1
|
Sica GS, Vinci D, Siragusa L, Sensi B, Guida AM, Bellato V, García-Granero Á, Pellino G. Definition and reporting of lymphadenectomy and complete mesocolic excision for radical right colectomy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:846-861. [PMID: 36097099 PMCID: PMC9944740 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09548-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2022] [Accepted: 08/07/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several procedures have been proposed to reduce the rates of recurrence in patients with right-sided colon cancer. Different procedures for a radical right colectomy (RRC), including extended D3 lymphadenectomy, complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been associated with survival benefits by some authors, but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the variability in definition and reporting of RRC, which might be responsible for significant differences in outcome evaluation. METHODS PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review to identify the definitions of RRC. Primary aims were to identify surgical steps and different nomenclature for RRC. Secondary aims were description of heterogeneity and overlap among different RRC techniques. RESULTS Ninety-nine articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Eight surgical steps were identified and recorded as specific to RRC: Central arterial ligation was described in 100% of the included studies; preservation of mesocolic integrity in 73% and dissection along the SMV plane in 67%. Other surgical steps were inconstantly reported. Six differently named techniques for RRC have been identified. There were 35 definitions for the 6 techniques and 40% of these were used to identify more than one technique. CONCLUSIONS The only universally adopted surgical step for RRC is central arterial ligation. There is great heterogeneity and consistent overlap among definitions of all RRC techniques. This is likely to jeopardise the interpretation of the outcomes of studies on the topic. Consistent use of definitions and reporting of procedures are needed to obtain reliable conclusions in future trials. PROSPERO CRD42021241650.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Giuseppe S Sica
- Minimally Invasive Unit, Department of Surgical Science, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy. .,Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
| | - Danilo Vinci
- Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Leandro Siragusa
- Minimally Invasive Unit, Department of Surgical Science, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.,Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Bruno Sensi
- Minimally Invasive Unit, Department of Surgical Science, University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.,Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Andrea M Guida
- Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
| | - Vittoria Bellato
- Department of Surgical Science, Policlinico Tor Vergata - University Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.,Ospedale IRCCS San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Álvaro García-Granero
- Colorectal Unit, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Palma, Spain.,Applied Surgical Anatomy Unit, Human Embryology and Anatomy Department, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.,Human Embryology and Anatomy Department, University of Islas Baleares, Palma, Spain
| | - Gianluca Pellino
- Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences, Università Degli Studi Della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.,Colorectal Surgery, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Clarke EM, Rahme J, Larach T, Rajkomar A, Jain A, Hiscock R, Warrier S, Smart P. Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a retrospective cohort study of the Binational Colorectal Cancer Database. J Robot Surg 2021; 16:927-933. [PMID: 34709537 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01319-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/16/2021] [Accepted: 10/06/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Robotic right hemicolectomy (RRC) may have technical advantages over the conventional laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) due to higher degrees of rotation, articulation, and tri-dimensional imaging. There is growing literature describing advantages of RRC compared to LRC; however, there is a lack of evidence about safety, oncologic quality of surgery and cost. This study aimed to analyse complication rates, length of stay and nodal harvest in patients undergoing minimally invasive right hemicolectomy for colon cancer from a prospective Australasian colorectal cancer database. This was a retrospective cohort study using nearest neighbour matching. The Binational Colorectal Cancer Audit (BCCA) provided the data for analysis. The primary outcome was length of stay. Secondary outcomes were harvested lymph node count, anastomotic leak, postoperative haemorrhage, abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, wound infections and non-surgical complications. 4977 patients who underwent robotic (n = 146) or laparoscopic (n = 4831) right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer were included. For RRC, LOS was shorter (5 vs 6.9 days, p = 0.01) and nodal harvest was higher (22 vs 19, p = 0.04). For RRC, surgical complications (5.9% vs 14.2%, p < 0.004) and non-surgical complications (4.6% vs 11.7%, p = 0.007) were lower though there was no difference in return to theatre or inpatient death. Robotic right hemicolectomy is associated shorter LOS and marginally higher lymph node count, though this may reflect anastomotic technique rather than surgical platform. Longer term studies are required to establish differences in overall survival, incisional hernia rates and cost effectiveness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward M Clarke
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Melbourne, VIC, 3084, Australia.
| | - Jessica Rahme
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Melbourne, VIC, 3084, Australia
| | - Tomas Larach
- Department of Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia
| | - Amrish Rajkomar
- General Surgery and Gastroenterology Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Richmond, Melbourne, VIC, 3121, Australia
| | - Anshini Jain
- Department of Surgery, Eastern Health, Box Hill, Melbourne, VIC, 3128, Australia
| | - Richard Hiscock
- Translational Obstetrics Group, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.,Mercy Perinatal, Mercy Hospital for Women, Heidelberg, Melbourne, VIC, 3084, Australia
| | - Satish Warrier
- Department of Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastroenterology Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Richmond, Melbourne, VIC, 3121, Australia
| | - Philip Smart
- Department of Surgery, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Melbourne, VIC, 3084, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastroenterology Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Richmond, Melbourne, VIC, 3121, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Larach JT, Flynn J, Kong J, Waters PS, McCormick JJ, Murphy D, Stevenson A, Warrier SK, Heriot AG. Robotic colorectal surgery in Australia: evolution over a decade. ANZ J Surg 2021; 91:2330-2336. [PMID: 33438361 DOI: 10.1111/ans.16554] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/16/2020] [Revised: 12/24/2020] [Accepted: 12/24/2020] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite reports of increasing adoption of robotics in colorectal surgery worldwide, data regarding its uptake in Australasia are lacking. This study examines the trends of robotic colorectal surgery in Australia during the last 10 years. METHODS Data from patients undergoing robotic colorectal surgery with the da Vinci robotic platform between 2010 and 2019 were obtained. Overall, numbers of specific colorectal procedures across Australia were obtained from the Medicare Benefit Schedule data over the same period. Pearson's correlation analysis was used to determine the statistical trends of overall and specific robotic colorectal procedures over time. RESULTS A total of 6110 robotic general surgery procedures were performed across Australia during the study period. Of these, 3522 (57.6%) were robotic colorectal procedures. An increasing trend of overall robotic colorectal procedures was seen over 10 years (Pearson's coefficient of 0.875; P = 0.001). While this applied to both the public and private sectors, 90.7% of the procedures were undertaken in the private sector. Restorative rectal resections, rectopexies, and right hemicolectomies accounted for 82.6% of the robotic colorectal procedures performed during this period with an increasing trend seen over time for each intervention. Moreover, a robotic approach was utilized in 12.5%, 41.0% and 9.0% of all restorative rectal resections, rectopexies and right hemicolectomies undertaken in Australia during 2019, respectively. CONCLUSION Robotic colorectal surgery has increased dramatically in Australia over the last 10 years, especially in the private sector. Penetration of robotic colorectal surgery in the public healthcare system will require focussed cost-benefit evaluations and governmental investment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- José Tomás Larach
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Digestive Surgery, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Julie Flynn
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Joseph Kong
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Peadar S Waters
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jacob J McCormick
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Declan Murphy
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Andrew Stevenson
- Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Satish K Warrier
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Alexander G Heriot
- Division of Cancer Surgery, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Division of Cancer Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,General Surgery and Gastrointestinal Clinical Institute, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|