Hand-assisted Laparoscopy: Expensive but Considerable Step Between Laparoscopic and Open Colectomy

PROcedure-SPECific postoperative pain management guideline for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A systematic review with recommendations for postoperative pain management

Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in women and third most common in men. Laparoscopic resection has become the standard surgical technique worldwide given its notable benefits, mainly the shorter length of stay and less postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature on postoperative pain management following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and update previous procedure-specific pain management recommendations. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements. We also considered study quality, clinical relevance of trial design, and a comprehensive risk-benefit assessment of the analgesic intervention. We performed a literature search to identify randomised controlled studies (RCTs) published before January 2022. Seventy-two studies were included in the present analysis. Through the established PROSPECT process, we recommend basic analgesia (paracetamol for rectal surgery, and paracetamol with either a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitor for colonic surgery) and wound infiltration as first-line interventions. No consensus could be achieved either for the use of intrathecal morphine or intravenous lidocaine; no recommendation can be made for these interventions. However, intravenous lidocaine may be considered when basic analgesia cannot be provided.

A reduction in hospital length of stay reduces costs for colorectal surgery: an economic evaluation of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in Singapore

PURPOSE

In 2017, the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) was introduced in the Department of Colorectal Surgery at Singapore General Hospital as a pilot quality improvement initiative. This study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of NSQIP by evaluating its effects on surgical outcomes, length of stay (LOS), and costs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing colorectal surgery (2017-2020). Patients were divided into two cohorts: pre-NSQIP (2017-2018) and post-NSQIP (2019-2020). Outcomes evaluated were 30-day postoperative complications, LOS, and costs. Total cost-savings from NSQIP intervention's impact on LOS were estimated using a decision model with a one-way sensitivity analysis. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify factors for prolonged LOS.

RESULTS

1905 patients underwent colorectal surgery, with 996 in the pre-NSQIP cohort and 909 in the post-NSQIP cohort. A significant reduction in overall postoperative complications of 4.7% was observed in the post-NSQIP cohort (36.5% vs. 31.8%, p = 0.029). Patients in the post-NSQIP cohort had a shorter median LOS (8.0 vs. 6.0 days, p < 0.001). The implementation of NSQIP resulted in an 8.5% decrease in prolonged LOS > 6 days (p < 0.001), saving S$0.31 million on LOS. Total costs per case were reduced by 20.8% following NSQIP (S$39,539.05 vs. S$31,311.93, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Implementing NSQIP has significantly reduced overall postoperative complications, LOS, and costs and achieved cost savings following colorectal surgery.

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.

Hand-assisted versus straight laparoscopy for colorectal surgery - a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is an alternative to straight laparoscopy (LAP) in colorectal surgery. Many studies have compared the two in terms of efficacy, complications, and outcomes. This meta-analysis aims to uncover if there are any significant differences in conversion rates, operative times, body mass index (BMI), incision lengths, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of stay.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches were performed on databases from their respective inceptions to 16 December 2021, with a manual search performed through Scopus. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case series involving more than 10 patients were included.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies were found fitting the inclusion criteria, with 5 RCTs, 41 cohort studies, and 1 case series. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery was associated with lower conversion rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.41, 95%CI 0.28-0.60, p < 0.00001), shorter operative times (Mean Difference [MD] - 8.32 min, 95%CI - 14.05- - 2.59, p = 0.004), and higher BMI (MD 0.79, 95%CI 0.46-1.13, p < 0.00001), but it was also associated with longer incision lengths (MD 2.19 cm, 95%CI 1.66-2.73 cm, p < 0.00001), and higher postoperative complication rates (OR 1.15, 95%CI 1.06-1.24, p = 0.0004). Length of stay was not different in HALS as compared to Lap (MD 0.16 days, 95%CI - 0.06-0.38 days, p = 0.16, and intraoperative complications were the same between both techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand-assisted laparoscopy is a suitable alternative to straight laparoscopy with benefits and risks. While there are many cohort studies comparing HALS and LAP, more RCTs would be needed for a better quality of evidence.

Effect of LncRNA MIAT on Prognosis of Hand-assisted Laparoscopic or Laparoscopic-assisted Colectomy for Colorectal Cancer

PURPOSE

The current study aims to explore the effect of myocardial infarction associated transcript (MIAT) level on the long-term prognosis of hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (HALC) or laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) for colorectal cancer (CC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 320 CC patients were included. Patients were randomized into HALC and LAC group.

RESULTS

MIAT level in CC tissue was upregulated, and had a significant positive association with its level in serum. MIAT levels in both CC tissue and serum were correlated with lymph node metastasis and histologic grading. Survival analysis showed that the overall survival rate in 3 years after operation was significantly lower in HALC-High MIAT group (P<0.05). When MIAT level is <10.9 in CC tissue or 8.7 in serum, 100% of patients who underwent HALC will be alive for >3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with low MIAT level, both HALC and LAC are available, otherwise, LAC is more recommended.