgery, and no study evaluated the influence of the learning curve on long-term oncologic outcomes.

Methods

Clinical data on consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer by a single surgeon between January 2015 and December 2018 at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University were retrospectively collected. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) and risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) were used to visualize the learning curve of operation time and postoperative complications (CD ≥ grade II). Comparisons of clinical outcomes at different learning phases analyzed by RA-CUSUM were performed after propensity score matching.

Results

A total of 389 consecutive patients were included in the analysis. The numbers of patients needed to overcome the learning curves of operation time and postoperative complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer were 34 and 36, respectively. The learning process was divided into two phases based on RA-CUSUM: the learning phase (1st-36th cases) and the mastery phase (37th-389th cases). Before matching, the mastery phase had more patients with older age, lower tumor location, and neoadjuvant therapy. After matching, the two phases exhibited similar characteristics. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications in the mastery phase were reduced compared with the learning phase, with a median follow-up of 35 months, and the long-term oncologic outcomes were not significantly different between the two phases.

Conclusions

An experienced laparoscopic surgeon initially implements robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer, surgical outcomes improved after 36 cases, and the learning curve seemingly did not have an obvious impact on long-term oncologic outcomes.

Evaluation of the learning curve for robot-assisted rectal surgery using the cumulative sum method

BACKGROUND

There is no clear evidence on the number of cases required to master the techniques required in robot-assisted surgery for different surgical fields and techniques. The purpose of this study was to clarify the learning curve of robot-assisted rectal surgery for malignant disease by surgical process.

METHOD

The study retrospectively analyzed robot-assisted rectal surgeries performed between April 2014 and July 2020 for which the operating time per process was measurable. The following learning curves were created using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method: (1) console time required for total mesorectal excision (CUSUM tTME), (2) time from peritoneal incision to inferior mesenteric artery dissection (CUSUM tIMA), (3) time required to mobilize the descending and sigmoid colon (CUSUM tCM), and (4) time required to mobilize the rectum (CUSUM tRM). Each learning curve was classified into phases 1-3 and evaluated. A fifth learning curve was evaluated for robot-assisted lateral lymph node dissection (CUSUM tLLND).

RESULTS

This study included 149 cases. Phase 1 consisted of 32 cases for CUSUM tTME, 30 for CUSUM tIMA, 21 for CUSUM tCM, and 30 for CUSUM tRM; the respective numbers were 54, 48, 45, and 61 in phase 2 and 63, 71, 83, and 58 in phase 3. There was no significant difference in the number of cases in each phase. Lateral lymph node dissection was initiated in the 76th case where robot-assisted rectal surgery was performed. For CUSUM tLLND, there were 12 cases in phase 1, 6 in phase 2, and 7 cases in phase 3.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the learning curve for robot-assisted rectal surgery is the same for all surgical processes. Surgeons who already have adequate experience in robot-assisted surgery may be able to acquire stable technique in a smaller number of cases when they start to learn other techniques.

Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer

Utilization of robotic surgical systems has increased over the years. Robotic surgery is presumed to have advantages of enhanced visualization, improved dexterity, and reduced tremor, which is purported to be more suitable for rectal cancer surgery in a confined space than laparoscopic or open surgery. However, evidence supporting improved clinical and oncologic outcomes after robotic surgery remains controversial and limited despite the widespread adoption of robotic surgical systems. To date, numerous observational studies and a few randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate that short-term, oncological, and functional outcomes after a robotic surgery are superior to those of laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer patients. The objective of this review is to summarize the current state of robotic surgery and its impact on low-lying rectal cancer.

Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): 10-year follow-up of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has been widely used for rectal cancer; however, its long-term outcomes remain controversial. This study aimed to assess the long-term oncological safety of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer using 10-year follow-up data of the Comparison of Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low REctal cancer After Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN) trial.

METHODS

The COREAN trial is a, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Eligible participants were aged 18-80 years, had cT3N0-2M0 middle or low rectal cancer with lesions located within 9 cm of the anal verge, and had been treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to open or laparoscopic surgery with a computer-generated random allocation sequence with a random permuted block design. Neither patients nor clinicians were masked to treatment assignment. Open or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision was done 6-8 weeks after the administration of preoperative concurrent chemoradiotherapy (fluoropyrimidines alone, doublet therapy, or triplet therapy) at a dose of 50·5 Gy over 5·5 weeks. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy was administered for 4 months. The primary endpoint of 3-year disease-free survival was published previously. Here, we report 10-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence. Analyses were done in the modified intention-to-treat population of all participants who were randomly assigned and provided follow-up data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00470951.

FINDINGS

Of the 340 patients enrolled in the COREAN trial between April 4, 2006, and Aug 26, 2009 (170 patients in each group), two patients in the laparoscopic surgery group moved abroad and were lost to follow-up, so were not included in this 10-year analysis. The median duration of follow-up was 143 months (IQR 122-156). No differences were observed in 10-year overall survival (74·1% [95% CI 66·8-80·0] in the open surgery group vs 76·8% [69·6-82·5] in the laparoscopic surgery group; p=0·44), 10-year disease-free survival (59·3% [51·1-66·5] vs 64·3% [56·0-71·5]; p=0·20), or 10-year local recurrence (8·9% [5·2-15·0] vs 3·4% [1·4-7·9]; p=0·050) between the open surgery and laparoscopic surgery groups at 10 years after surgery. The stratified hazard ratios, adjusted for ypT and ypN classification and tumour regression grade, for open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery were 0·94 (95% CI 0·63-1·43) for overall survival, 1·05 (0·74-1·49) for disease-free survival, and 2·22 (0·78-6·34) for local recurrence.

INTERPRETATION

The 10-year follow-up of the COREAN trial confirms the long-term oncological safety of laparoscopic surgery in patients with rectal cancer treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Similar to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery does not compromise long-term survival outcomes in rectal cancer when performed by well trained surgeons.

FUNDING

National Cancer Center, Goyang, South Korea.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision in Mid-Low Rectal Cancer: Evaluation of the Learning Curve and Comparison of Short-term Results With Standard Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision

BACKGROUND

Ever since transanal total mesorectal excision was introduced by Sylla and Lacy in 2010, it has become more popular among colorectal surgeons. However, some surgeons hesitate to use it, because this novel approach differs greatly from laparoscopic total mesorectal excision and requires a long learning curve.

OBJECTIVE

This study analyzed the learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision procedure and compared the different phases of transanal total mesorectal excision with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision.

DESIGN

This is retrospective case-control study.

SETTINGS

We used data from the approved colorectal cancer database of the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University.

PATIENTS

The patients involved in this study underwent transanal total mesorectal excision performed by a single surgeon (L.K.) or underwent laparoscopic transanal total mesorectal excision performed by experienced surgeons.

INTERVENTIONS

Transanal or laparoscopic resection of mid-low rectal cancer was conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Perioperative complication and resection margin were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 342 patients were included in both groups. The learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision was divided into 3 phases. Data show that demographics and tumor characteristics were not significantly different between the matched groups. Indeed, during phase 1, only operative time was longer than in the laparoscopic group, whereas, during phase 2, results from the transanal group were comparable with the laparoscopic group. Results show that, during phase 3, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay were all lower than in the laparoscopic group. Local recurrence occurred in 3 patients during phase 1 and in 1 patient during phase 2.

LIMITATIONS

This study was a small retrospective study and focused on just 1 surgeon performing transanal total mesorectal excision.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term and histopathologic outcomes are similar compared between a transanal group and matched laparoscopic group. Transanal total mesorectal excision also provided good oncologic outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B450.

ESCISIN MESORRECTAL TOTAL TRANSANAL EN EL CNCER DE RECTO MEDIOBAJO EVALUACIN DE LA CURVA DE APRENDIZAJE Y COMPARACIN DE RESULTADOS A CORTO PLAZO CON TME LAPAROSCPICA ESTNDAR

ANTECEDENTES:Desde que Sylla y Lacy introdujeron la escisión mesorrectal total transanal en 2010, se ha vuelto más popular entre los cirujanos colorrectales. Sin embargo, algunos cirujanos dudan en utilizarlo, porque este nuevo método difiere mucho de la escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica y requiere una larga curva de aprendizaje.OBJETIVO:Este estudio analizó la curva de aprendizaje del procedimiento de escisión mesorrectal total transanal y comparó las diferentes fases de la escisión mesorrectal total transanal con la escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio retrospectivo de casos y controles.ENTORNO CLINICO:Utilizamos base de datos de cáncer colorrectal aprobada del Sexto Hospital Afiliado de la Universidad Sun Yat-sen (Guangzhou, China).PACIENTES:Los pacientes involucrados en este estudio fueron sometidos a escisión mesorrectal total transanal realizada por un solo cirujano (LK) o se sometieron a escisión mesorrectal total transanal laparoscópica realizada por cirujanos experimentados.INTERVENCIONES:Resección transanal o laparoscópica de cáncer de recto medio-bajo.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VOLARCION:complicación perioperatoria y margen de resección.RESULTADOS:Se incluyó un total de 342 pacientes en ambos grupos. La curva de aprendizaje de la escisión mesorrectal total transanal se dividió en tres fases. Los datos muestran que las características demográficas y tumorales no fueron significativamente diferentes entre los grupos emparejados. De hecho, durante la fase 1, solo el tiempo operatorio fue más largo que en el grupo laparoscópico. Mientras que durante la fase 2, los resultados del grupo transanal fueron comparables a los del grupo laparoscópico. Los resultados muestran que durante la fase 3, el tiempo operatorio, la pérdida de sangre intraoperatoria y la estancia hospitalaria postoperatoria fueron menores que en el grupo laparoscópico. La recurrencia local ocurrió en 3 pacientes durante la fase 1 y en 1 paciente durante la fase 2.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio fue un estudio retrospectivo pequeño y se centró en un solo cirujano que realizaba la escisión mesorrectal total transanal.CONCLUSIÓN:Los resultados a corto plazo e histopatológicos son similares en comparación entre el grupo transanal y el grupo laparoscópico emparejado. La escisión mesorrectal total transanal también proporcionó buenos resultados oncológicos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B450.

Individual learning curve of cytoreductive surgery for peritoneal metastasis from colorectal cancer: A process with an impact on survival

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the learning curve (LC) of cytoredutive surgery (CRS) of peritoneal metastasis (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC). Information about learning curves is important for developing teaching tools and well-structured training programs for the implementation of this complex procedure in new healthcare centers. The aim of this study was to estimate how many procedures an inexperienced surgeon must perform (the length of the learning period) in order to demonstrate an acceptably low rate of locoregional recurrence.

METHODS

All consecutive 74 patients with CRS for CRC performed by a novice surgeon between 2012 and 2017 in a tertiary cancer center were included. The learning curve was calculated by a cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) graph. Two groups were formed based on the length of the learning period and were compared on overall and disease free survival.

RESULTS

The risk of locoregional recurrence decreased after surgeons had performed 19 cases, suggesting a learning period of this length. Overall survival and postoperative morbidity were not significantly different between learning and proficiency periods. Multiple linear regression analysis showed that the learning period and peritoneal cancer index are the only factors affecting disease free survival. A second learning period was observed in cases where patient care became more complex.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that learning period has negative impacts on disease-free survival. An initial experience supervised in specialized centers allow to have a short learning curve for CRS for peritoneal metastases for CRC.

Post-Operative Complications and Nipple Necrosis Rates Between Conventional and Robotic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Purpose

This study is to directly compare surgical outcomes between conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (CNSM) and robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM).

Materials and Method

For this case–control study, 369 cases of 333 patients who underwent CNSM or RNSM with immediate reconstruction between November 2016 and January 2019 at Severance Hospital in Seoul, Republic of Korea were reviewed. Patients with stage IV breast cancer (n = 1), receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 43), or subjected to previous operations (n = 14) or radiotherapy on the breasts were excluded. The main outcomes were comparing rates of post-operative complications, of high-grade post-operative complications as defined by the Clavien-Dindo classification, and nipple necrosis between the CNSM and the RNSM groups.

Results

A total of 311 cases, including 270 CNSMs and 41 RNSMs, were analyzed. The rates of post-operative nipple necrosis (p = 0.026, 2.4 vs. 15.2%) and of high-grade post-operative complications (p = 0.031, 34.8 vs. 17.1%) in the RNSM group were significantly lower than those in the CNSM group.

Conclusion

RNSM was associated with lower rates of high-grade post-operative complications and nipple necrosis than CNSM for patients with small breast volumes and less ptotic breasts.

Impact of laparoscopic surgical experience on the learning curve of robotic rectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery has advantages in terms of the ergonomic design and expectations of shortening the learning curve, which may reduce the number of patients with adverse outcomes during a surgeon's learning period. We investigated the differences in the learning curves of robotic surgery and clinical outcomes for rectal cancer among surgeons with differences in their experiences of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent robotic surgery for colorectal cancer were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into five groups by surgeons, and their clinical outcomes were analyzed. The learning curve of each surgeon with different volumes of laparoscopic experience was analyzed using the cumulative sum technique (CUSUM) for operation times, surgical failure (open conversion or anastomosis-related complications), and local failure (positive resection margins or local recurrence within 1 year).

RESULTS

A total of 662 patients who underwent robotic low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer were included in the analysis. Number of laparoscopic LAR cases performed by surgeon A, B, C, D, and E prior to their first case of robotic surgery were 403, 40, 15, 5, and 0 cases, respectively. Based on CUSUM for operation time, surgeon A, B, C, D, and E's learning curve periods were 110, 39, 114, 55, and 23 cases, respectively. There were no significant differences in the surgical and oncological outcomes after robotic LAR among the surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the limited impact of laparoscopic surgical experience on the learning curve of robotic rectal cancer surgery, which was greater than previously reported curves.

Robotic sphincter saving rectal cancer surgery: A learning curve analysis

BACKGROUND

Longer operation time is one of the major obstacles in front of the proposed benefits of robotic rectal surgery. We intended to evaluate the learning process for robotic surgery in sphincter saving rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

The learning curve was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. The variable evaluated for learning curve calculation was the operative time.

RESULTS

The learning curve was divided into two phases: initial 52 operations comprised phase 1 and the following 44 operations represented phase 2. Interphase comparisons showed that phase 2 patients had shorter operation times (323.3 ± 102.8 vs. 379.9 ± 108.7 min, p = 0.011), less blood loss (37.2 ± 51.0 vs. 87.7 ± 124.8 mL, p = 0.009), longer distal resection margins (4.5 ± 4.3 vs. 2.5 ± 1.7 cm, p = 0.008), and higher rates of grade 3 mesorectal completeness (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this study, we saw that the cut-off level in the learning curve of a laparoscopically experienced surgeon could be beyond the numbers reported in the literature.

Analysis of the learning process for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: CUSUM-curve of 110 consecutive patients with 1-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most popular bariatric procedure worldwide. A tremendous recent increase in the number of LSGs has not been driven by an accurate learning process, especially in low volume bariatric centers. The cumulative-sum (CUSUM) method is an effective analysis of the learning process, taking intraoperative and postoperative variables into account. This study was aimed at establishing a CUSUM learning curve for LSG in order to define the number of procedures needed to achieve sufficient surgical skill.

METHODS

All LSGs performed by a single general surgeon between September 2014 and November 2017 were considered. We hypothesized that the key t variables related to the LSG learning process (LP) are: operative time (OT), intraoperative complications or difficulties, need for expert assistance, length of hospital stay (LOS), and 3-month postoperative morbidity. All of these parameters are binary variables analyzed with the risk-adjusted CUSUM method. Two groups, learning group (LG) and experienced group (EG), were identified and compared by univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify the variables most closely associated with operative time and surgical success. One-year weight loss outcomes were likewise analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred and ten (110) consecutive LSGs were considered. CUSUM-LSG showed that the mean number of consecutive interventions necessary to reach proficiency in LSG was 58. In multivariate analysis, surgical success was negatively correlated with longer operative time and need for expert assistance. Body mass index was not correlated with surgical success.

CONCLUSION

Fifty-eight LSG procedures were required to achieve surgical skill. Operative time and the need for expert assistance were variables most closely associated with surgical success.

ACGME COMPETENCY

Practice-based learning and improvement.

Resident Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Appendectomy According to Seniority

Purpose

This study sought to delineate the learning curve (LC) for laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) in surgical residency according to seniority and experience.

Methods

Between October 2015 and November 2016, 150 patients underwent LA performed by one of 3 residents (who were in their first [A], second [B], or third [C] year of training) under supervision. The patients were nonrandomly assigned to each resident. Data from a prospectively collected database were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively. Perioperative outcomes including operation time, complications, and conversion were compared among the 3 residents. The LC was evaluated using the moving average method and cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) for operation time and surgical completion.

Results

Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were similar among the 3 groups except for age and location of the appendix. The operation time did not vary among the 3 residents (43.9, 45.3, and 48.4 minutes for A, B, and C, respectively; P=0.392). The moving average method for operation time showed a decreasing tendency for all residents. CUSUM results for operation time revealed peak points achieved at the 24th, 18th, and 31st cases for residents A, B, and C, respectively. In terms of surgical failure, residents A, B, and C reached steady states after their 35th, 11th, and 16th cases, respectively. Perforation of the appendix base was the only risk factor for surgical failure.

Conclusion

The resident LC for LA was 11 to 35 cases according to multidimensional statistical analyses. The accumulation of surgical experience among residents might influence the LC for surgical completion but not that for operation time.

Operation time as a simple indicator to predict the overcoming of the learning curve in gastric cancer surgery: a multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to identify an indicator to predict the overcoming of the learning curve of distal gastrectomy in gastric cancer surgery.

METHOD

A retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted in 2100 patients who underwent radical distal gastrectomy performed by nine surgeons in eight hospitals between 2001 and 2006. For each surgeon, an individual CUSUM chart was formulated in terms of operation time or clinical outcomes, including severe complications, number of retrieved lymph nodes, positive resection margin, and hospital stay. The actual changing points (CPs) of the CUSUM charts were analyzed. Based on the CP, patients were divided into pre-CP and post-CP groups, and the clinicopathologic outcomes and survival data were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

CP determined by operation time was more reliable than CP determined by a combination of clinical outcomes, as the former was correlated not only with short-term outcomes but also with survival. The outcomes were superior in the post-CP group in terms of numbers of harvested lymph nodes, sufficient lymph node harvesting (> 15), and negative proximal margins. In a survival analysis, the post-CP group showed better survival than the pre-CP group in stage II (76% vs 86.1% p = 0.010) and stage III (51.5% vs 60.6% p = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

Overcoming the learning curve of distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer can be better predicted by operation time rather than by a combination of postoperative clinical parameters. It is recommended that surgeons initially operate on early stage cancer patients before overcoming the learning curve.

[Transanal total mesorectal excision-a critical appraisal]

INTRODUCTION

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the international standard for rectal cancer surgery. In addition to laparoscopic TME (lapTME), transanal TME (taTME) was developed in recent years to reduce the rate of incomplete TME, conversion to open surgery and postoperative functional impairment. Despite limited evidence, this technique is becoming increasingly more popular and is already routinely used by many hospitals for rectal cancer in varying tumor level locations. The aim of this review was to evaluate the taTME compared to anterior rectal resection with lapTME as the standard of care in rectal cancer surgery based on currently available evidence.

METHOD

The databases PubMed and Medline were systematically searched for publications on transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS). Relevant studies were selected and further research based on the reference lists was undertaken.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies analyzing 3782 patients were identified. The taTME does not lead to a higher rate of complete TME-resected specimens compared to the standard procedure. So far, superiority could not be demonstrated for complication rates or for functional or oncological results. Serious complications secondary to dissection in incorrect planes were observed. The anastomotic level generally seems to be closer to the sphincter after taTME versus anterior lapTME.

CONCLUSION

Considering current evidence, taTME failed to show superiority compared to conventional anterior lapTME. Although taTME has some potential advantages, it carries substantial risks. If performed outside of clinical trials, it should therefore only be used in carefully selected patients with a high possibility of conversion, following adequate patient informed consent and after intense and systematic training of the surgeon.

The Effectiveness and Safety of Open Versus laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer after Preoperative Chemo-radiotherapy: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Only a limited number of studies considered the combined chemo-radiation therapy after surgery for treating locally advanced rectal cancer. Comparative studies on laparoscopic and open procedures indicated that laparoscopy surgery may be associated with fewer postoperative complications. Despite encouraging results from rectal cancer patients who received neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy prior to laparoscopic surgery, the acceptance of this procedure remains controversial, and conflicting evidence exists only in the form of retrospective trials.

OBJECTIVES

Since laparoscopic surgery was introduced into clinical practice to treat rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy, it has been discussed controversially whether laparoscopic surgery can be performed as effectively as an open procedure. To overcome the biases inherent in any nonrandomized comparison, we analyzed the propensity-matched analysis and randomized clinical trial. In this study, we set out to determine whether laparoscopic resection was non-inferior to open resection in treatment outcomes of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemo-radiotherapy.

METHODS

Publications on laparoscopic surgery in comparison with open thoracotomy in treatment outcomes of rectal cancer after neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy to November 2017 were collected. Summary hazard ratios (HRs) of endpoints of interest such as 3-OS (overall survival), 3-DFS (disease-free survival), and individual postoperative complications were analyzed in all trials. By using fixed- or random-effects models according to the heterogeneity, meta-analysis Revman 5.3 software was applied to analyze combined pooled HRs.

RESULTS

A total of 6 trials met our inclusion criteria. The pooled analysis of 3-DFS showed that laparoscopic surgery did not improve disease -free survival, compared with open thoracotomy (OR =1.48, 95% CI 0.95 - 2.29; P = 0.08), as well with the 3-OS (OR=0.96, 95%CI=0.66-1.41, P=0.084). The pooled result of duration of surgery indicated that laparoscopic surgery had a tendency towards a longer surgery time (SMD= 43.96, 95% CI 34.04- 53.88; P < 0.00001) and a shorter hospital stay (SMD= -0.97, 95% CI -1.75- -0.18; P=0.02). However, no significant differences between laparoscopic surgery and open thoracotomy were observed in terms of the meta-analysis on the number of removed lymph nodes (SMD =-0.37, 95% CI -0.1.77 - 1.03; P = 0.60), blood loss (SMD =-21.30, 95% CI -0.48.36 - 5.77; P = 0.12), positive circumferential resection margin (OR =0.73, 95% CI 0.22- 2.48; P = 0.61) or postoperative complications (OR =0.89, 95% CI 0.67 - 1.17; P = 0.40) l.

CONCLUSION

The current data supported the concept that laparoscopic surgery had correlated with a longer operative time but a shorter hospital stay, without superior advantages in short-term survival rates or oncologic efficiency for locally treating advanced rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. However, prospective investigation on long-term oncological results from laparoscopic surgery is required in the future to verify the benefits of laparoscopic surgery over open surgery after chemo-radiation therapy for treating locally advanced rectal cancer.

Structured training pathway and proctoring; multicenter results of the implementation of transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) in the Netherlands

Background

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a new complex technique with potential to improve the quality of surgical mesorectal excision for patients with mid and low rectal cancer. The procedure is technically challenging and has shown to be associated with a relative long learning curve which might hamper widespread adoption. Therefore, a national structured training pathway for TaTME has been set up in the Netherlands to allow safe implementation. The aim of this study was to monitor safety and efficacy of the training program with 12 centers.

Methods

Short-term outcomes of the first ten TaTME procedures were evaluated in 12 participating centers in the Netherlands within the national structured training pathway. Consecutive patients operated during and after the proctoring program for rectal carcinoma with curative intent were included. Primary outcome was the incidence of intraoperative complications, secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and pathological outcomes.

Results

In October 2018, 12 hospitals completed the training program and from each center the first 10 patients were included for evaluation. Intraoperative complications occurred in 4.9% of the cases. The clinicopathological outcome reported 100% for complete or nearly complete specimen, 100% negative distal resection margin, and the circumferential resection margin was positive in 5.0% of patients. Overall postoperative complication rate was 45.0%, with 19.2% Clavien–Dindo ≥ III and an anastomotic leak rate of 17.3%.

Conclusions

This study shows that the nationwide structured training program for TaTME delivers safe implementation of TaTME in terms of intraoperative and pathology outcomes within the first ten consecutive cases in each center. However, postoperative morbidity is substantial even within a structured training pathway and surgeons should be aware of the learning curve of this new technique.

Evaluation of the learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision: single-centre experience

Introduction

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has been recently proposed to overcome the difficulties of the standard TME approach, allowing better visualization and dissection of the mesorectal fascia. Although TaTME seems very promising, the evidence and body of knowledge on achieving proficiency in performing it are still sparse.

Aim

To evaluate the learning curve of TaTME based on a single centre’s experience.

Material and methods

Consecutive patients undergoing TaTME since 2014 in a tertiary referral department were included in the study. All procedures were performed by one experienced surgeon. CUSUM curve analyses were performed to evaluate learning curves.

Results

Sixty-six patients underwent TaTME. After analysis of postoperative morbidity rate, intraoperative adverse effects and operative time, we estimated that 40 cases are needed to achieve TaTME proficiency. Subsequently, patients were divided into two groups: before (40 patients) and after overcoming the learning curve (26 patients). Group 1 had higher readmission (p = 0.041) and complication rates (p = 0.019). There were no statistically significant differences in terms of intraoperative adverse effects, length of stay or pathological quality of the specimen.

Conclusions

Transanal total mesorectal excision is a promising yet technically demanding procedure and requires at least 40 cases to complete the learning curve. More data are needed to introduce it as a standard procedure for low rectal cancer treatment.

Preservation of Pathologic Outcomes in Robotic versus Open Resection for Rectal Cancer: Can the Robot Fill the Minimally Invasive Gap?

Open resection remains the standard of care in the surgical management of rectal cancer with recent studies unable to prove noninferiority of laparoscopic resection. Few studies directly compare robotic versus open techniques. This is a retrospective chart review of all consecutive patients undergoing robotic or open rectal cancer resection during a three-year period. The primary endpoint was a composite of complete mesorectal excision, circumferential resection margin <1 mm, and distal resection margin <1 mm. The study cohort included 64 patients undergoing robotic (n = 28) or open (n = 36) resection. Successful surgical resection was similar between the robotic (75%) and open (76%) approaches. Robotic resection was associated with significantly lower blood loss ( P = 0.02) and significantly longer operative times ( P = 0.009) compared with open resection. Length of hospital stay and complications were similar between groups. Both male gender ( P = 0.03) and shorter tumor distance from the anal verge ( P = 0.01) were predictors for unsuccessful surgical resection in open, but not robotic, surgery. Pathologic outcomes are similar between robotic and open rectal cancer resection, even early in the learning curve. Tumor distance from the anal verge complicates open total mesorectal excision; however, robotic surgery is less impacted. Robotic resection may be a promising minimally invasive approach for rectal cancer resection.

Robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current state and future perspective

Interest in minimally invasive surgery has increased in recent decades. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) was introduced as the latest advance in minimally invasive surgery. RALS has the potential to provide better clinical outcomes in rectal cancer surgery, allowing for precise dissection in the narrow pelvic space. In addition, RALS represents an important advancement in surgical education with respect to use of the dual-console robotic surgery system. Because the public health insurance systems in Japan have covered the cost of RALS for rectal cancer since April 2018, RALS has been attracting increasingly more attention. Although no overall robust evidence has yet shown that RALS is superior to laparoscopic or open surgery, the current evidence supports the notion that technically demanding subgroups (patients with obesity, male patients, and patients treated by extended procedures) may benefit from RALS. Technological innovation is a constantly evolving field. Several companies have been developing new robotic systems that incorporate new technology. This competition among companies in the development of such systems is anticipated to lead to further improvements in patient outcomes as well as drive down the cost of RALS, which is one main concern of this new technique.

Comprehensive Evaluation of the Learning Curve for Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is a minimally invasive endoscopic surgical procedure that is effective in treatment for spastic esophageal motility disorders. However, little is known about the learning curve for endoscopists. We aimed to evaluate the effects of various factors on the POEM learning curve.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 1346 patients who underwent POEM for achalasia at Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital in China from August 2010 through July 2015. We used risk-adjusted cumulative sum and moving average methods to evaluate outcomes. The primary outcome was a composite of technical failure and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included procedure time and the composite outcome of technical failure, adverse events, and clinical failure of the first 192 cases performed by only the original, training surgeon.

RESULTS

The primary composite outcome occurred in 54 (4%) of the 1346 patients: 10 technical failures and 44 adverse events. This composite outcome was independently associated with the case number (P = .010), full-thickness myotomy (P = .002), and procedure time (P = .001). After we adjusted for these risk factors, cumulative sum analysis showed that the primary composite outcome decreased gradually after 100 cases. The procedure time was high during the first few cases and decreased after endoscopists performed 70 cases. The secondary composite outcome of technical failure, adverse events, and clinical failure for the 192 cases performed by only the original surgeon gradually decreased after 90-100 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

In a retrospective analysis of POEM procedures, we found that 100 cases were required to decrease the risk of technical failure, adverse events, and clinical failure (the learning curve). Seventy cases can be considered the threshold for decreasing procedure time.

Short- and Long-Term Oncological Outcome After Rectal Cancer Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Open Versus Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

While several trials have compared laparoscopic to open surgery for colon cancer showing similar oncological results, oncological quality of laparoscopic versus open rectal resection is not well investigated.

METHODS

A systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials was conducted in MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Embase. Qualitative and quantitative meta-analyses of short-term (rate of complete resections, number of harvested lymph nodes, circumferential resection margin positivity) and long-term (recurrence, disease-free and overall survival) oncologic results were conducted.

RESULTS

Fourteen randomized controlled trials were identified including 3528 patients. Patients in the open resection group had significantly more complete resections (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.51-0.97; p = 0.03) and a higher number of resected lymph nodes (mean difference - 0.92; 95% CI - 1.08 to 0.75; p < 0.001). No differences were detected in the frequency of positive circumferential resection margins (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.62-1.10; p = 0.18). Furthermore, no significant differences of long-term oncologic outcome parameters after 5 years including locoregional recurrence (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.44-2.05; p = 0.89), disease-free survival (OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.84-1.58; p = 0.36), and overall survival (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.76-1.41; p = 0.82) were found. Most trials exhibited a relevant risk of bias and several studies provided no information on the surgical expertise of the participating surgeons.

CONCLUSION

Differences in oncologic outcome between laparoscopic and open rectal surgery for rectal cancer were detected for the complete resection rate and the number of resected lymph nodes in favor of the open approach. No statistically significant differences were found in oncologic long-term outcome parameters.

Early Urinary Dysfunction after Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery: Does Surgeons’ Learning Curve Matter?

Poor early urinary outcomes after laparoscopy were reported in studies comparing laparoscopic versus open rectal cancer surgery. One possible explanation was that these studies might include a number of patients on the laparoscopic surgeons’ learning curve. This study aims to evaluate whether the learning curve of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery influences early postoperative urinary dysfunction. Between September 2009 and December 2014, 208 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal resection for rectal cancer were enrolled in the present study. All the clinical data were obtained from a prospectively compiled database. The primary outcomes were the incidences of postoperative urinary retention (POUR) and major urinary dysfunction requiring long-term urinary catheterization. POUR and major urinary dysfunction rate were 20.2 per cent (42/208) and 4.3 per cent (9/208), respectively. The learning curve analysis for operative time using the moving average method showed stabilization at 80 cases. Surgeon experience was divided into two periods: learning curve period (1–80 cases) and experienced period (81–208 cases). Multivariate analysis showed that older age (OR = 3.250, P = 0.006) and learning curve (OR = 2.241, P = 0.024) were independent risk factors for POUR. Learning curve was not significantly associated with increased rates of major urinary dysfunction (OR = 3.378, P = 0.092). Learning curve is a significant risk factor for increased rate of POUR after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Technical training may be key to shorten the learning curve and limit its impact on the postoperative urinary complications.

Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: evaluation of the learning curve

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) provides an excellent view of the resection margins for rectal cancer from below, but is challenging due to few anatomical landmarks. During implementation of this technique, patient safety and optimal outcomes need to be ensured. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve of TaTME in patients with rectal cancer in order to optimize future training programs.

METHODS

All consecutive patients after TaTME for rectal cancer between February 2012 and January 2017 were included in a single-center database. Influence of surgical experience on major postoperative complications, leakage rate and operating time was evaluated using cumulative sum charts and the splitting model. Correction for potential case-mix differences was performed.

RESULTS

Over a period of 60 months, a total of 138 patients were included in this study. Adjusted for case-mix, improvement in postoperative outcomes was clearly seen after the first 40 patients, showing a decrease in major postoperative complications from 47.5 to 17.5% and leakage rate from 27.5 to 5%. Mean operating time (42 min) and conversion rate (from 10% to zero) was lower after transition to a two-team approach, but neither endpoint decreased with experience. Readmission and reoperation rates were not influenced by surgical experience.

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve of TaTME affected major (surgical) postoperative complications for the first 40 patients. A two-team approach decreased operative time and conversion rate. When implementing this new technique, a thorough teaching and supervisory program is recommended to shorten the learning curve and improve the clinical outcomes of the first patients.

Robotic vs laparoscopic rectal surgery in high-risk patients

AIM

Laparoscopic rectal surgery is associated with a steep learning curve and high conversion rate despite progress in equipment design and consistent practice. The robotic system has shown an advantage over the laparoscopic approach due to stable three-dimensional views, improved dexterity and better ergonomics. These factors make the robotic approach more favourable for rectal surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic rectal cancer surgery in high-risk patients.

METHOD

A prospectively collected dataset for high-risk patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery between May 2013 and November 2015 was analysed. Patients with any of the following characteristics were defined as high risk: a body mass index ≥30, male gender, preoperative chemoradiotherapy, tumour <8 cm from the anal verge and previous abdominal surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 184 high-risk patients were identified: 99 in the robotic group and 85 in the laparoscopic group. Robotic surgery was associated with a significantly higher sphincter preservation rate (86% vs 74%, P = 0.045), shorter operative time (240 vs 270 min, P = 0.013) and hospital stay (7 vs 9 days, P = 0.001), less blood loss (10 vs 100 ml, P < 0.001) and a smaller conversion rate to open surgery (0% vs 5%, P = 0.043) compared with the laparoscopic technique. Reoperation, anastomotic leak rate, 30-day mortality and oncological outcomes were comparable between the two techniques.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery in high-risk patients is associated with higher sphincter preservation, reduced blood loss, smaller conversion rates, and shorter operating time and hospital stay. However, further studies are required to evaluate this notion.

Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic operation in anus-preserving rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

Objective

The aim of this meta-analysis is to provide recommendations for clinical practice and prevention of postoperative complications, such as circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement, and compare the amount of intraoperative bleeding, safety, operative time, recovery, outcomes, and clinical significance of robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic procedures in anus-preserving rectal cancer.

Methods

A literature search (PubMed) was performed to identify biomedical research papers and abstracts of studies comparing robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic procedures. We attempted to obtain the full-text link for papers published between 2000 and 2016, and hand-searched references for relevant literature. RevMan 5.3 software was used for the meta-analysis.

Results

Nine papers (949 patients) were eligible for inclusion; there were 473 patients (49.8%) in the robotic group and 476 patients (50.2%) in the laparoscopic group. According to the data provided in the literature, seven indicators were used to complete the evaluation. The results of the meta-analysis suggested that robot-assisted procedure was associated with lower intraoperative blood loss (mean difference [MD] −41.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] −77.51, −4.79; P=0.03), lower open conversion rate (risk difference [RD] −0.05; 95% CI −0.09, −0.01; P=0.02), lower hospital stay (MD −1.07; 95% CI −1.80, −0.33; P=0.005), lower overall complication rate (odds ratio 0.58; 95% CI 0.41, 0.83; P=0.003), and longer operative time (MD 33.73; 95% CI 8.48, 58.99; P=0.009) compared with conventional laparoscopy. There were no differences in the rate of CRM involvement (RD −0.02; 95% CI −0.05, 0.01; P=0.23) and days to return of bowel function (MD −0.03; 95% CI −0.40, 0.34; P=0.89).

Conclusion

The Da Vinci robot was superior to laparoscopy with respect to blood loss, open conversion, hospital stay, and postoperative complications during anus-preserving rectal cancer procedures; however, conventional laparoscopy had an advantage regarding operative time. The remaining indicators (CRMs and recovery from intestinal peristalsis) did not differ.

Is it right to ignore learning-curve patients? Laparoscopic colorectal trials

BACKGROUND

Increasingly complex, technically demanding surgical procedures utilizing emerging technologies have developed over recent decades and are recognized as having long 'learning curves'. This raises significant new issues. Ethically and scientifically, the outcome of a patient in the learning curve is as important as the outcome of a patient outside the learning curve. The aim of this study is to highlight just one aspect of our approach to learning-curve patients that should change.

METHODS

The protocols of multicentre, prospective, randomized trials of patients undergoing either traditional open or laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were reviewed. The number of patients excluded from the published trial results because they were in surgeons' learning curves was calculated. The seven editorials accompanying these publications were also examined for any mention of these patients.

RESULTS

The eight studies identified had similar designs. All patients in the surgeons' laparoscopic learning curves, which were often several years long, were excluded from the actual trials. The total number of patients included in the trial publications was 5680. The number of patients excluded because they were in the surgeons' laparoscopic learning curves was >10 605. In none of the studies or accompanying editorials is there any mention of the total number of patients in the surgeons' learning curves, these patients' outcomes or how inclusion of their outcomes might have affected the overall results.

CONCLUSION

Learning curves are inescapable in modern medicine. Our recognition of patients in these curves should evolve, with more data about them included in trial publications.

Nomogram Prediction of Anastomotic Leakage and Determination of an Effective Surgical Strategy for Reducing Anastomotic Leakage after Laparoscopic Rectal Cancer Surgery

Background

Although many surgical strategies have been used to reduce the anastomotic leak (AL) rate after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, limited data are available on the risk factors for AL and the effective strategy to reduce AL.

Methods

The present study enrolled 736 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic resection without a diverting stoma for rectal adenocarcinoma. A nomogram was constructed to predict AL. Based on the nomogram, personalized risk was calculated and sequential surgical strategies were monitored using risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) analysis.

Results

Among the 736 patients, clinical AL occurred in 65 patients (8.8%). Sex, an American Society of Anesthesiologists score, operation time, blood transfusion, and tumor location were identified as significant predictive factors for AL. Based on these factors, a nomogram was created to predict AL, with a concordance index (C-index) of 0.753 (95% confidence interval, 0.690–0.816). A calibration plot showed good statistical performance on internal validation (bias-corrected C-index of 0.742). The RA-CUSUM curve showed that extended splenic flexure mobilization (SFM) could be the most influential strategy to reduce AL.

Conclusions

Our nomogram for predicting AL after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery might be helpful to identify the individual risk of AL. Furthermore, extended SFM might be the most appropriate strategy for reducing AL.

Learning curve estimation in medical devices and procedures: hierarchical modeling

In the use of medical device procedures, learning effects have been shown to be a critical component of medical device safety surveillance. To support their estimation of these effects, we evaluated multiple methods for modeling these rates within a complex simulated dataset representing patients treated by physicians clustered within institutions. We employed unique modeling for the learning curves to incorporate the learning hierarchy between institution and physicians and then modeled them within established methods that work with hierarchical data such as generalized estimating equations (GEE) and generalized linear mixed effect models. We found that both methods performed well, but that the GEE may have some advantages over the generalized linear mixed effect models for ease of modeling and a substantially lower rate of model convergence failures. We then focused more on using GEE and performed a separate simulation to vary the shape of the learning curve as well as employed various smoothing methods to the plots. We concluded that while both hierarchical methods can be used with our mathematical modeling of the learning curve, the GEE tended to perform better across multiple simulated scenarios in order to accurately model the learning effect as a function of physician and hospital hierarchical data in the use of a novel medical device. We found that the choice of shape used to produce the 'learning-free' dataset would be dataset specific, while the choice of smoothing method was negligibly different from one another. This was an important application to understand how best to fit this unique learning curve function for hierarchical physician and hospital data. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A multicentre randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy, morbidity and functional outcome of endoscopic transanal proctectomy versus laparoscopic proctectomy for low-lying rectal cancer (ETAP-GRECCAR 11 TRIAL): rationale and design

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the standard surgical treatment for mid- and low-rectal cancer. Laparoscopy represents a clear leap forward in the management of rectal cancer patients, offering significant improvements in post-operative measures such as pain, first bowel movement, and hospital length of stay. However, there are still some limits to its applications, especially in difficult cases. Such cases may entail either conversion to an open procedure or positive resection margins. Transanal endoscopic proctectomy (ETAP) was recently described and could address the difficulties of approaching the lower third of the rectum. Early series and case-control studies have shown favourable short-term results, such as a low conversion rate, reduced hospital length of stay and oncological outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery. The aim of the proposed study is to compare the rate of positive resection margins (R1 resection) with ETAP versus laparoscopic proctectomy (LAP), with patients randomly assigned to each arm.

METHODS/DESIGN

The proposed study is a multicentre randomised trial using two parallel groups to compare ETAP and LAP. Patients with T3 lower-third rectal adenocarcinomas for whom conservative surgery with manual coloanal anastomosis is planned will be recruited. Randomisation will be performed immediately prior to surgery after ensuring that the patient meets the inclusion criteria and completing the baseline functional and quality of life tests. The study is designed as a non-inferiority trial with a main criterion of R0/R1 resection. Secondary endpoints will include the conversion rate, the minimal invasiveness of the abdominal approach, postoperative morbidity, the length of hospital stay, mesorectal macroscopic assessment, functional urologic and sexual results, faecal continence, global quality of life, stoma-free survival, and disease-free survival at 3 years. The inclusion period will be 3 years, and every patient will be followed for 3 years. The number of patients needed is 226.

DISCUSSION

There is a strong need for optimal evaluation of the ETAP because of substancial changes in the operative technique. Assessment of oncological safety and septic risk, as well as digestive and urological functional results, is particularily mandatory. Moreover, benefits of the ETAP technique could be demonstrated  in post-operative outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT02584985 . Date and version identifier: Version n°2 - 2015 July 6.

Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted rectal cancer surgery offers multiple advantages for surgeons, and it seems to yield the same clinical outcomes as regards the short-time follow-up of patients compared to conventional laparoscopy. This surgical approach emerges as a technique aiming at overcoming the limitations posed by rectal cancer and other surgical fields of difficult access, in order to obtain better outcomes and a shorter learning curve.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature of robot-assisted rectal surgery was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The search was conducted in October 2015 in PubMed, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, for articles published in the last 10 years and pertaining the learning curve of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer. It consisted of the following key words: "rectal cancer/learning curve/robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery".

RESULTS

A total of 34 references were identified, but only 9 full texts specifically addressed the analysis of the learning curve in robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery, 7 were case series and 2 were non-randomised case-comparison series. Eight papers used the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method, and only one author divided the series into two groups to compare both. The mean number of cases for phase I of the learning curve was calculated to be 29.7 patients; phase II corresponds to a mean number 37.4 patients. The mean number of cases required for the surgeon to be classed as an expert in robotic surgery was calculated to be 39 patients.

CONCLUSION

Robotic advantages could have an impact on learning curve for rectal cancer and lower the number of cases that are necessary for rectal resections.

Prophylactic transanal decompression tube versus non-prophylactic transanal decompression tube for anastomotic leakage prevention in low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transanal decompression tube (TDT), an alternative intervention believed to have potential equivalent efficacy in reducing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery and lower complication rates compared to protective stoma, was sporadically applied in some medical centers during recent decade. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of the TDT in preventing the anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

METHODS

The studies comparing TDT and non-TDT in rectal cancer were researched up to March 22, 2016 without language preference, in databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and National Clinical Trials Registry. The rates of anastomotic leakage, bleeding, and re-operation were separately calculated and compared between TDT and non-TDT groups using RevMan 5.3. Funnel plots, and Egger's tests were used to evaluate the publication biases of the studies.

RESULTS

Two prospective randomized controlled trial studies and five observational cohort studies with 833 participants in TDT group and 939 participants in non-TDT group were finally included in this meta-analysis. The results indicated that the TDT group had lower anastomotic leakage rate than non-TDT group with significant RR (RR 0.44; 95 % CI 0.29-0.66; P < 0.0001) and heterogeneity (I ² = 33 %; P = 0.18). So did the re-operation rate, with RR (RR 0.16; 95 % CI 0.07-0.37; P < 0.0001) and heterogeneity among the studies (I ² = 0 %; P = 0.80). There was no significant difference in anastomotic bleeding rates (RR 1.48; 95 % CI 0.79-2.77; P = 0.22) (I ² = 58 %; P = 0.09). No publication bias was found by Egger's test (anastomotic leakage rate, Pr > |z| = 0.224; re-operation rate, Pr > |z| = 0.425).

CONCLUSIONS

TDT might be an efficient and economic intervention in preventing anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery.

Learning curve for single-incision laparoscopic resection of right-sided colon cancer by complete mesocolic excision

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is cosmetically beneficial, but technically challenging. In this study, the learning curve (LC) for single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILRC), incorporating complete mesocolic excision to resect right-sided colon cancer, was investigated through multidimensional techniques. Between December 2009 and May 2015, 64 patients each underwent SILRC of right-sided colon cancer at Severance Hospital, performed in all instances by the same surgeon. Moving average and cumulative sum control chart (CUSUM) were used for LC analyses retrospectively. Surgical failure was defined as conversion to conventional laparoscopic surgery, postsurgical morbidity within 30 days, harvested lymph node count <12, or local tumor recurrence. Both moving average and CUSUM graphics of operative time registered nadirs at the 24th patient, with slight ascent thereafter, reaching a plateau at the 40th patient. The CUSUM for surgical success peaked at the 23rd patient. Operative time for 23 patients in phase 1 (1-23) and for 41 patients in phase 2 (24-64) of the LC did not differ significantly. By comparison, significant differences in patients of phase 2 included larger tumor size, higher harvested lymph node counts, longer proximal resection margins, and more advanced disease. As indicated by multidimensional statistical analyses, the LC for SILRC of right-sided colon cancer was 23 patients. In terms of operative time and surgical success, SILRC is feasible for surgeons experienced in LS, but may prove more challenging for novices, given the fundamental technical difficulties of this procedure.

Current Status of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Cancer

Recent randomized controlled data have shown possible limitations to laparoscopic treatment of rectal cancer. The retrospective data, used as the basis for designing the trials, and which showed no problems with the technique, are discussed. The design of the randomized trials is discussed relative to the future meta-analysis of the recent data. The implications of the current findings on practice are discussed as surgeons try to adjust their practice to the new findings. The possible next steps for clinical and research innovations are put into perspective as new technology is considered to compensate for newly identified limitations in the laparoscopic treatment of rectal cancer.

Learning Curve for Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: a CUSUM Analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), an advanced minimally invasive technique, has demonstrated advantages to open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). However, this complex procedure requires a relatively long training period to ensure technical proficiency. This study was therefore designed to analyze the learning curve for LPD.

METHODS

From October 2010 to September 2015, 63 standard pancreaticoduodenectomy procedures were to be performed laparoscopically by a single surgeon at the Department of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 57 patients were included in the study. Data for all the patients, including preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables, were prospectively collected and analyzed. The learning curve for LPD was evaluated using both cumulative sum (CUSUM) and risk-adjusted CUSUM (RA-CUSUM) methods. All of the variables among the learning curve phases were compared.

RESULTS

Based on the CUSUM and the RA-CUSUM analyses, the learning curve for LPD was grouped into three phases: phase I was the initial learning period (cases 1-11), phase II represented the technical competence period (cases 12-38), and phase III was regarded as the challenging period (cases 39-57). The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative ICU demand significantly decreased with the learning curve. More lymph nodes were collected after the initial learning period. There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative complications or the 30-day mortality among the three phases. More challenging cases were encountered in phase III.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this study, the learning curve for LPD consisted of three phases. Conservatively, to attain technical competence for performing LPD, a minimum of 40 cases are required for laparoscopic surgeons with a degree of laparoscopic experience.

Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Resection in High-Volume Surgical Centers: Long-Term Outcomes from the LAPCOLON Group Trial

BACKGROUND

Strong evidence has confirmed the benefit of laparoscopy in colorectal cancer resection but remains a challenging procedure. It is not clear that such promising results in selected patients translate into a favorable risk-benefit balance in real practice. We conducted a multicenter national observational registry to assess operative and oncologic long-term outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection.

METHODS

All patients with laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection between 2001 and 2004 were included. Data were extracted from the prospective Italian national database of 10 high-volume centers (≥40 colorectal cancer laparoscopic resections per year). Surgical technique and follow-up were standardized. Survivals were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

We reported 1832 patients with colon (58.5%) and rectal cancer (41.5%). TNM stage was 0-I-II in 1044 patients (57%) and III-IV in 788 patients (43%). Surgery included a totally laparoscopic procedure in 1820 patients (99.3%). Conversion was 10.5%. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day mortality rates were 17 and 1.2%, respectively. Clinical anastomotic leakage rate was 8.3% (n=152). R0 resection was 95%. With a median follow-up of 54.2 months, cancer recurrence rate was 13.3%. At 5 years, cancer-free survival was 86.7%. Upon multivariate analysis, age (P=0.001) and TNM stage (P<0.001) were associated with cancer-free survival. Predictive factors of cancer recurrence were gender (P=0.029) and TNM stage (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In high-volume centers and non-selective patients, laparoscopic colorectal resection for cancer achieves good operative results with satisfactory long-term oncologic results. Even in the laparoscopy era, age, gender, and TNM stage remain the most powerful predictor of oncologic outcomes.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of 3-year follow-up outcomes

PURPOSE

We wished to evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic and open surgery for patients with rectum cancer through a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane database until June 30, 2015, to identify eligible studies. Randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic with open surgery for rectum cancer were included. Meta-analysis was performed using the search strategy following the requirement of the Cochrane Library Handbook. Three-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were the main endpoints.

RESULTS

Eight randomized controlled trials comprising 3145 patients matched the selection criteria. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference between laparoscopic and open surgery in 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) (hazard ratio (HR)3-year OS = 0.83, 95 % CI [0.68-1.01]; P = 0.06; HR3-year DFS = 0.89, 95 % CI [0.75,1.05]; P = 0.16). No evidence of publication bias was observed.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis supported the notion that based on the 3-year DFS and OS, oncological outcomes are comparable after laparoscopic and open surgery for rectal cancer.

Impact of anal decompression on anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

The effectiveness of a transanal drainage tube for the prevention of anastomotic leakage (AL) is still uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the impact of anal decompression on AL after rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 536 rectal cancer patients who underwent low anterior resection without diverting stoma, with (n = 154) or without (n = 382) placing of a transanal drainage tube, between January 2005 and December 2014. Risk factors for AL were analyzed, and propensity score matching analysis was used to compensate for the differences in baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

AL occurred in 50 (9.3%) of the patients. Male sex (odds ratio [OR] 3.097, p = 0.005), high ASA score (OR 3.505, p = 0.025), and neoadjuvant chemoradiation (OR 2.506, p = 0.018) were independent predictors of AL on multivariable analysis. After propensity score matching, transanal drainage tube tended to lessen rates of grade C AL with definite peritonitis (1.9 vs. 5.8%, p = 0.077), although there was no difference in the incidence of AL in patients with or without transanal drainage tubes (5.8 vs. 9.1%, p = 0.278).

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of a transanal drainage tube was not associated with a reduction in the total incidence of AL after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Possible benefits of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery regarding urological and sexual dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer may result in lower rates of urogenital dysfunction compared with laparoscopic surgery. A systematic review was conducted of studies reporting urogenital dysfunction after robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery.

METHOD

PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched in February 2014. All studies investigating urogenital function after robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery were identified. The inclusion criteria for meta-analysis studies required comparison of robot-assisted with laparoscopic surgery and the evaluation of urological and sexual function by validated questionnaire. The outcome was evaluated using the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and the Female Sexual Function Index.

RESULTS

Ten studies including 689 patients were included. For the meta-analysis this fell to four including 152 patients in the robotic group and 161 in the laparoscopic group, without heterogeneity. The IPSS score at 3 and 12 months favoured robot-assisted surgery [mean difference (MD) -1.58; 95% CI (-3.1, -0.0), [P = 0.04; and MD -0.90 (-1.81, -0.02), P = 0.05]. IIEF scores at 3 months' follow-up [MD -2.59 (-4.25, -0.94),] P = 0.002] and 6 months' follow-up [MD -3.06 (-4.53, -1.59), P = 0.0001] were better after robot-assisted than laparoscopic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Although there were few data and no randomized controlled trials the results of the review suggested that robot-assisted surgery resulted in improved urogenital function than after laparoscopy.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for cancer located in the lower rectum: short- and mid-term results

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic trans-abdominal total mesorectal excision is technically demanding. Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision (taTME) is a new technique which seems to provide technical advantages. This study describes the results of taTME in a consecutive series of patients with low rectal cancer.

METHODS

From January 2012 to December 2013, a consecutive series of 26 patients with low rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic taTME with coloanal anastomosis. cT4 or Type II-III rectal cancer (according to Rullier's classification) were contraindications to taTME. After anal sleeve mucosectomy, the rectal wall was transected at the ano-rectal junction. A single-access multichannel port was inserted in the anal canal. taTME was performed from down to up until the sacral promontory posteriorly and the Pouch of Douglas anteriorly were reached. A laparoscopic trans-abdominal approach was used to complete the left colon mobilization.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients (61.5%) were male. The mean distance of the rectal cancer from the anal verge was 4.4 cm (range 3-6). Nineteen patients (73.1%) received long-course neoadjuvant radiotherapy. At final pathology, resection margins were negative in all the patients: the mean distal and radial resection margins were 19 mm and 11.2 mm, respectively. TME was complete in 23 patients (88.5%) and nearly complete in three. Postoperative mortality was 3.8%. The overall morbidity rate was 26.9% (7 patients): two patients (7.7%) had an anastomotic leakage (Dindo I-d). After a mean follow up of 23 months, no patients have developed a local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

laparoscopic taTME allow wide resection margins and good quality TME.