Laparoscopic surgery contributes more to nutritional and immunologic recovery than fast-track care in colorectal cancer

Enhancing recovery and reducing inflammation: the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery recommendations on inflammatory markers in laparoscopic surgery-a scoping review

Introduction

The relationship between the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) guidelines and inflammatory markers in laparoscopic surgery has garnered increasing attention. These recommendations are designed to minimize surgical stress and potentially improve recovery outcomes by modifying perioperative care.

Objective

This scoping review aims to evaluate the impact of ERAS recommendations on inflammatory markers in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries, identifying current research gaps and consolidating findings from existing studies.

Methods

Guided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews and adhering to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, this review analyzed studies from databases like PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. We included both randomized controlled trials and observational studies that assessed inflammatory markers such as C-reactive protein (CRP), white blood cells (WBC), and Interleukin-6 (IL-6) in laparoscopic surgery patients managed with ERAS recommendations.

Results

Out of 64 initial studies, 7 met the inclusion criteria, involving a total of 2,047 patients. Most of the studies focused on laparoscopic colorectal surgeries. Commonly assessed markers were CRP and WBC. The findings consistently showed that ERAS guideline could mitigate the inflammatory response, evidenced by reduced levels of CRP and IL-6, which correlated with fewer postoperative complications and expedited recovery.

Conclusion

ERAS recommendations appear to beneficially modulate inflammatory responses in laparoscopic surgery, which suggests a potential for enhanced recovery outcomes. However, the evidence is currently limited by the small number of studies and inherent methodological biases. Further robust RCTs are required to strengthen the evidence base and refine these protocols for broader clinical application.

Systematic Review Registration

https://osf.io/tj8mw/.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a comprehensive contrastive analysis with propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) is increasingly applied in locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC). However, there is no study to comprehensively evaluate the clinicopathological, prognostic, and laboratory data such as nutrition, immune, inflammation-associated indexes, and tumor markers between LG and open gastrectomy (OG) for LAGC following NC.

METHODS

The clinicopathological, prognostic, and laboratory data of LAGC patients with clinical stage of cT2-4aN1-3M0 who underwent gastrectomy after NC were retrospectively collected. The effects of LG and OG were compared after propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

This study enrolled 148 cases, of which 110 cases were included after PSM. The LG group had a shorter length of incision (P < 0.001) and was superior to OG group in terms of blood loss (P < 0.001), postoperative first flatus time (P < 0.001), and postoperative first liquid diet time (P = 0.004). No significant difference was found in postoperative complications (P = 0.482). Laboratory results showed that LG group had less reduced red blood cells (P = 0.039), hemoglobin (P = 0.018), prealbumin (P = 0.010) in 3 days after surgery, and less reduced albumin in 1 day (P = 0.029), 3 days (P = 0.015), and 7 days (P = 0.035) after surgery than the OG group. The systemic immune-inflammation index and systemic inflammatory response index were not significantly different between the two groups. As for oncological outcomes, there were no significant differences in postoperative tumor markers of CEA (P = 0.791), CA199 (P = 0.499), and CA724 (P = 0.378). The 5-year relapse-free survival rates (P = 0.446) were 46.9% and 43.3% in the LG and OG groups, with the 5-year overall survival rates (P = 0.742) being 46.7% and 52.1%, respectively; the differences were not statistically significant. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that tumor size ≥ 4 cm (P = 0.021) and the absence of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.012) were independent risk factors for overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

LG has faster gastrointestinal recovery, better postoperative nutritional status, and comparable oncological outcomes than OG, which can serve as an alternative surgical method for LAGC patients after NC.

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.

Influence of Laparoscopic Surgery on Cellular Immunity in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer worldwide. The main treatment options are laparoscopic (LS) and open surgery (OS), which might differ in their impact on the cellular immunity so indispensable for anti-infectious and antitumor defense. MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science (SCI-EXPANDED), the Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP (WHO) were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing cellular immunity in CRC patients of any stage between minimally invasive and open surgical resections. A random effects-weighted inverse variance meta-analysis was performed for cell counts of natural killer (NK) cells, white blood cells (WBCs), lymphocytes, CD4+ T cells, and the CD4+/CD8+ ratio. The RoB2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The meta-analysis was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021264324). A total of 14 trials including 974 participants were assessed. The LS groups showed more favorable outcomes in eight trials, with lower inflammation and less immunosuppression as indicated by higher innate and adaptive cell counts, higher NK cell activity, and higher HLA-DR expression rates compared to OS, with only one study reporting lower WBCs after OS. The meta-analysis yielded significantly higher NK cell counts at postoperative day (POD)4 (weighted mean difference (WMD) 30.80 cells/µL [19.68; 41.92], p < 0.00001) and POD6-8 (WMD 45.08 cells/µL [35.95; 54.21], p < 0.00001). Although further research is required, LS is possibly associated with less suppression of cellular immunity and lower inflammation, indicating better preservation of cellular immunity.

ERAS Protocol Applied to Oncological Colorectal Mini-invasive Surgery Reduces the Surgical Stress Response and Improves Long-term Cancer-specific Survival

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are known to reduce postoperative complications and improve short-term outcomes by minimizing the surgical stress response (SSR). Retrospective reviews of large cohorts suggest that they may also have an impact on long-term oncological outcomes. In 2016, Mari et al published a randomized trial on ERAS protocol and the impact on the SSR; they found that IL-6 was less expressed in patients who undergo laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an ERAS protocol compared with controls. The aim of the present study is to report the long-term oncological outcomes of patients enrolled 5 years after the conclusion of the study.

METHODS

Patients enrolled had received the indication for major colorectal surgery, aged between 18 and 80 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grades I to III, autonomous for mobilization and walking, eligible for laparoscopic technique. In total, 140 patients were enrolled and randomized into 2 groups of 70 patients each. Among these patients, 52 in the ERAS group (EG) and 53 in the Standard group (SG) had colorectal cancer. For them, a 5-year oncological follow-up according to the NCCN 16 guidelines was planned. IL-6, C-reactive protein, prolactine, white blood cell count, albumin, and prealbumin were compared between oncological patients in the EG and in the SG.

RESULTS

EG showed lower IL-6 on postoperative day 1 (21.2±9.1 vs. 40.3 ±11.3; P <0.05) and on day 5 (14.9±6.2 vs. 38.7±8.9; P <0.05), lower C-reactive protein on day 1 (48.3±15.7 vs. 89.4±20.3; P <0.05) and on day 5 (38.3±11.4 vs. 74.3±19.7; P <0.05), and lower pre-albumine on day 5 (18.9±7.2 vs. 12.3±6.9; P <0.05) compared with SG. Median oncological follow-up was 57 months [46.5 to 60]. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (log rank=0.195) and disease-free survival (Log rank=0.089) between groups. Cancer-specific survival was significantly better (log rank=0.038) in the EG compared with patients in the SG.

CONCLUSIONS

ERAS protocol applied to colorectal laparoscopic surgery for cancer is able to minimize the SSR. As a possible result, cancer-specific survival seems to be improved in patients within enhanced protocols. However, even though there may be an association between an excess of SSR and worse oncological outcomes, the favorable effect of ERAS protocols toward better overall and disease-free survival is yet to be demonstrated.

Laparoscopic Radical Resection versus Routine Surgery for Colorectal Cancer

For patients with colorectal cancer, minimally invasive surgical methods, particularly laparoscopic methods, are now the preferred course of therapy. This research is performed to investigate the effects of laparoscopic radical resection on patients with colorectal cancer. A total of 100 colorectal cancer patients treated in our hospital from January 2017 to January 2019 were enrolled. The subjects were divided into observation (n = 50) and control (n = 50) groups and treated with laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy, respectively. As well as postoperative complications and survival rates, the levels of inflammatory substances, stress response, immunological function, and perioperative markers were compared between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the postoperative exhaust time between the two groups (P > 0.05). Compared with the control group, the observation group showed longer operation time, faster recovery of intestinal function, shorter hospital stay, and less intraoperative bleeding amount (P < 0.05). The serum contents of hs-CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, norepinephrine, adrenaline, and cortisol at 1 d, 3 d, and 5 d after surgery were significantly higher than before in both groups (P < 0.05). Moreover, the serum contents of hs-CRP, TNF-α, IL-6, norepinephrine, adrenaline, and cortisol in the observation group were significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). At 10 days following surgery, immune index levels had dramatically increased in both groups, with noticeably higher immune index levels in the observation group than in the control group (P < 0.05). There were no appreciable differences in the two groups' 2-year survival rates (P > 0.05), but the complication rate was much greater in the control group (P < 0.05). To sum up, after laparoscopic surgery, patients had fewer complications, shorter hospital stay, lower inflammatory factor expression, less stress response, better immune function, less trauma, faster recovery, and improved quality of life.

Effect of single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery assisted with enhanced recovery after surgery on colorectal cancer: study protocol for a single-arm trial

Background

Studies have proved that the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol can significantly improve the recovery course of patients during the perioperative period. The application of minimally invasive surgery is a critical component of ERAS protocol. Single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS plus one) could achieve further minimally invasive surgical results than conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). The objective of this trial is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of SILS plus one with ERAS protocol in colorectal cancer.

Methods

This is a prospective, single-center, open-label, single-arm trial. A total of 120 eligible patients with colorectal cancer will receive SILS plus one followed by the ERAS management during the perioperative period. The primary endpoint is postoperative hospital stay. The secondary endpoints include rehabilitative rate of the fourth postoperative day, postoperative medical cost, postoperative pain score, postoperative recovery indexes, inflammatory immune response indexes, compliance with ERAS measures, 6 min postoperative walking test (6MWT), hospital readmissions, and early postoperative complications.

Discussion

This trial will be the first to evaluate the short-term outcomes of SILS plus one assisted with ERAS protocol for patients with colorectal cancer and will provide valuable clinical evidence on the benefit of the combination of these two techniques, hopefully, to provide patients with more safe, economic, feasible, and rapid surgery and perioperative strategies.

Trial Registration

Clinical Trial Registry, NCT0426829. Registered February 15, 2020 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04268290).

Biological impact of an enhanced recovery after surgery programme in liver surgery

BACKGROUND

The clinical and economic impacts of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been demonstrated extensively. Whether ERAS protocols also have a biological effect remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the biological impact of an ERAS programme in patients undergoing liver surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing liver surgery (2010-2018) was undertaken. Patients operated before and after ERAS implementation in 2013 were compared. Surrogate markers of surgical stress were monitored: white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP) level, albumin concentration, and haematocrit. Their perioperative fluctuations were defined as Δvalues, calculated on postoperative day (POD) 0 for Δalbumin and Δhaematocrit and POD 2 for ΔWBC and ΔCRP.

RESULTS

A total of 541 patients were included, with 223 and 318 patients in non-ERAS and ERAS groups respectively. Groups were comparable, except for higher rates of laparoscopy (24.8 versus 11.2 per cent; P < 0.001) and major resection (47.5 versus 38.1 per cent; P = 0.035) in the ERAS group. Patients in the ERAS group showed attenuated ΔWBC (2.00 versus 2.75 g/l; P = 0.013), ΔCRP (60 versus 101 mg/l; P <0.001) and Δalbumin (12 versus 16 g/l; P < 0.001) compared with those in the no-ERAS group. Subgroup analysis of open resection showed similar results. Multivariable analysis identified ERAS as the only independent factor associated with high ΔWBC (odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95 per cent c.i. 0.43 to 0.98; P = 0.038), ΔCRP (OR 0.41, 0.23 to 0.73; P = 0.003) and Δalbumin (OR 0.40, 95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.72; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Compared with conventional management, implementation of ERAS was associated with an attenuated stress response in patients undergoing liver surgery.

The Effect of Preoperative Nutrition on Postoperative CRP and Albumin Levels in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery: A Surgical Nursing Perspective

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of preoperative oral carbohydrate on postoperative serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin levels in patients laparoscopic surgery.

DESIGN

This is an experimental study with intervention and control groups.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included (intervention, n = 33; control, n = 33). The patients in the intervention group were given 400 mL of oral liquid carbohydrate 2 hours before surgery. Blood samples were collected from the two groups with serum CRP and albumin levels measured 2 hours before surgery and 24 hours postoperatively.

FINDINGS

CRP levels in the intervention group 2 hours before surgery and 24 hours postoperatively were higher than the control group (P = .028; P = .014, respectively). CRP levels of the patients in the intervention group 24 hours postoperatively (26.98 ± 18.60 mg/L) were higher than the preoperative level (9.37 ± 15.68 mg/L) (P < .001). The CRP level of the patients in the control group 24 hours postoperatively (16.24 ± 16.01 mg/L) was higher than the preoperative level (3.11 ± 3.12 mg/L) (P < .001). There was no difference between the serum albumin levels of the patients in the intervention and control groups measured 24 hours postoperatively (P = .103).

CONCLUSIONS

We determined that 400 mL oral liquid carbohydrate given preoperatively had no anabolic effect on serum CRP and albumin levels.

Fast-track multidisciplinary treatment versus conventional treatment for colorectal cancer: a multicenter, open-label randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery, fast-track perioperative treatment and XELOX chemotherapy are effective strategies for shortening the duration of hospital stay for cancer patients. This trial aimed to clarify the safety and efficacy of the fast-track multidisciplinary treatment (FTMDT) model compared to conventional surgery combined with chemotherapy in Chinese colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

This trial was a prospective randomized controlled study with a 2 × 2 balanced factorial design and was conducted at six hospitals. Patients in group 1 (FTMDT) received fast-track perioperative treatment and XELOX adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in group 2 (conventional treatment) received conventional perioperative treatment and mFOLFOX6 adjuvant chemotherapy. Subgroups 1a and 2a had laparoscopic surgery and subgroups 1b and 2b had open surgery. The primary endpoint was total length of hospital stay during treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 374 patients were randomly assigned to the four subgroups, and 342 patients were finally analyzed, including 87 patients in subgroup 1a, 85 in subgroup 1b, 86 in subgroup 2a, and 84 in subgroup 2b. The total hospital stay of group 1 was shorter than that of group 2 [13 days, (IQR, 11-17 days) vs. 23.5 days (IQR, 15-42 days), P = 0.0001]. Compared to group 2, group 1 had lower surgical costs, fewer in-hospital complications and faster recovery (all P < 0.05). Subgroup 1a showed faster surgical recovery than that of subgroup 1b (all P < 0.05). There was no difference in 5-year overall survival between groups 1 and 2 [87.1% (95% CI, 80.7-91.5%) vs. 87.1% (95% CI, 80.8-91.4%), P = 0.7420].

CONCLUSIONS

The FTMDT model, which integrates laparoscopic surgery, fast-track treatment, and XELOX chemotherapy, was the superior model for enhancing the recovery of Chinese patients with colorectal cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01080547 , registered on March 4, 2010.

Effect of Radical Surgery for Advanced Adenocarcinoma of Esophagogastric Junction on Perioperative Cellular Cell Immunity

Background: To investigate the perioperative peripheral blood levels of CD4⁺CD25⁺ regulatory T cells, programed cell death 1 (PD-1), and lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG-3) in patients with advanced Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG). Methods: Patients (n = 102) with advanced Siewert type II AEG underwent open total gastrectomy/proximal gastrectomy with a transhiatal resection of the distal esophagus and lymphadenectomy of the lower mediastinum and the abdominal D2 compartment. Flow cytometry was used to detect CD4⁺CD25⁺ T cells, PD-1 and LAG-3 expression on both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells in the peripheral blood of the Siewert type II AEG patients prior to surgery and on postoperative day (POD) 1, 3, 7, and 9. Results: The proportion of CD4⁺CD25⁺ T cells rapidly decreased on POD 1, then gradually increased and peaked at POD 7. The proportion of CD4⁺PD-1⁺ T cells significantly increased after surgery, reaching a maximum on POD 1, and remained significantly elevated on POD 3 compared to the preoperative day. The proportion of CD8⁺ PD-1⁺ and CD4⁺LAG-3⁺ T cells gradually increased after surgery and reached a peak at POD 7. The change in proportion of CD8⁺LAG-3⁺ T cells in the peripheral venous blood lymphocytes after surgery was not statistically significant. Conclusion: The change in the CD4⁺PD-1⁺ T lymphocyte ratio may likely reflect the cellular immunity status of the perioperative period.

Prediction of early discharge after gynaecological oncology surgery within ERAS

OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs (ERAS) have been proven to decrease the length of hospital stay without increasing readmission rates or complications. However, the patient and operative characteristics that improve the chance of a successful early hospital discharge are not well established. The aim of this study was to design a nomogram which could be used before surgery, using the characteristics of patients, to establish who could benefit from early discharge (POD ≤ 2 days).

METHODS

This observational study has been prospectively conducted. All the included patients were referred for surgical treatment of gynecologic cancer. We defined two sub-groups of patients on surgical procedure characteristics: isolated procedures (hysterectomy or lymphadenectomy) and combined procedures (at least the association of two procedures).

RESULTS

230 patients were enrolled during the study protocol. 83.9% of patients were treated with a minimally invasive surgery (MIS). 159 patients (69.1%) were discharged on or before POD 2. On multivariate analysis, the surgical approach (open surgery vs. laparoscopy, OR  0.02 (95% CI [0-0.07]), p < 0.001) and the type of surgery (combined procedure versus isolated procedure, OR  0.41 (95% CI [0.18-0.91]), p = 0.028) were found to be significant predictors of increased hospital stay. A nomogram has been built for the purpose of predicting eligible patients for early post-operative discharge based on the multivariate analysis results (AUC = 0.86, 95% CI [0.81-0.92]).

CONCLUSION

The use of MIS for isolated procedures in oncologic indications constitutes an independent factor of early discharge in a setting of ERAS. These promising preliminary results still require to be validated on a prospective cohort.

Laparoscopic total nephrectomy for Wilms tumor: Towards new standards of care

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic total nephrectomy (LN) in malignant pediatric tumors remains controversial. For selected patients undergoing pre-operative chemotherapy in referral centers, LN has so far shown comparable results to the standard open technique.

PURPOSE

To describe the inclusion criteria and preliminary results of laparoscopic nephrectomies (LN) for the treatment of unilateral Wilms tumors (WT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between November 2010 and January 2016, a retrospective study of patients with WT and undergoing pre-operative chemotherapy was performed. Inclusion criteria for candidates for LN were: unilateral tumors without venous invasion and central kidney localization. Tumor size and vascular thrombus were estimated with pre-operative computed tomography (CT) scan. Overall survival and recurrence rates were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 105 patients with WT, 14 underwent LN. Tumor bleeding or the lack of response to chemotherapy were not exclusion criteria. Median tumor volume for the patients undergoing LN was 71.5 cc (range 7-169). Patients with small tumors localized near the renal pole and candidates for nephron sparing surgery (NSS) were excluded. Estimated 5-year overall survival for all patients with WT during this period was 88.7% (88.1-103.1). Two patients underwent conversion. No recurrence or related death was found at a mean 32- month follow-up period.

DISCUSSION

Reproducing the steps of the open nephrectomy when performing LN for malignant tumors allowed comparable oncologic results to the conventional procedure. However, upstaging of the tumor was not admissible and has become the main goal when approaching these patients laparoscopically. Preliminary results showed that the incidence of intraoperative rupture and incomplete node sampling were not an issue when comparing LN to open nephrectomy. On the other hand, LN for malignant tumors requires experience in advanced laparoscopy and oncologic surgery. Pre-operative chemotherapy changes the tumor's consistency and this is the key point as to why these patients are amenable to be approached laparoscopically. Lifting the tumor along with the fat to avoid capsule fraction, as well as changing the lens to the lateral port to achieve a correct view for lymph node sampling are some of the considerations when performing LN.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary data suggest that LN for WT is feasible and has promising results in terms of event-free and overall survival. In patients undergoing pre-operative chemotherapy the correct selection for LN is crucial. Following the basic oncological precepts and in experienced centers, LN represents a plausible modality in the care of these patients.

Propensity score matching comparison of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer in a middle-income country: short-term outcomes and cost analysis

Background

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is associated with improved postoperative outcomes compared to open surgery; however, economic studies have yielded contradictory results. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery for patients with rectal cancer.

Methods

Propensity score matching analysis was performed in a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent elective low anterior resection for rectal cancer treatment by laparoscopic and open surgery in a single Brazilian cancer center. Matched covariates included age, gender, body mass index, pTNM stage, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, type of anesthesia, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and index surgery. The clinical and economic outcomes were evaluated. The follow-up period was within 30 days of the index procedure. The clinical outcomes were reoperation, postoperative complications, operative time, length of stay in the intensive care unit, and postoperative hospital stay. For economic outcomes, a cost analysis was used to compare the costs.

Results

Initially, 220 patients were evaluated. After propensity score matching, 100 patients were included in the analysis (50 patients in the open surgery group and 50 patients in the laparoscopic surgery group). There were no differences in patients' baseline characteristics. Operative time was longer for laparoscopic surgery (247 minutes vs 285 minutes, P=0.006). There were no significant differences in other clinical outcomes. The hospital costs were similar between the two groups (Brazilian reais 21,233.15 vs Brazilian reais 21,529.28, P=0.115), although the intraoperative costs were higher for laparoscopic surgery, mainly owing to the surgical devices and the theater-related costs. The postoperative costs were lower for laparoscopic surgery, owing to lower intensive care unit, ward, and reoperation costs.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is not costlier than open surgery from the health care provider's perspective, since the intraoperative costs were offset by lower postoperative costs. Open surgery tends to have a longer length of stay.

Comparison of robot-assisted surgery, laparoscopic-assisted surgery, and open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to find the better treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) by comparing robot-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS), laparoscopic-assisted colorectal surgery (LACS), and open surgery using network meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search updated to August 15, 2017 was performed. All the included literatures were evaluated according to the quality evaluation criteria of bias risk recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. All data were comprehensively analyzed by ADDIS. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to show the effect index of all data. The degree of convergence of the model was evaluated by the Brooks-Gelman-Rubin method with the potential scale reduction factor (PSRF) as the evaluation indicator.

RESULTS

The PSRF values of operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, complication, mortality, and anastomotic leakage ranged from 1.00 to 1.01, and those of wound infection, bleeding, and ileus ranged from 1.00 to 1.02. Open surgery had the shortest operation time compared with LACS and RACS. Furthermore, compared with LACS, the amount of blood loss, complication, mortality, bleeding rate, and ileus rate for RACS were the least, and the length of hospital stay for RACS was the shortest. The anastomotic leakage rate for LACS was the least, but there was no significant difference compared with those of RACS and open surgery. The wound infection rate for LACS was the least, but there was no significant difference compared with that of RACS.

CONCLUSION

RACS might be a better treatment for patients with CRC.

Minimally invasive surgery for stage III colon adenocarcinoma is associated with less delay to initiation of adjuvant systemic therapy and improved survival

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) may improve surgical recovery and reduce time to adjuvant systemic therapy after colon cancer resection. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of MIS on the initiation of adjuvant systemic therapy and survival in patients with stage III colon cancer.

METHODS

The 2010-2014 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with resected stage III colon adenocarcinoma, and divided into MIS, which included laparoscopic and robotic approaches, and open surgery. Propensity-score matching was used to balanced open and MIS groups. The main outcome measures were delayed initiation of adjuvant systemic therapy (defined as > 8 weeks after surgery) and 5-year overall survival (OS). Multiple Cox regression was performed to identify independent predictors for 5-year OS, including an interaction between delayed systemic therapy and MIS, and adjusted for clustering at the hospital level.

RESULTS

There were 86,680 patients that were included in this study. Overall, 45% (38,713) underwent MIS colectomy, of which 93% underwent laparoscopic and 7% robotic surgery. After matching, 33,183 open patients were balanced to 33,183 MIS patients. Patient, tumor, and facility characteristics were similar in the matched cohort. More patients in the MIS group received adjuvant therapy within 8 weeks of surgery (49% vs. 42%, p < 0.001), and fewer MIS patients did not receive any systemic therapy (30% vs. 35%, p < 0.001). Delayed initiation of systemic therapy > 8 weeks was associated with worse 5-year OS (HR 1.27, 95%CI 1.19-1.36). MIS was independently associated with improved survival (HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.86-0.97). This relationship remained even if 90-day mortality was excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS approaches are associated with less delay to the initiation of adjuvant systemic therapy and improved survival in patients with stage III colon adenocarcinoma. Surgeons should favor MIS approaches for the treatment of stage III colon adenocarcinoma whenever possible.

Comparing laparoscopic surgery with open surgery for long-term outcomes in patients with stage I to III colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Although the short-term advantages of laparoscopy for colon cancer (CC) over open surgery have been clearly demonstrated, there is little evidence available concerning the long-term outcomes. This study aimed to compare the long-term results of laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery in a cohort of CC patients from a single center.

METHODS

A series of 443 patients consecutively operated on for stage I to III CC between January 2006 and December 2013 were followed up. Patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique and were compared for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) before and after 1:1 propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Due to exclusions and drop-outs, the statistical analysis of the study is based on 398 patients. Open surgery was performed in 133 patients, and laparoscopic surgery was performed in 265. After propensity score matching, two comparable groups of 89 patients each were obtained. The 5-year DFS was 64.3% and 78.2% for patients in the open and laparoscopic resection groups, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33-1.19; P = 0.148]. A 5-year OS of 72.1% and 86.8% was observed in the open and laparoscopic resection groups, respectively (HR 0.43, 95%CI 0.20-0.94; P = 0.026). The multivariate survival analysis demonstrated better results of laparoscopy compared with open surgery for both DFS (HR 0.43, 95%CI 0.23-0.78; P = 0.004) and OS (HR 0.28, 95%CI 0.14-0.59; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limitations of a retrospective analysis, our study confirms better results for laparoscopic surgery in terms of DFS and OS compared with open surgery in CC treatment.

Network meta-analysis of protocol-driven care and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic approaches and standardized recovery protocols have reduced morbidity following colorectal cancer surgery. As the optimal regimen remains inconclusive, a network meta-analysis was undertaken of treatments for the development of postoperative complications and mortality.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, trial registries and related reviews were searched for randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and open surgery within protocol-driven or conventional perioperative care for colorectal cancer resection, with complications as a defined endpoint. Relative odds ratios (ORs) for postoperative complications and mortality were estimated for aggregated data.

RESULTS

Forty trials reporting on 11 516 randomized patients were included with the network. Open surgery within conventional perioperative care was the index for comparison. The OR relating to complications was 0·77 (95 per cent c.i. 0·65 to 0·91) for laparoscopic surgery within conventional care, 0·69 (0·48 to 0·99) for open surgery within protocol-driven care, and 0·43 (0·28 to 0·67) for laparoscopic surgery within protocol-driven care. Sensitivity analyses excluding trials of low rectal cancer and those with a high risk of bias did not affect the treatment estimates. Meta-analyses demonstrated that mortality risk was unaffected by perioperative strategy.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery combined with protocol-driven care reduces colorectal cancer surgery complications, but not mortality. The reduction in complications with protocol-driven care is greater for open surgery than for laparoscopic approaches. Registration number: CRD42015017850 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).