Systemic inflammatory response in robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer (SIRIRALS): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Robotic-assisted surgery for left-sided colon and rectal resections is associated with reduction in the postoperative surgical stress response and improved short-term outcomes: a cohort study

INTRODUCTION

There is growing evidence that the use of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in colorectal cancer resections is associated with improved short-term outcomes when compared to laparoscopic surgery (LS) or open surgery (OS), possibly through a reduced systemic inflammatory response (SIR). Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) is a sensitive SIR biomarker and its utility in the early identification of post-operative complications has been validated in a variety of surgical procedures. There remains a paucity of studies characterising post-operative SIR in RAS.

METHODS

Retrospective study of a prospectively collected database of consecutive patients undergoing OS, LS and RAS for left-sided and rectal cancer in a single high-volume unit. Patient and disease characteristics, post-operative CRP levels, and clinical outcomes were reviewed, and their relationships explored within binary logistic regression and propensity scores matched models.

RESULTS

A total of 1031 patients were included (483 OS, 376 LS, and 172 RAS). RAS and LS were associated with lower CRP levels across the first 4 post-operative days (p < 0.001) as well as reduced complications and length of stay compared to OS in unadjusted analyses. In binary logistic regression models, RAS was independently associated with lower CRP levels at Day 3 post-operatively (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.21-0.59, p < 0.001) and a reduction in the rate of all complications (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26-0.56, p < 0.001) and major complications (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.26-0.95, p = 0.036). Within a propensity scores matched model comparing LS versus RAS specifically, RAS was associated with lower post-operative CRP levels in the first two post-operative days, a lower proportion of patients with a CRP ≥ 150 mg/L at Day 3 (20.9% versus 30.5%, p = 0.036) and a lower rate of all complications (34.7% versus 46.7%, p = 0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

The present observational study shows that an RAS approach was associated with lower postoperative SIR, and a better postoperative complications profile.

Role of vitamin D supplementation in modifying outcomes after surgery: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence to suggest vitamin D plays a role in immune and vascular function; hence, it may be of biological and clinical relevance for patients undergoing major surgery. With a greater number of randomised studies being conducted evaluating the impact of vitamin D supplementation on surgical patients, it is an opportune time to conduct further analysis of the impact of vitamin D on surgical outcomes.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Trials Register were interrogated up to December 2023 to identify randomised controlled trials of vitamin D supplementation in surgery. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted for all studies. The primary outcome assessed was overall postoperative survival.

RESULTS

We screened 4883 unique studies, assessed 236 full-text articles and included 14 articles in the qualitative synthesis, comprising 1982 patients. The included studies were highly heterogeneous with respect to patient conditions, ranging from open heart surgery to cancer operations to orthopaedic conditions, and also with respect to the timing and equivalent daily dose of vitamin D supplementation (range: 0.5-7500 mcg; 20-300 000 IU). No studies reported significant differences in overall survival or postoperative mortality with vitamin D supplementation. There was also no clear evidence of benefit with respect to overall or intensive care unit length of stay.

DISCUSSION

Numerous studies have reported the benefits of vitamin D supplementation in different surgical settings without any consistency. However, this systematic review found no clear evidence of benefit, which warrants the supposition that a single biological effect of vitamin D supplementation does not exist. The observed improvement in outcomes in low vitamin D groups has not been convincingly proven beyond chance findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021232067.

Postoperative inflammatory response in colorectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Surgical removal of the cancerous tissue remains the cornerstone of curative treatment for colorectal cancer and results in an inflammatory response. An exaggerated inflammatory response has been implicated in the promotion of tumor proliferation and has shown associations with postoperative complications. Literature on the preferred surgical technique to minimize inflammatory response is inconclusive. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the inflammatory response and postoperative incidence of infectious complications following surgery for colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases were searched for RCTs that reported inflammatory parameters as a function of surgical modality only. Data related to CRP or IL-6 levels on postoperative days 1 and 3 and data related to postoperative infections were subject to a pairwise meta-analysis to compare open versus laparoscopic techniques.

RESULTS

The literature search and screening process yielded 4151 studies. Ten studies met criteria, including 568 patients. Only studies on laparoscopic and open surgery were found. Pooled analyses found lower Il-6 and CRP levels on postoperative day 1 and lower CRP levels on postoperative day 3 for laparoscopic surgery compared to open surgery. However, there was no difference in incidence of postoperative infectious complications.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study indicate a superior inflammatory profile for laparoscopic surgery compared to an open approach for colorectal cancer surgery. For future research, it would be worthwhile to conduct a randomized controlled trial to compare the postoperative inflammatory response and related clinical outcomes between minimally invasive surgical approaches, including laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery.

Robotic-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Left Hemicolectomy-Postoperative Inflammation Status, Short-Term Outcome and Cost Effectiveness

Robotic-assisted colon surgery may contain advantages over the laparoscopic approach, but clear evidence is sparse. This study aimed to analyze postoperative inflammation status, short-term outcome and cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic left hemicolectomy. All consecutive patients who received minimal-invasive left hemicolectomy at the Department of Surgery I at the University Hospital of Wuerzburg in 2021 were prospectively included. Importantly, no patient selection for either procedure was carried out. The robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic approaches were compared head to head for postoperative short-term outcomes as well as cost-effectiveness. A total of 61 patients were included, with 26 patients having received a robotic-assisted approach. Baseline characteristics did not differ among the groups. Patients receiving a robotic-assisted approach had a significantly decreased length of hospital stay as well as lower rates of complications in comparison to patients who received laparoscopic surgery (n = 35). In addition, C-reactive protein as a marker of systemic stress response was significantly reduced postoperatively in patients who were operated on in a robotic-assisted manner. Consequently, robotic-assisted surgery could be performed in a cost-effective manner. Thus, robotic-assisted left hemicolectomy represents a safe and cost-effective procedure and might improve patient outcomes in comparison to laparoscopic surgery.