Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive right colectomy: A multi-center propensity score-matched comparison of outcomes

Design and validation of a simulation-based training module for ileo-transverse intracorporeal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

The benefits of the totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy have been established, but its adoption has been limited by the challenges of intracorporeal suturing. While simulation is effective for training advanced surgical skills, no dedicated simulation-based course exists for intracorporeal ileo-transverse anastomosis (ICA). This study aimed to develop and validate a simulation module for training in ICA.

METHODS

This study employed a proof-of-concept design for an educational tool. Key aspects of the anastomosis were identified using the team's surgical experience, surgical videos, and existing evidence. Surgeons were recruited to test and refine successive simulation models through an iterative process until a functional prototype was achieved and assessed. Subsequently, surgeons with varying experience levels were invited to perform an ICA in the model. Performance was evaluated by two blinded surgeons through video recordings, utilizing a modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS), a Specific Rating Score (SRS), and operative time measurements. Non-parametric descriptive and analytical methods were applied, with results presented as median [IQR].

RESULTS

An ex vivo based model was developed. Seventeen participants evaluated the model. Eighty-three percent declared acceptable or maximum fidelity regarding the colon. Resemblance to the surgical scenario in terms of ergonomic and anatomical similarity was highlighted. All participants found the model useful to train intracorporeal suturing. Thirteen subjects performed the ICA. Experts achieved significantly higher OSATS scores (22.3 [22-22.5] vs 18 [16-19.5]; p = .013), exhibited a trend toward higher SRS, and obtained shorter operative times (21.5 vs 36 min; p = .039).

CONCLUSION

An ex vivo simulation module for ICA was developed, demonstrating acceptable fidelity in replicating the surgical environment. The simulated scenario could successfully distinguish between levels of surgical experience, as evidenced by significant differences in OSATS scores and operative times, thereby confirming its construct validity.

Innovative needle-assisted technique for intracorporeal anastomosis: Simplifying closure of common enterotomy in laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery

BACKGROUND

Intracorporeal anastomosis offers notable advantages over extracorporeal techniques, including reduced tissue manipulation leading to faster recovery and potentially lower risks of surgical site infections and complications. However, it also involves several challenges, such as increased operative time and the need for experienced assistants and multiple trocars. Our novel technique addresses these problems.

METHODS

We present a novel approach for closing common enterotomies during intracorporeal anastomosis by using a linear stapler. This technique involves the use of a 6-cm straight needle, which facilitates closure of the common enterotomy. The technique can be performed independently by a single surgeon without the need for additional trocars or assistants.

RESULTS

This technique was applied for 20 patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery between June 2023 and February 2024. The median age of the enrolled patients was 65 years, with laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal ileocolostomy being the most common procedure (60% of cases). The median anastomosis time was 22.5 min. No occurrence of anastomotic leakage was reported, and only one patient (5%) developed temporary postoperative bowel obstruction, which was managed conservatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our technique enables efficient and safe closure of common enterotomies during intracorporeal anastomosis, minimizing reliance on additional trocars and experienced assistants. It simplifies the procedure and ensures fullthickness stapling, potentially reducing the likelihood of complications. Because of its broad applicability across various laparoscopic surgeries, this technique offers substantial benefits and is worth recommending for intracorporeal anastomosis.

Robotic Sigmoidectomy for Diverticular Disease

Introduction: Historically, colon resection was recommended after one episode of complicated diverticulitis. However, current trends favor a more individualized approach. This review examines elective sigmoidectomy for complicated diverticulitis as well as robotic approaches for diverticular disease. Methods: The literature was reviewed for timely (post 2000) and relevant articles regarding robotics and diverticulitis. The articles included large prospective series, retrospective analysis, meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials. Results: Primary anastomosis with or without protective ileostomy has emerged as an alternative to the Hartman's procedure in emergent or urgent surgery in patients without significant comorbidities. Elective sigmoidectomy after an episode of complicated diverticulitis should be decided on a case-by-case basis considering patient characteristics, continued subacute symptoms, complications from the disease, and chance of recurrence episodes. Conclusions: There are several variations techniques for robotic sigmoidectomy outlined in this article, and familiarity with all can help depending on the logistics of the case. Minimally invasive colectomy provides superior patient satisfaction and outcomes.

Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes and Long-Term Survival Rates between Patients Who Underwent Robotic and Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision for Right-Sided Colon Cancer

Introduction: Right colon cancer often requires surgical intervention, and complete mesocolic excision (CME) has emerged as a standard procedure. The study aims to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic CME for patients with right colon cancer and 5-year survival rates examined to determine the outcomes. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent CME for right-sided colon cancer between 2014 and 2021 were included in this study. Group differences of age, body mass index, operation time, bleeding amount, total harvested lymph nodes, and postoperative stay were analyzed by the Mann-Whitney U test. Group differences of sex, American Society of Anesthesiology, and tumor, node, and metastasis stage were analyzed by the Chi-squared test. Disease-free and overall survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves with the log-rank Mantel-Cox test. Results: From 109 patients, 74 of them were 1:1 propensity score matched and used for analysis. Total harvested lymph node (P ≤ .001) and estimated blood loss (P = .031) were found to be statistically significant between the groups. We found no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of disease-free and overall survival (P = .27, .86, respectively), and the mortality rate was 9.17%, with no deaths directly attributed to the surgery. Conclusions: Study shows that minimally invasive surgery is a feasible option for CME in right colon cancers, with acceptable overall survival rates. Although the robotic approach has a higher lymph node yield, there was no significant difference in survival rates. Further randomized trials are needed to determine the clinical significance of both approaches.

Evaluation of the short-term complications of intracorporeal anastomosis in right-sided colectomy

INTRODUCTION

The benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery remain unclear. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the short-term postoperative outcomes of intracorporeal anastomosis.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 87 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for right-sided colon tumors using a colon database.

RESULTS

Of the 87 patients, 23 underwent intracorporeal anastomosis and 64 underwent extracorporeal anastomosis. Intraoperative bleeding, wound length, exhaust gas, preoperative white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein (postoperative day 1) were higher in the extracorporeal anastomosis group than in the intracorporeal anastomosis group. The incidence of wound infection was higher in the intracorporeal anastomosis group than in the extracorporeal anastomosis group. In the irrigation water bacterial culture collected after anastomosis, the positive group had a higher white blood cell count on postoperative day 1 and higher C-reactive protein levels on postoperative day 3 than did the negative group. Patients who underwent chemical preparation had lower C-reactive protein levels on postoperative day 1 than did the group who did not undergo chemical preparation.

CONCLUSION

Despite the advantages of intracorporeal anastomosis in terms of wound length and intraoperative bleeding, the risk of infection may increase during the introduction phase. Fever and inflammatory responses are significantly elevated in culture-positive cases.

Clinical Outcomes after Intracorporeal versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy for Colon Cancer

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRHC) is commonly performed for patients with colon cancer, selecting between intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) or extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). However, the impact of ICA versus ECA on patient outcomes remains debatable. The varying levels of experience among surgeons may influence the outcomes. Therefore, this study sought to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of LRHC using ICA versus ECA. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study extracted patient data from the medical records database of Changhua Christian Hospital, Taiwan, from 2017 to 2020. Patients with colon cancer who underwent LRHC with either ICA or ECA were included. Primary outcomes were post-surgical outcomes and secondary outcomes were recurrence rate, overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Between-group differences were compared using chi-square, t-tests, and Fisher's exact tests and Mann-Whitney U tests. Associations between study variables, OS, and CSS were determined using Cox analyses. Results: Data of 240 patients (61 of ICA and 179 of ECA) with a mean age of 65.0 years and median follow-up of 49.3 months were collected. No recognized difference was found in patient characteristics between these two groups. The ICA group had a significantly shorter operation duration (median (IQR): 120 (110-155) vs. 150 (130-180) min) and less blood loss (median (IQR): 30 (10-30) vs. 30 (30-50) mL) than the ECA group (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found in 30-day readmission (ICA vs. ECA: 1.6% vs. 2.2%, p > 0.999) or recurrence (18.0% vs. 13.4%, p = 0.377) between the two groups. Multivariable analyses revealed no significant differences in OS (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-1.44) or CSS (adjusted sub-hazard ratio (aSHR): 0.41, 95% CI: 0.10-1.66) between groups. Conclusions: Both ICA and ECA in LRHC for colon cancer had similar outcomes without statistically significant differences in post-surgical complications, 30-day readmission rates, recurrence rate, and long-term survival outcomes. However, ICA may offer two advantages in terms of a shorter operative duration and reduced blood loss.

A new surgical technique: robotic intracorporeal Kono-S anastomosis in Crohn's - a safety and feasibility case series on short-term outcomes

AIM

The Kono-S anastomosis was introduced as a possible solution to the high surgical recurrence rates in Crohn's disease. However, this technique is known to be challenging, which is why it was originally performed in an extracorporeal setting. The aim of this case series was to assess safety, in terms of intra-/postoperative complications, and feasibility, in terms of successful performance of anastomosis, of a robot-assisted intracorporeal Kono-S anastomosis.

METHOD

This is a prospective single-centre consecutive case series. Patients were considered eligible if they were diagnosed with refractory Crohn's disease with significant bowel stenosis of the terminal ileum. All patients underwent robot-assisted intracorporeal Kono-S anastomosis. Perioperative care was provided according to the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery® protocol. Follow-up for postoperative complications was 30 days.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were included, of whom 11 (55%) were men. The median age was 30 years [interquartile range (IQR) 22-51 years] and the median BMI was 25 kg/m2 (IQR 19-28 kg/m2). Intracorporeal Kono-S anastomosis was successfully performed in all cases. The median operating time was 155 min (IQR 144-176 min) and the median length of stay was 3 days (IQR 1-5 days). No conversions or 30-day mortality were observed. One patient experienced anastomotic leakage, which was treated with radiologically guided drainage. A total of three patients experienced postoperative complications in the first 30 days.

CONCLUSION

Performance of intracorporeal robot-assisted Kono-S anastomosis seems safe and feasible in this case series for Crohn's disease. Since this is a first case series, further research is required to confirm results in a larger population-based cohort.

The Effect of Bidirectional Barbed Sutures on the Duration of Common Enterotomy Closure in Intracorporeal Anastomosis

BACKGROUND/AIM

The adoption of intracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive surgery for colon cancer has gradually expanded owing to its many advantages. However, intracorporeal anastomosis has the disadvantage of a longer operative time than extracorporeal anastomosis. One reason that intracorporeal anastomosis takes longer to perform is the closure of the common enterotomy. The present study evaluated the effect of bidirectional barbed sutures on the duration of common enterotomy closure in intracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive colectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The time required for common enterotomy closure was measured with a simulator using an intestinal model. A two-layer suture with continuous full-thickness suture followed by a continuous serosal-muscular suture was adopted. The time required to close the common enterotomy using two unidirectional barbed sutures and one bidirectional barbed suture was measured five times each.

RESULTS

The duration of common enterotomy closure using bidirectional barbed suture was significantly shorter than that using two conventional barbed sutures.

CONCLUSION

Bidirectional barbed sutures are useful for closing the common enterotomy in intracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive colectomy.

Intussusception after colonoscopic polypectomy: a rare complication

We present a patient who developed an ileocolic intussusception within a few hours of undergoing an endoscopic polypectomy found on screening colonoscopy. She underwent a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. Final histopathological examination showed no evidence of malignancy. Intussusception after colonoscopy is a rare complication, and only 11 cases have been reported prior to this case. Laparoscopic resection with intracorporeal anastomosis is a safe and feasible option in patients who are not candidates or failed conservative management.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in segmental resections for colon cancer: a retrospective cohort study of 328 patients

PURPOSE

The intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) technique possibly results in enhanced recovery and reduced morbidity rates compared to the extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) technique. This study compared the short-term morbidity rates of IA versus EA in segmental resections for colon cancer.

METHOD

We performed a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients from 2015 to 2020 using the IA or EA technique at a single Danish colorectal center. Comparative outcomes of interest were surgical efficacy and short-term morbidity rates. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis of clinically relevant outcomes was conducted to explore potential baseline confounding.

RESULTS

We included 328 patients, 129 in the EA and 199 in the IA groups. There was no significant difference in preoperative baseline characteristics between the two groups. The rate of overall surgical (16% in both groups, p = 1.000) and medical complications (EA: 25 (19%) vs. IA: 27 (14%), p = 0.167) was comparable for both groups. The IA technique did not cause a reduction in operative time (EA: 127.0 min [103.0-171.0] vs. IA: 134.0 min [110.0-164.0], p = 0.547). The IPTW analysis indicated that having an IA caused a reduction in the rate of major surgical complications (RRRadjusted = 0.45, 95%CI [0.29-0.69], p = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

Adopting IA for colon cancer resulted in similar overall morbidity rates without increasing the duration of the surgical procedure compared to EA. The IA technique had a probable protective effect against developing severe surgical complications. However, this must be interpreted cautiously, limited by the retrospective study design.

Meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive right hemicolectomy: upgrading the level of evidence

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive right hemicolectomy has been increasingly used for the treatment of right hemicolectomy disease, and both intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) are available to restore intestinal continuity. However, the advantages and disadvantages of these two anastomoses are highly controversial. The present meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of ICA versus ECA in minimally invasive right colectomy to improve the grade of evidence.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic or robotic right hemicolectomy published from database inception to February 2023. Two researchers performed the literature review, data extraction, bias assessment, and meta-analysis of the data using Review Manager 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs with a total of 750 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed a lower incidence of postoperative paralytic ileus (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39 ~ 0.99, p = 0.04) and shorter incision length (MD - 1.38; 95% CI: - 1.98 ~  - 0.78, p < 0.00001), but longer operative time (MD 10.69; 95% CI: 2.76 ~ 18.63, p = 0.008). The remaining events including bleeding (RR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.12 ~ 2.04, p = 0.33), anastomotic leak (RR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.39 ~ 0.99, p = 0.85), surgical site infection (RR 0.15, 95% CI: 0.22 ~ 1.25, p = 0.15), overall perioperative morbidity (RR 0.86, 95% CI: 0.58 ~ 1.26, p = 0.44), number of harvested lymph nodes (MD 0.75; 95% CI: - 0.15 ~ 1.65, p = 0.10), and length of hospital stay (MD - 0.27; 95% CI: - 0.91 ~ 0.38, p = 0.42) were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to ECA, ICA in minimally invasive right hemicolectomy reduced the risk of postoperative paralytic ileus and shortened the length of the incision but prolonged the operative time.

Health-care expenditures are less for minimally invasive than open colectomy for colon cancer: A US commercial claims database analysis

BACKGROUND

Most studies comparing surgical platforms focus on short-term outcomes. In this study, we compare the expanding societal penetration of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with open colectomy by assessing payer and patient expenditures up to one year for patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed the IBM MarketScan Database for patients who underwent left or right colectomy for colon cancer between 2013 and 2020. Outcomes included perioperative complications and total health-care expenditures up to 1 year following colectomy. We compared results for patients who had open colectomy (OS) to those with MIS operations. Subgroup analyses were performed for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC+) versus no adjuvant chemotherapy (AC-) groups and for laparoscopic (LS) versus robotic (RS) approaches.

RESULTS

Of 7,063 patients, 4,417 cases did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (OS: 20.1%, LS: 67.1%, RS: 12.7%) and 2646 cases had adjuvant chemotherapy (OS: 28.4%, LS: 58.7%, RS: 12.9%) after discharge. MIS colectomy was associated with lower mean expenditure at index surgery and post-discharge periods for AC- patients (index surgery: $34,588 vs $36,975; 365-day post-discharge $20,051 vs $24,309) and for AC+ patients (index surgery: $37,884 vs $42,160; 365-day post-discharge $103,341vs $135,113; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). LS had similar index surgery expenditures but significantly higher expenditures at post-discharge 30 days (AC-: $2,834 vs $2276, p = 0.005; AC+: $9100 vs $7698, p = 0.020) than RS. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the MIS group than the open group for AC- patients (20.5% vs 31.2%) and AC+ patients (22.6% vs 39.1%, both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

MIS colectomy is associated with better value at lower expenditure than open colectomy for colon cancer at the index operation and up to one year after surgery. RS expenditure is less than LS in the first 30 postoperative days regardless of chemotherapy status and may extend to 1 year for AC- patients.

Surgical site infection after intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic left colectomy for colon cancer: a multicenter propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) is associated with reduced surgical site infection (SSI) and other postoperative complications in laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC). However, evidence is inadequate for IA in laparoscopic left colectomy (LLC). This study aimed to determine the effect of IA and extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) on SSI and other short-term postoperative complications in LLC.

METHODS

In this retrospective multicenter propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort study, we enrolled consecutive patients who underwent LLC with IA (TLLC/IA) and laparoscopic-assisted left colectomy with EA (LALC/EA) at two medical centers between January 2015 and September 2021. Propensity score matching with a 1:2 ratio was employed. The primary outcome was SSI occurrence. Secondary outcomes were operating time, intraoperative hemorrhage, other postoperative complications, and pathological outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, 574 and 99 patients received LALC/EA and TLLC/IA, respectively. After PSM, 84 patients with TLLC/IA were matched with 141 patients with LALC/EA. Thirty patients (13.3%) patients experienced SSI (17.0% in LALC/EA vs 7.1% in TLLC/IA). IA was associated with a reduced risk of overall SSI and superficial/deep SSI compared with EA after PSM, with OR of 0.375 (95% CI, 0.147-0.959, P = 0.041). and 0.148 (95% CI, 0.034-0.648, P = 0.011), respectively. Multivariate analysis of unmatched patients indicated similar results. In the analysis of secondary outcomes, LALC/EA may have a shorter operating time (absolute mean difference - 13.41 [95% CI, - 23.76 to - 3.06], P = 0.002) and a higher risk of intraoperative hemorrhage (absolute risk difference 4.96 [95% CI, - 0.09 to 9.89], P = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

IA in LLC is associated with a reduced risk of overall SSI and superficial/deep SSI. However, it may require a longer operating time.

Intraoperative and postoperative short-term outcomes of intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy

Background

Intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) is a difficult but popular anastomotic approach for reconstruction of digestive tract after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy, which may reduce some limitations faced during extracorporeal anastomosis (EA).

Methods

A retrospective review of 78 patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy by a veteran surgeon in a high-volume public tertiary hospital, including 50 patients with IA and 28 patients with EA. The intraoperative-related factors and short-term results of the two anastomotic approaches were compared.

Results

There was no significant difference in demographics and clinical characteristics between the two groups (P>0.05). The intraoperative blood loss was less (P=0.010) and the incision length was shorter (P<0.001) in the intracorporeal group. Postoperative farting time was faster (P=0.005) and postoperative pain score (VAS) was lower (P<0.001) in IA group. Although the anastomotic time of IA was shorter (P<0.001), the operative time of the two groups were similar. And number of lymph nodes harvested, NLR from POD₁ to POD₃, postoperative hospital stay and overall hospital stay between the two groups were comparable. Except for significant difference in abdominal infection rate, the Clavien-Dindo classification and the incidence of other postoperative complications were not statistically different. Moreover, the morbidity of abdominal infection decreased with time in the IA group (P=0.040).

Conclusion

IA is a reliable and feasible procedure, which has faster anastomotic time, earlier return of bowel function and superior postoperative comfort of patient, compared to EA. The postoperative complication rate of IA is similar to that of EA, and may be improved with the IA technical maturity of surgeons, which potentially contributes to the development of ERAS.

A multicentre, prospective cohort study of handsewn versus stapled intracorporeal anastomosis for robotic hemicolectomy

AIM

Robotic right hemicolectomy is gaining in popularity due to the recognized technical benefits associated with the robotic platform. However, there is a lack of standardization regarding the optimal anastomotic technique in this cohort of patients, namely stapled or handsewn intra- or extra-corporeal anastomosis. The ergonomic benefit associated with the robotic platform lends itself to intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA). The aim of this study was to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of stapled versus handsewn ICA.

METHOD

A multicentre prospective cohort study was undertaken across four high-volume robotic centres in France between September 2018 and December 2020. All adult patients undergoing an elective robotic right hemicolectomy with an ICA performed and a minimum postoperative follow-up of 30 days were included. The primary endpoint of our study was anastomotic leak within 30 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 144 patients underwent robotic right hemicolectomy: 92 (63.8%) had a stapled ICA and 52 (36.1%) a handsewn ICA. The operative indication was adenocarcinoma in 90% with a stapled ICA compared with 62% in the handsewn ICA group (p < 0.001). The overall operating time was longer in the handsewn ICA group compared with the stapled ICA group (219 min vs. 193 min; p = 0.001). The anastomotic leak rate was 3.3% in stapled ICA and 3.8% in handsewn ICA (p = 1.00). There was no difference in the rate or severity of postoperative morbidity.

CONCLUSION

ICA robotic hemicolectomy is technically safe and is associated with low rates of anastomotic leak overall and equivalent clinical outcomes between the two techniques.

Right colectomy from open to robotic - a single-center experience with functional outcomes in a learning-curve setting

Purpose

Right colectomy (RC) is a frequently performed procedure. Beneath standard conventional open surgery (COS), various minimally invasive techniques had been introduced. Several advantages had recently been described for robotic approaches over COS or conventional laparoscopy. Nevertheless, novel minimally invasive techniques require continuous benchmarking against standard COS to gain maximum patient safety. Bowel dysfunction is a frequent problem after RC. Together with general complication rates postoperative bowel recovery are used as surrogate parameters for postoperative patient outcome in this study.

Methods

Retrospective, 10-year single-center analysis of consecutive patients who underwent sequentially either COS (n = 22), robotic-assisted (ECA: n = 39), or total robotic surgery (ICA: n = 56) for oncologic RC was performed.

Results

The conversion from robotic to open surgery rate was low (overall: 3.2%). Slightly longer duration of surgery had been observed during the early phase after introduction of the robotic program to RC (ECA versus COS, p = 0.044), but not anymore thereafter (versus ICA). No differences were observed in oncologic parameters including rates of tumor-negative margins, lymph node-positive patients, and lymph node yield during mesocolic excision. Both robotic approaches are beneficial regarding postoperative complication rates, especially wound infections, and shorter length of in-hospital stay compared with COS. The duration until first postoperative stool is the shortest after ICA (COS: 4 [2–8] days, ECA: 3 [1–6] days, ICA: 3 [1–5] days, p = 0.0004). Regression analyses reveal neither a longer duration of surgery nor the extent of mesocolic excision, but the degree of minimally invasiveness and postoperative systemic inflammation contribute to postoperative bowel dysfunction, which prolongs postoperative in-hospital stay significantly.

Conclusion

The current study reflects the institutional learning curve of oncologic RC during implementation of robotic surgery from robotic-assisted to total robotic approach without compromises in oncologic results and patient safety. However, the total robotic approach is beneficial regarding postoperative bowel recovery and general patient outcome.

Short- and Long-Term Outcome of Laparoscopic- versus Robotic-Assisted Right Colectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: There is a rapidly growing literature available on right hemicolectomy comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic right colectomy (RRC) to that of laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC). The aim of this meta-analysis is to revise current comparative literature systematically. Methods: A systematic review of comparative studies published between 2000 to 2021 in PubMed, Scopus and Embase was performed. The primary endpoint was postoperative morbidity, mortality and long-term oncological results. Secondary endpoints consist of blood loss, conversion rates, complications, time to first flatus, hospital stay and incisional hernia rate. Results: 25 of 322 studies were considered for data extraction. A total of 16,099 individual patients who underwent RRC (n = 1842) or LRC (n = 14,257) between 2002 and 2020 were identified. Operative time was significantly shorter in the LRC group (LRC 165.31 min ± 43.08 vs. RRC 207.38 min ± 189.13, MD: −42.01 (95% CI: −51.06−32.96), p < 0.001). Blood loss was significantly lower in the RRC group (LRC 63.57 ± 35.21 vs. RRC 53.62 ± 34.02, MD: 10.03 (95% CI: 1.61−18.45), p = 0.02) as well as conversion rate (LRC 1155/11,629 vs. RRC 94/1534, OR: 1.65 (1.28−2.13), p < 0.001) and hospital stay (LRC 6.15 ± 31.77 vs. RRC 5.31 ± 1.65, MD: 0.84 (95% CI: 0.29−1.38), p = 0.003). Oncological long-term results did not differ between both groups. Conclusion: The advantages of robotic colorectal procedures were clearly demonstrated. RRC can be regarded as safe and feasible. Most of the included studies were retrospective with a limited level of evidence. Further randomized trials would be suitable.

Predictors of surgical outcomes of minimally invasive right colectomy: the MERCY study

PURPOSE

The optimal approach for minimally invasive (MIS) right colectomy remains under debate. This study aimed to describe surgical trends in the treatment of nonmetastatic right colon cancer and to identify predictors of short-term surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter cohort study of Minimally-invasivE surgery for oncologic Right ColectomY (MERCY) was conducted on patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic right colectomy between 2014 and 2020. Classification tree approach was used to describe the extracorporeal (EA) or intracorporeal (IA) anastomosis choice. Mixed-model regressions were used to identify patient- and surgery-related factors predictive of postoperative outcomes. A questionnaire was used to evaluate the surgeons' perspectives.

RESULTS

The MERCY database comprised 1870 patients; 87.2% underwent laparoscopy, and 68.1% received an EA. A clear surgical trend was noted, with an increasing rate of IA and robotic procedures after 2017. EA represented 41% of anastomoses in centers equipped with a robotic surgical system. Mixed-model regressions (on 1088 patients) showed that age, sex, BMI, comorbidity, robotics, IA, and conversion to open surgery were predictors of surgical outcomes. In particular, IA was a predictor of a shorter time to regular diet and fewer surgical site infections. Based on the questionnaire, IA was the preferred over EA by 72% of surgeons.

CONCLUSION

MIS continues to evolve, with an increasing number of IA being performed in the recent years and when using a robotic surgical system. Understanding the role of predictors of surgical outcomes may help surgeons personalize decision-making among the different MIS options to manage right colon cancer.

Anastomosis technique and leakage rates in minimally invasive surgery for right-sided colon cancer. A retrospective national cohort study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the different techniques currently used in Denmark to construct right-sided ileocolic anastomoses in minimally invasive surgery, and investigate, compare and analyse the anastomotic configurations and their anastomotic leakage (AL) rates.

METHODS

This was a retrospective register-based, study design using prospectively collected data from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG) database. All patients aged 18 years or older with a malignant colorectal tumour in Denmark in the period of 1 February 2015 until 31 December 2019, and who had an elective, curative, minimally invasive right hemicolectomy (MIRH) with ileocolic anastomosis, were included.

RESULTS

Three thousand three hundred ninety-eight patients were included. The most commonly used anastomotic approach was the extracorporeal (EC) hand-sewn anastomosis (HA) with end-to-end configuration (59%) and the second most used was the EC stapled anastomosis (SA) side-to-side configuration (20%). The latter had a higher AL rate compared with the hand-sewn technique (3.8% vs. 1.3%), and had significantly higher odds ratio (OR) (OR: 2.85, 95% CI: 1.56-4.92, p < 0.0001) for AL in the adjusted regression model. The least used technique was the end-to-side HA which also had a significantly higher OR (OR: 3.05, 95% CI: 1.30-7.15, p = 0.010) compared with the end-to-end HA. Smoking was an independent factor associated with higher OR for AL.

CONCLUSION

The ileocolic end-to-end HA was the most commonly used technique and had the lowest AL rate in MIRH for colon cancer. The EC SA technique and tobacco smoking were independent risk factors for leakage of the ileocolic anastomosis.

Intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis for robotic-assisted and laparoscopic right colectomy: short-term outcomes of a multi-center prospective trial

BACKGROUND

Studies to date show contrasting conclusions when comparing intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses for minimally invasive right colectomy. Large multi-center prospective studies comparing perioperative outcomes between these two techniques are needed. The purpose of this study was to compare intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses outcomes for robotic assisted and laparoscopic right colectomy.

METHODS

Multi-center, prospective, observational study of patients with malignant or benign disease scheduled for laparoscopic or robotic-assisted right colectomy. Outcomes included conversion rate, gastrointestinal recovery, and complication rates.

RESULTS

There were 280 patients: 156 in the robotic assisted and laparoscopic intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) group and 124 in the robotic assisted and laparoscopic extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) group. The EA group was older (mean age 67 vs. 65 years, p = 0.05) and had fewer white (81% vs. 90%, p = 0.05) and Hispanic (2% vs. 12%, p = 0.003) patients. The EA group had more patients with comorbidities (82% vs. 72%, p = 0.04) while there was no significant difference in individual comorbidities between groups. IA was associated with fewer conversions to open and hand-assisted laparoscopic approaches (p = 0.007), shorter extraction site incision length (4.9 vs. 6.2 cm; p ≤ 0.0001), and longer operative time (156.9 vs. 118.2 min). Postoperatively, patients with IA had shorter time to first flatus, (1.5 vs. 1.8 days; p ≤ 0.0001), time to first bowel movement (1.6 vs. 2.0 days; p = 0.0005), time to resume soft/regular diet (29.0 vs. 37.5 h; p = 0.0014), and shorter length of hospital stay (median, 3 vs. 4 days; p ≤ 0.0001). Postoperative complication rates were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSION

In this prospective, multi-center study of minimally invasive right colectomy across 20 institutions, IA was associated with significant improvements in conversion rates, return of bowel function, and shorter hospital stay, as well as significantly longer operative times compared to EA. These data validate current efforts to increase training and adoption of the IA technique for minimally invasive right colectomy.

Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease

BACKGROUND

Adoption of minimally invasive approaches continues to increase, and there is a need to reassess outcomes and cost. We aimed to compare open versus minimally invasive colectomy short- and long-term health-care utilization and payer/patient expenditures for benign disease.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of IBM^® MarketScan^® Database patients who underwent left or right colectomy for benign disease between 2013 and 2018. Outcomes included total health-care expenditures, resource utilization, and direct workdays lost up to 365 days following colectomy. The open surgical approach (OS) was compared to minimally invasive colectomy (MIS) with subgroup analysis of laparoscopic (LS) and robotic (RS) approaches using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS

Of 10,439 patients, 2531 (24.3%) had open, 6826 (65.4%) had laparoscopic, and 1082 (10.3%) had robotic colectomy. MIS patients had shorter length of stay (LOS; mean difference, - 1.71, p < 0.001) and lower average total expenditures (mean difference, - $2378, p < 0.001) compared with open patients during the index hospitalization. At 1 year, MIS patients had lower readmission rates, and fewer mean emergency and outpatient department visits than open patients, translating into additional savings of $5759 and 2.22 fewer days missed from work for health-care visits over the 365-day post-discharge period. Within MIS, RS patients had shorter LOS (mean difference, - 0.60, p < 0.001) and lower conversion-to-open rates (odds ratio, 0.31 p < 0.001) during the index hospitalization, and lower hospital outpatient visits (mean difference, - 0.31, p = 0.001) at 365 days than LS.

CONCLUSION

MIS colectomy is associated with lower mean health-care expenditures and less resource utilization compared to the open approach for benign disease at index operation and 365-days post-discharge. Health-care expenditures for LS and RS are similar but shorter mean LOS and lower conversion-to-open surgery rates were observed at index operation for the RS approach.

Intracorporeal versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis for Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: Short-Term Outcomes

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy represents an effective therapeutic approach for right colon cancer (RCC). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate bowel function recovery, length of hospital stay, operative time, and the number of general and anastomosis-related postoperative complications from intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) vs. extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA); the secondary outcome was the number of lymph nodes retrieved. This observational study was conducted on 108 patients who underwent right hemicolectomy for RCC; after surgical resection, 64 patients underwent ICA and 44 underwent ECA. The operative time was slightly longer in the ICA group than in the ECA group, even though the difference was not significant (199.31 ± 48.90 min vs. 183.64 ± 35.80 min; p = 0.109). The length of hospital stay (7.53 ± 1.91 days vs. 8.77 ± 3.66 days; p = 0.036) and bowel function recovery (2.21 ± 1.01 days vs. 3.45 ± 1.82 days; p < 0.0001) were significantly lower in the ICA group. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications (12% in ICA group vs. 9% in ECA group), wound infection (6% in ICA group vs. 7% in ECA group), or anastomotic leakage (6% in ICA group vs. 9% in ECA group). We did not observe a significant difference between the two groups in the number of lymph nodes collected (19.46 ± 7.06 in ICA group vs. 22.68 ± 8.79 in ECA group; p = 0.086). ICA following laparoscopic right hemicolectomy, compared to ECA, could lead to a significant improvement in bowel function recovery and a reduction in the length of hospital stay in RCC patients.

Evaluating the Regional Uptake of Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: a Report from the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal disease has well-known benefits, but many patients undergo open operations. When choosing an MIS approach, robotic technology may have benefits over traditional laparoscopy and is increasingly used. However, the broad adoption of MIS, and specifically robotics, across colorectal operations has not been well described. Our primary hypothesis is that rates of MIS in colorectal surgery are increasing, with different contributions of robotics to abdominal and pelvic colorectal operations.

METHODS

Rates of MIS colorectal operations are described using a prospective cohort of elective colorectal operations at hospitals in the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program (SCOAP) from 2011 to 2018. The main outcome was proportion of cases approached using open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery. Factors associated with increased use of MIS approaches were described.

RESULTS

Across 21,423 elective colorectal operations, rates for MIS (laparoscopic or robotic surgery) increased from 44% in 2011 to 75% in 2018 (p < 0.001). Approaches for abdominal operations (n = 12,493) changed from 2 to 11% robotic, 43 to 63% laparoscopic, and 56 to 26% open (p < 0.001). Approaches for pelvic operations (n = 8930) changed from 3 to 33% robotic, 40 to 42% laparoscopic, and 57 to 24% open(p < 0.001). These trends were similar for high-(100 + operations/year) and low-volume hospitals and surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

At SCOAP hospitals, the majority of elective colorectal operations is now performed minimally invasively. The increase in the MIS approach is primarily driven by laparoscopy in abdominal procedures and robotics in pelvic procedures.

2D vs 3D laparoscopic right colectomy: A propensity score-matching comparison of personal experience with systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The benefits of laparoscopic approach for right colectomy have been well established. However, the technical difficulty to construct the intra-corporeal anastomosis is still cumbersome.

AIM

To analyze the results of 3D and 2D laparoscopic right colectomy and to compare it to the published series through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective study with propensity score matching analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy at Umbria2 Hospitals from January 2014 to March 2020 was performed. A systematic review was accomplished comparing 2D and 3D right colectomy.

RESULTS

In the personal series 47 patients of the 2D group were matched to 47 patients of the 3D group. The 3D group showed a favorable trend in terms of mean operative time (170.7 ± 32.9 min vs 183.8 ± 35.4 min; P = 0.053) and a significant lower anastomotic time (16.9 ± 2.3 min vs 19.6 ± 2.9 min, P < 0.001). The complete mesocolic excision (CME) subgroups analysis showed a shorter anastomotic time (16.5 ± 1.8 min vs 19.9 ± 3.0 min; P < 0.001) and operative time (175.0 ± 38.5 min vs 193.7 ± 37.1 min; P = 0.063) in the 3D group. Six studies and our series were included in the meta-analysis with 551 patients (2D group: 291; 3D group: 260).The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant difference in favour of the 3D group regarding the operative time (P < 0.001) and the anastomotic time (P < 0.001) while no differences were identified between groups in terms of blood loss (P = 0.827), LNH yield (P = 0.243), time to first flatus (P = 0.333), postoperative complications (P = 0.718) and length of stay (P = 0.835).

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis results showed that 3D laparoscopic right colectomy shortens operative and anastomotic time without affecting the standard lymphadenectomy. In our series, the advantage of the 3D system becomes evident when CME and/or more complex associated procedure are requested significantly reducing both the total operative and the anastomotic time.

Postoperative Pain After Enhanced Recovery Pathway Robotic Colon and Rectal Surgery: Does Specimen Extraction Site Matter?

BACKGROUND

The current opioid crisis has motivated surgeons to critically evaluate ways to balance postoperative pain while decreasing opioid use and thereby reducing opioids available for community diversion. The longest incision for robotic colorectal surgery is the specimen extraction site incision. Intracorporeal techniques allow specimen extraction to be at any location.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to determine whether the Pfannenstiel location is associated with less pain and opioid use than other abdominal wall specimen extraction sites.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted with a prospectively maintained colorectal surgery database (July 2018 through October 2019).

PATIENTS

Patients with enhanced recovery robotic colorectal resections with specimen extraction were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Propensity score weighting was used to derive adjusted rates for numeric pain scores, inpatient opioid use, opioids prescribed at discharge, opioid refills after discharge, and other related outcomes. For comparing outcomes between groups, p values were calculated using weighted χ2, Fisher exact, and t tests.

RESULTS

There were 137 cases (70.9%) with Pfannenstiel extraction site incisions and 56 (29.0%) at other locations (7 midline, 49 off-midline). There was no significant difference in transversus abdominis plane blocks and epidural analgesia use between groups. Numeric pain scores, overall benefit of analgesia scores, inpatient postoperative opioid use, opioids prescribed at discharge and taken after discharge, and opioid refills were not significantly different between groups. Nonopioid pain analgesics (acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and gabapentin) prescribed at discharge were significantly less in the Pfannenstiel group (90.19% vs 98.45%; p = 0.006). Postoperative complications and readmissions were not different between groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was conducted at a single institution.

CONCLUSIONS

The Pfannenstiel incision as the specimen extraction site choice in minimally invasive surgery is associated with similar postoperative pain and opioid use as extraction sites in other locations for patients having robotic colorectal resections. Specimen extraction sites may be chosen based on patient factors other than pain and opioid use. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B495.

DOLOR POSTOPERATORIO DESPUS DE VAS DE RECUPERACIN MEJORADA EN CIRUGA ROBTICA DE COLON Y RECTO IMPORTA EL LUGAR DE EXTRACCIN DE LA MUESTRA

ANTECEDENTES:La actual crisis de opioides ha motivado a los cirujanos a evaluar críticamente, formas para equilibrar el dolor postoperatorio, disminuyendo el uso de opioides y por lo tanto, disminuyendo opioides disponibles para el desvío comunitario. La incisión más amplia en cirugía colorrectal robótica, es la incisión del sitio de extracción de la muestra. Las técnicas intracorpóreas permiten que la extracción de la muestra se realice en cualquier sitio.OBJETIVO:El estudio fue diseñado para determinar si la ubicación del Pfannenstiel está asociada con menos dolor y uso de opioides, a otros sitios de extracción de la muestra en la pared abdominal.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Estudio de base de datos de cirugía colorrectal mantenida prospectivamente (7/2018 a 10/2019).PACIENTES:Se incluyeron resecciones robóticas colorrectales con recuperación mejorada y extracción de muestras.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se utilizó la ponderación del puntaje de propensión para derivar las tasas ajustadas para los puntajes numéricos de dolor, uso de opioides en pacientes hospitalizados, opioides recetados al alta, recarga de opioides después del alta y otros resultados relacionados. Para comparar los resultados entre los grupos, los valores p se calcularon utilizando chi-cuadrado ponderado, exacto de Fisher y pruebas t.RESULTADOS:Hubo 137 (70,9%) casos con incisiones en el sitio de extracción de Pfannenstiel y 56 (29,0%) en otras localizaciones (7 en la línea media, 49 fuera de la línea media). No hubo diferencias significativas en los bloqueos del plano transverso del abdomen y el uso de analgesia epidural entre los grupos. Las puntuaciones numéricas de dolor, puntuaciones de beneficio general de la analgesia, uso postoperatorio de opioides en pacientes hospitalizados, opioides recetados al alta y tomados después del alta, y las recargas de opioides, no fueron significativamente diferentes entre los grupos. Los analgésicos no opioides (acetaminofén, antiinflamatorios no esteroideos, gabapentina) prescritos al alta, fueron significativamente menores en el grupo de Pfannenstiel (90,19% frente a 98,45%, p = 0,006). Las complicaciones postoperatorias y los reingresos, no fueron diferentes entre los grupos.LIMITACIONES:Una sola institución.CONCLUSIÓN:La incisión de Pfannenstiel como sitio de extracción de la muestra en cirugía mínimamente invasiva, se asocia con dolor postoperatorio y uso de opioides similar, a otros sitios de extracción en pacientes sometidos a resecciones robóticas colorrectales. Sitios de extracción de la muestra, pueden elegirse en función de factores del paciente distintos al dolor y uso de opioides. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B495.).

Postoperative Complications Associated With Intra- Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis for Laparoscopic Right Colectomy

OBJECTIVE

To compare the postoperative complications of intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) in patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC).

BACKGROUND

Although several studies have compared postoperative complications of ICA and ECA after LRC, most were retrospective studies.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive electronic search of the literature to identify studies that compared postoperative complications between ICA and ECA in patients who underwent LRC. We performed meta-analysis using random-effects models to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of experiencing complications, and we analyzed heterogeneity using I² statistics.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies consist of randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, and propensity score matching studies involving a total of 3219 patients who underwent LRC were included. Among 1377 patients who received ICA, 255 (18.5%) had postoperative complications, whereas among 1652 patients who received ECA, 373 (22.6%) had such complications. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that ICA was associated with a significantly reduced risk of postoperative complications (RR, .73; 95% CI: .57-.95; P = .02; I² = 57%) compared with ECA. Although there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in risk of anastomotic leakage (RR, .67; 95% CI: .39-1.17; P = .16; I² = 8%), there was a significant difference between them in risk of surgical site infection (RR, .50; 95% CI: .34-.71; P = .0002; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Intracorporeal anastomosis is associated with a reduced risk of postoperative complications compared with ECA in patients undergoing LRC.

Surgical stress and metabolic response after totally laparoscopic right colectomy

No clear consensus on the need to perform an intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) after laparoscopic right colectomy is currently available. One of the potential benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis may be a reduction in surgical stress. Herein, we evaluated the surgical stress response and the metabolic response in patients who underwent right colonic resection for colon cancer. Fifty-nine patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for right colon cancer were randomized to receive an intracorporeal or an extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). Data including demographics (age, sex, BMI and ASA score), pathological (AJCC tumour stage and tumour localization) and surgical results were recorded. Moreover, to determine the levels of the inflammatory response, mediators, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin 1β (IL-1β), IL-6, IL-10, and IL-13, were evaluated. Similarly, cortisol and insulin levels were evaluated as hormonal responses to surgical stress. We found that the proinflammatory mediator IL-6, CRP, TNF and IL-1β levels, were significantly reduced in IA compared to EA. Concurrently, an improved profile of the anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-10 and IL-13 was observed in the IA group. Relative to the hormone response to surgical stress, cortisol was increased in patients who underwent EA, while insulin was reduced in the EA group. Based on these results, surgical stress and metabolic response to IA justify advocating the adoption of a totally laparoscopic approach when performing a right colectomy for cancer.

This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03422588).

Intracorporeal vs extracorporeal anastomosis following neoplastic right hemicolectomy resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

PURPOSE

While minimally invasive surgery is the preferred approach for right hemicolectomy, the choice of anastomotic technique is still debated. Both intracorporeal (ICA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) are described, with conflicting reports on safety and efficacy seen. This study aimed to examine impact of ICA and ECA on outcomes in right hemicolectomy.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCT) was performed. The primary outcome was overall morbidity. The secondary outcomes included both perioperative and post-operative outcomes.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were included incorporating 399 patients (199 patients (49.9%) ICA Vs 200 (50.1%) ECA). There was no significant difference in overall morbidity (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.43, 1.48, p = 0.47), anastomotic leak (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.58, 3.13, p = 0.5) or surgical site infections (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.17, 1.64, p = 0.27). ICA patients had a significantly less post-operative ileus (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.3-0.94, p = 0.03) quicker return to first flatus (WMD - 0.71, 95% CI - 1.12, 0.31, p = 0.0005), first bowel motion (WMD - 0.53, 95% CI - 0.69, - 0.37, p < 0.00001) and first meal (WMD - 0.68, 95% CI - 1.33, - 0.03, p = 0.04). Pain scores were significantly better for ICA patients on POD 3 (WMD - 0.76, 95% CI - 1.23, - 0.28, p = 0.002), POD 4 (WMD - 0.90, 95% CI - 1.71, - 0.09, p = 0.03) and POD 5 (WMD - 0.67, 95% CI - 1.22, - 0.13, p = 0.01). Length of hospital stay was similar (WMD - 0.46, 95% CI - 1.14, 0.22, p = 0.19).

CONCLUSION

ICA is associated with a quicker return to normal physiological function with equivalent post-operative morbidity. Both ECA and ICA are safe and feasible for restoring normal bowel continuity.

The impact of intracorporeal anastomosis in right laparoscopic colectomy in the surgical site infections and the hospital stay: a cohort study

Ileocolic anastomosis in laparoscopic-assisted right colectomy is frequently performed extracorporeally. Intracorporeal anastomosis could be associated with several short-term benefits. However, it is a more technically demanding procedure. The primary endpoint of the study aimed to evaluate the postoperative surgical-site infection rate and its impact on the length of hospital stay after laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared to extracorporeal anastomoses. Between 2010 and 2019, 108 unselected consecutive patients underwent right colectomy. An observational comparative cohort study of two anastomosis techniques, intracorporeal (IA) versus extracorporeal (EA), was conducted. Data were extracted from a prospectively maintained colorectal surgery database of a university-affiliated hospital and retrospectively analyzed. The main exclusion criteria were emergency surgery and medical or anesthetic contraindication for laparoscopy. 53 patients underwent right colectomy with IA, and 55 had extracorporeal anastomoses. The groups did not differ in demographics, anesthetic risk, intraoperative data, pathological outcomes, or overall survival. Mean operative time was longer in the IA group (156.9 vs. 146.0 min; p = 0.061). A significant reduction in the anastomotic leak rate was observed in the IA group compared with the EA group (0 vs. 7.3%; p = 0.045) with no differences in the intraabdominal abscess rate (IA: 1.9% vs. EA: 1.8%; p = 0.97). The wound infection rate was 5.7% for IA and 10.9% for EA (p = 0.324). The hospital stay was significantly shorter for those who had intracorporeal anastomoses (5.2 ± 3.3 vs. 10.8 ± 9.6 days; p = 0.000). Right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis was associated with less surgical-site infections and a significantly shorter hospital stay than EA technique. Surgeons should consider the IA as the first option when performing laparoscopic right colectomy. Registration number: NCT04350203 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Short- and medium-term outcomes of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUNDS

Though better short-term outcomes were frequently reported, differences in specimen parameters and the rate of subsequent peritoneal recurrence between intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) and extracorporeal anastomoses (EA) for laparoscopic right hemicolectomy have not been analyzed. We aimed to compare the pathologic differences and oncological outcomes between these two approaches.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 217 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomies from September 2016 to April 2018 and classified them into IA and EA groups, based on the approach used. Propensity score matching analysis was performed, after which 101 patients were included in each group with the patients matched for demographics, tumor stage, and localization.

RESULTS

The IA group had a longer operative time, shorter length of stay, shorter time to first flatus and tolerating a soft diet, and better pain scale scores at postoperative day 3. No inter-group differences in conversion, postoperative complication, mortality, or readmission rates were found. The IA group had a longer resected colon length (23.67 vs. 19.75 cm, p = 0.010) and nearest resected margin (7.51 vs. 5.40 cm, p = 0.010) for cancer near the hepatic flexure. There are comparable 3-year overall survival (87.7% vs. 89.6%, p = 0.604) and disease-free survival (75.0% vs. 75.7%, p = 0.842) between the IA and EA groups. The rate of peritoneal recurrence was similar between the two groups (5.9% vs. 7.9%, p = 0.580).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall survival, disease-free survival, and the rate of peritoneal recurrence were comparable between the IA and EA procedures. IA ensures better recovery and comparable complications to EA and achieved a more precise tumor excision; thus, IA can be considered a safe procedure for patients with right-sided colon lesions.

Ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis during robotic right colectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of different techniques

PURPOSE

Robotic assistance could increase the rate of ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis (ICA) during robotic right colectomy (RRC). However, although robotic ICA can be accomplished with several different technical variants, it is not clear whether some of these technical details should be preferred. An evaluation of the possible advantage of one respect to another would be useful.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of literature on technical details of robotic ileo-colic ICA, from which we performed a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes. The extracted data allowed a comparative analysis regarding the outcome of overall complication (OC), bleeding rate (BR) and leakage rate (LR), between (1) mechanical anastomosis with robotic stapler, versus laparoscopic stapler, versus totally hand-sewn anastomosis and (2) closure of enterocolotomy with manual double layer, versus single layer, versus stapled.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies including 2066 patients were selected. Globally, the side-to-side, isoperistaltic anastomosis, realized with laparoscopic staplers, and double-layer closure for enterocolotomy, is the most common technique used. According to the meta-analysis, the use of robotic stapler was significantly associated with a reduction of the BR with respect to mechanical anastomosis with laparoscopic stapler or totally hand-sewn anastomosis. None of the other technical aspects significantly influenced the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

ICA fashioning during RRC can be accomplished with several technical variants without evidence of a clear superiority of anyone of these techniques. Although the use of robotic staplers could be associated with some benefits, further studies are necessary to draw conclusions.

Peroral traction-assisted natural orifice trans-anal flexible endoscopic rectosigmoidectomy followed by intracorporeal colorectal anastomosis in a live porcine model

BACKGROUND

Compared to traditional open surgery, laparoscopic surgery has become a standard approach for colorectal cancer due to its great superiorities including less postoperative pain, a shorter hospital stay, and better quality of life. In 2007, Whiteford et al reported the first natural orifice trans-anal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) sigmoidectomy using transanal endoscopic microsurgery. To date, all cases of NOTES colorectal resection have included a hybrid laparoscopic approach with the use of established rigid platforms.

AIM

To introduce a novel technique of peroral external traction-assisted transanal NOTES rectosigmoidectomy followed by intracorporeal colorectal end-to-end anastomosis by using only currently available and flexible endoscopic instrumentation in a live porcine model.

METHODS

Three female pigs weighing 25-30 kg underwent NOTES rectosigmoid resection. After preoperative work-up and bowel preparation, general anesthesia combined with endotracheal intubation was achieved. One dual-channel therapeutic endoscope was used. Carbon dioxide insufflation was performed during the operation. The procedure of trans-anal NOTES rectosigmoidectomy included the following eight steps: (1) The rectosigmoid colon was tattooed with India ink by submucosal injection; (2) Creation of gastrostomy by directed submucosal tunneling; (3) Peroral external traction using endoloop ligation; (4) Creation of rectostomy on the anterior rectal wall by directed 3 cm submucosal tunneling; (5) Peroral external traction-assisted dissection of the left side of the colon; (6) Trans-anal rectosigmoid specimen transection, where an anvil was inserted into the proximal segment after purse-string suturing; (7) Intracorporeal colorectal end-to-end anastomosis using a circular stapler by a single stapling technique; and (8) Closure of gastrostomy using endoscopic clips. All animals were euthanized immediately after the procedure, abdominal exploration was performed, and the air-under-water leak test was carried out.

RESULTS

The procedure was completed in all three animals, with the operation time ranging from 193 min to 259 min. Neither major intraoperative complications nor hemodynamic instability occurred during the operation. The length of the resected specimen ranged from 7 cm to 13 cm. With the assistance of a trans-umbilical rigid grasper, intracorporeal colorectal, tension-free, end-to-end anastomosis was achieved in the three animals.

CONCLUSION

Peroral traction-assisted transanal NOTES rectosigmoidectomy followed by intracorporeal colorectal end-to-end anastomosis is technically feasible and reproducible in an animal model and is worthy of further improvements.

Complete mesocolic excision in minimally invasive surgery of colonic cancer: do we need the robot?

Background

Robotic surgery offers favorable prerequisites for complex minimally invasive surgeries which are delivered by higher degrees of freedom, improved instrument stability, and a perfect visualization in 3D which is fully surgeon controlled. In this article we aim to assess its impact on complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer and to answer the question of whether the current evidence expresses a need for robotic surgery for this indication.

Methods

Retrospective analysis and review of the current literature on complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer comparing the outcome after open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches.

Results

Complete mesocolic excision results in improved disease-free survival and reduced local recurrence, but turns out to be complex and prone to complications. Introduced in open surgery, the transfer to minimally invasive surgery resulted in comparable results, however, with high conversion rates. In comparison, robotic surgery shows a reduced conversion rate and a tendency toward higher lymph node yield. Data, however, are insufficient and no high-quality studies have been published to date. Almost no oncologic follow-up data are available in the literature.

Conclusion

The current data do not allow for a reliable conclusion on the need of robotic surgery for CME, but show results which hypothesize an equivalence if not superiority to laparoscopy. Due to recently published technical improvements for robotic CME and supplementary features of this method, we suppose that this approach will gain in importance in the future.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis for right colectomy does not affect gastrointestinal recovery within an enhanced recovery after surgery program

INTRODUCTION

Delayed gastrointestinal (GI) recovery remains a significant morbidity after colorectal surgery. Intracorporeal anastomosis for right colectomy may hasten GI recovery. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the effect of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis on GI recovery after elective laparoscopic right colectomy within an established ERAS program.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing elective laparoscopic right colectomy at a single high-volume institution from 07/2014 to 12/2018 were reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups: intracorporeal (IC) and extracorporeal (EC). The primary outcome was time to GI-3 defined as days to tolerance of solid diet and first flatus/bowel movement. Prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) was defined as GI-3 not met by postoperative day 4. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS) and overall 30-day complications. Sensitivity analysis was performed using coarsened exact matching to account for unmeasured confounding. Multiple regression was performed using a Cox proportional hazard model to identify predictors of GI recovery.

RESULTS

A total of 346 patients were reviewed, of which 226 were included (71IC, 155EC). Patient characteristics were well balanced between groups: mean age was 64.9 years (SD 15.9), BMI was 26.3 (SD 5.7), 38.1% of patients had ASA ≥ 3, and 78.3% underwent surgery for neoplasms. IC anastomosis was associated with longer operative duration (165 min (SD 40); 144 min (SD 48), p = 0.002). There was no difference in the median time to GI-3 (IC 2 days [IQR1-2]; EC 2 days [IQR2-3], p = 0.135). The incidence of PPOI (IC 8.5%; EC 10.3%, p = 0.659), superficial SSI (4.2% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.757), deep SSI (2.8% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.729), and median LOS (3 days [IQR 2-4] vs. 3 [IQR 3-5], p = 0.059) were also similar. On multivariate analysis, IC anastomosis did not independently predict faster GI recovery (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.71-1.34). Similar results were observed in the matched cohort (185 patients (61IC, 124EC)).

CONCLUSION

In this study, IC anastomosis was not associated with faster GI recovery or reduced complication rate compared to EC anastomosis. Longer term studies may be required to determine the potential benefits of IC anastomosis.

Laparoscopic versus robotic right colectomy with extra-corporeal or intra-corporeal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) versus robotic right colectomy (RRC) using homogeneous subgroup analyses for extra-corporeal anastomosis (EA) and intra-corporeal anastomosis (IA).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched up to April 2020 for prospective or retrospective studies comparing LRC versus RRC on at least one short- or long-term outcome. The primary outcome was the length of hospital stay (LOS). The secondary outcomes included operative and pathological results, survival, and total costs. LRC and RRC were compared using three homogeneous subgroups: without distinction by the type of anastomosis, EA only, and IA only. Pooled data analyses were performed using mean difference (MD) and random effects model.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven of 448 studies were selected. The included patients were 21,397 for the LRC group and 2796 for the RRC group. Regardless for the type of anastomosis, RRC showed shorter LOS, lower blood loss, lower conversion rate, shorter time to flatus, and lower overall complication rate compared with LRC, but longer operative time and higher total costs. In the EA subgroup, RRC showed similar LOS, longer operative time, and higher costs compared with LRC, the other outcomes being similar. In the IA subgroup, RRC showed shorter LOS and longer operative time compared with LRC, with no difference for the remaining outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Most included articles are retrospective, providing low-quality evidence and limiting conclusions. The more frequent use of the IA seems to explain the advantages of RRC over LRC.

Intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive colectomy

Outcomes advantages for the minimally invasive approach to colon and rectal surgery have been clearly described since the original report of a laparoscopic colectomy in 1991. Advancements in minimally invasive options for colon and rectal surgery have produced the need for critical evaluation of alternative and evolving techniques. The evolution and increased adoption of the minimally invasive robotic platform has allowed the intracorporeal anastomosis, previously described with the laparoscopic approach, to be more widely available to surgeon skill sets because of robotic articulating instruments and ergonomic advantages. Studies comparing intra- and extracorporeal techniques for laparoscopic right colectomy have demonstrated some outcomes advantages for the intracorporeal approach that include fewer conversions-to-open, fewer postoperative complications, and shorter hospital length of stay. Recent robotic-assisted comparisons have also shown an intracorporeal advantage and have extended the analysis to left-sided colorectal resections. Further upgrades in minimally invasive options and techniques warrant further evidence-based considerations for surgeons choosing between these options and techniques.

Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Right Colectomy with Complete Mesocolic Excision

Background and Objectives:

Literature demonstrates that colorectal cancer is nowadays one of the most common malignancies. Laparoscopy and robotic surgery are progressively gaining popularity in the treatment of colorectal tumors. Complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been widely adopted with encouraging results in terms of an improvement of overall survival, but some studies in the literature seem to demonstrate a higher morbidity rate.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective study from 01/01/2010 to 30/04/2019 on a series of 250 patients, 155 males (62%) and 95 females (38%) who underwent right colectomy with minimally invasive approach, complete mesocolic excision, central vascular ligation, and intracorporeal anastomosis.

Results:

No perioperative mortality occurred. Postoperative morbidity rate was 6%, including 10 cases of anastomotic leak (5%). Conversion rate was 2.5%. Mean hospital stay was 6 days (range, 4–25 days). Mean operative time was 70 minutes (range, 50–130 minutes). No cases of duodenal or pancreatic damages, no chronic pain or diarrhea, and no severe alteration of bowel function were recorded. We observed only 3 cases of transient delayed gastric emptying.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision, central vascular ligation and intracorporeal anastomosis leads to encouraging oncological mid- and long-term outcomes with low complications rates.

Successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer - a systematic review

AIM

Minimally invasive surgical approaches for cancer of the right colon have been well described with significant patient and equivalent oncological benefits. Robotic surgery has advanced in its ability to provide multi-quadrant abdominal access, leading the surgical community to widen its application outside of the pelvis to other abdominal compartments. Globally it is being realized that a patient's surgical episode of care is becoming the epicentre of cancer treatment. In order to establish the role of robotic surgery in a patient's episode of care, 'successful patient-oriented surgical' parameters in right hemicolectomy for malignancy were measured. The objective was to examine the rates of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH) compared to laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) for cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid: 1946-present), PubMed (NCBI), Embase (Ovid: 1966-present) and Cochrane Library was conducted using PRISMA for parameters of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in RRH and LRH for malignancy alone. The parameters measured included postoperative ileus, anastomotic complication, surgical wound infection, length of stay (LOS), incisional hernia rate, conversion to open, margin status, lymph node harvest and overall morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 15 studies which included 831 RRH patients and 3241 LRH patients, with a median age of 62-74 years. No study analysed the concept of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative ileus, with less time to first flatus in RRH (2.0-2.7 days, compared with 2.5-4.0 days, P < 0.05). Anastomotic leak rate in one study reported a significant increase in LRH compared to RRH (P < 0.05, 0% vs 8.3%). Significantly decreased LOS following RRH was outlined in six studies. One study reported a significantly higher rate of incisional hernias following LRH with extracorporeal anastomoses compared to RRH with intracorporeal anastomoses. Overall rates of conversion to open surgery were less with RRH (0%-3.9% vs 0%-18%, P < 0.001, 0.05). One study outlined significantly higher rates of incomplete resection with an open right hemicolectomy compared with minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic resections, with positive margin rates of 2.3%, 0.9% and 0% respectively (P < 0.001). Two studies reported significantly higher lymph node harvest in RRH (P < 0.05). Overall morbidity and 30-day mortality were comparable in both approaches.

CONCLUSION

Thirty-day morbidity and mortality were comparable between the two approaches, with patients undergoing RRH having lower anastomotic complications, increased lymph node harvest, and reduced LOS, conversion to open and incisional hernia rates in a number of studies. There are limited data on surgical approach and impact on quality of life and what patients deem successful surgical outcomes. There is a further need for a randomized controlled trial examining successful patient-oriented outcomes in right hemicolectomy for malignancy.

Intracorporeal or Extracorporeal Ileocolic Anastomosis After Laparoscopic Right Colectomy: A Double-blinded Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to determine whether there are clinically relevant differences in outcomes between laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) with intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis (IIA) and LRC with extracorporeal IA (EIA).

BACKGROUND

IIA and EIA are 2 well-established techniques for restoration of bowel continuity after LRC. There are no high-quality studies demonstrating the superiority of one anastomotic technique over the other.

METHODS

This is a double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of LRC with IIA and LRC with EIA in patients with a benign or malignant right-sided colon neoplasm. Primary endpoint was length of hospital stay (LOS). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03045107.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients were randomized and analyzed. Median operative time was comparable in IIA versus EIA group {130 [interquartile range (IQR) 105-195] vs 130 (IQR 110-180) min; P = 0.770} and no intraoperative complications occurred. The quicker recovery of bowel function after IIA than EIA [gas: 2 (IQR 2-3) vs 3 (IQR 2-3) days, P = 0.003; stool: 4 (IQR 3-5) vs 4.5 (IQR 3-5) days, P = 0.032] was not reflected in any advantage in the primary endpoint: median LOS was similar in the 2 groups [6 (IQR 5-7) vs 6 (IQR 5-8) days; P = 0.839]. No significant differences were observed in the number of lymph nodes harvested, length of skin incision, 30-day morbidity (17.1% vs 15.7%, P = 0.823), reoperation rate, and readmission rate between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LRC with IIA is associated with earlier recovery of postoperative bowel function than LRC with EIA; however, it does not reflect into a shorter LOS.

Benefits of barbed suture utilisation in gastrointestinal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Anastomosis formation constitutes a critical aspect of many gastrointestinal procedures. Barbed suture materials have been adopted by some surgeons to assist in this task. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the safety and efficacy of barbed suture material for anastomosis formation compared with standard suture materials.

METHODS

An electronic search of Embase, Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane databases was performed. Weighted mean differences were calculated for effect size of barbed suture material compared with standard material on continuous variables and pooled odds ratios were calculated for discrete variables.

FINDINGS

There were nine studies included. Barbed suture material was associated with a significant reduction in overall operative time (WMD: -12.87 (95% CI = -20.16 to -5.58) (P = 0.0005)) and anastomosis time (WMD: -4.28 (95% CI = -6.80 to -1.75) (P = 0.0009)). There was no difference in rates of anastomotic leak (POR: 1.24 (95% CI = 0.89 to 1.71) (P = 0.19)), anastomotic bleeding (POR: 0.80 (95% CI = 0.29 to 2.16) (P = 0.41)), or anastomotic stricture (POR: 0.72 (95% CI = 0.21 to 2.41) (P = 0.59)).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of barbed sutures for gastrointestinal anastomosis appears to be associated with shorter overall operative times. There was no difference in rates of complications (including anastomotic leak, bleeding or stricture) compared with standard suture materials.

Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Laparoscopic Right Colectomy: An Updated Systematic Review and Cumulative Meta-Analysis

Purpose: The effect of intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) versus extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, and functional outcomes of IA compared with EA and to explore the timely tendency variations favoring one treatment over another. Materials and Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were consulted. A systematic review, pairwise meta-analysis, and cumulative meta-analysis were conducted. Results: Twenty-three studies (3755 patients) were included: 45.7% underwent IA, whereas 54.3% underwent EA. The estimated pooled postoperative infectious complications, anastomotic leak, and overall complications risk ratios were 0.51 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31 to 0.84; P = .009), 0.64 (95% CI: 0.40 to 1.03; P = .063), and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.62 to 0.97; P = .028), respectively. The cumulative meta-analysis showed a statistically significant timely tendency in favor of IA while considering infectious and overall complications. The estimated pooled mean difference of time to first flatus, first defecation, first oral diet, and hospital stay were -16.68 (P < .001), -25.94 (P < .001), -16.35 (P < .001), and -0.72 (P < .001), respectively. Again, the cumulative meta-analysis showed a statistically significant timely trend in favor of IA. No differences were found in term of operative time, conversion rate, ileus, bleeding, reoperation, 30-day readmission, and 30-day mortality. Conclusions: Compared with EA, IA seems to be associated with reduced postoperative infectious and overall complications. The time to first flatus, time to defecation, time to liquid diet, and hospital length of stay were estimated to be lower. A statistically significant timely trend favoring IA was noticed for postoperative infectious complications, overall complications, and recovery parameters. Further studies are warranted to confirm these results and to deeply investigate the supposed timely tendency convergence in favor of IA.

Minimally invasive sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease decreases inpatient opioid use: Results of a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery are at high risk for postoperative opioid use.

METHODS

We evaluated inpatient opioid use among patients undergoing sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease from the Premier Hospital Database and compared across surgical approaches using propensity score-matching analysis.

RESULTS

After the day of surgery, minimally invasive (MIS) patients were administered significantly lower doses of parenteral opioids (median daily morphine milligram equivalents [MME]: 33.3 versus 48.3, p < 0.001). Within MIS, significantly less parenteral opioids were used by the robotic-assisted (RS) than the laparoscopic (LS) group (median daily MME: 30.0 versus 36.8, p = 0.012). MIS patients were more likely than open to start oral opioids on the day of surgery (MIS vs. OS: 8.7% vs. 6.6%, p < 0.001; RS vs. LS: 12.6% vs. 10.2%, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease was associated with less postoperative parenteral opioid use and starting oral opioids sooner after surgery compared to the open approach.

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: the SICE (Società Italiana di Chirurgia Endoscopica e Nuove Tecnologie) network prospective trial on 1225 cases comparing intra corporeal versus extra corporeal ileo-colic side-to-side anastomosis

Background

While laparoscopic approach for right hemicolectomy (LRH) is considered appropriate for the surgical treatment of both malignant and benign diseases of right colon, there is still debate about how to perform the ileo-colic anastomosis. The ColonDxItalianGroup (CoDIG) was designed as a cohort, observational, prospective, multi-center national study with the aims of evaluating the surgeons’ attitude regarding the intracorporeal (ICA) or extra-corporeal (ECA) anastomotic technique and the related surgical outcomes.

Methods

One hundred and twenty-five Surgical Units experienced in colorectal and advanced laparoscopic surgery were invited and 85 of them joined the study. Each center was asked not to change its surgical habits. Data about demographic characteristics, surgical technique and postoperative outcomes were collected through the official SICE website database. One thousand two hundred and twenty-five patients were enrolled between March 2018 and September 2018.

Results

ICA was performed in 70.4% of cases, ECA in 29.6%. Isoperistaltic anastomosis was completed in 85.6%, stapled in 87.9%. Hand-sewn enterotomy closure was adopted in 86%. Postoperative complications were reported in 35.4% for ICA and 50.7% for ECA; no significant difference was found according to patients’ characteristics and technologies used. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter for ICA (7.3 vs. 9 POD). Postoperative pain in patients not prescribed opioids was significantly lower in ICA group.

Conclusions

In our survey, a side-to-side isoperistaltic stapled ICA with hand-sewn enterotomy closure is the most frequently adopted technique to perform ileo-colic anastomosis after any indications for elective LRH. According to literature, our study confirmed better short-term outcomes for ICA, with reduction of hospital stay and postoperative pain.

Trial registration

Clinical trial (Identifier: NCT03934151).

How robotics is changing and will change the field of colorectal surgery

During the last decade there has been a significant upward trend in colon and rectal minimally invasive surgery which can be attributed largely to the acceptance of robotic surgery platforms such as the da Vinci^® robotic system. The fourth generation da Vinci^® system, introduced in 2014, includes integrated table motion, intelligent laser targeted docking and more sophisticated instrumentation and imaging. These developments have enabled more surgeons to efficiently and safely perform multi-quadrant operations. Firefly^® technology allows assessment of colon perfusion and identification of ureters, and has shown potential in detecting occult recurrence or metastasis using molecular-labelled tumor markers. Wristed instrumentation has increased the technical ease of intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) for many surgeons, leading to more common use of ICA during right colectomy. Advanced imaging has shown potential to decrease the incidence of presacral nerve injury and improve urogenital outcomes after pelvic surgery, as has been the case in robotic urologic procedures. Finally, the robotic platform lends itself to surgical simulation for surgical trainees, as a pre-operative tool for mock operations and as an ongoing assessment tool for established colorectal surgeons. Given these advantages, surgeons should anticipate continued and increased utilization of this beneficial technology.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive colectomy has become the standard for treatment of colonic disease in many centers. Restoration of bowel continuity following resection can be achieved by intracorporeal (IC) or extracorporeal (EC) anastomosis. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the outcomes of IC compared to EC anastomosis in minimally invasive right colectomy.

METHODS

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic literature search for studies assessing the outcome of IC and EC anastomosis in laparoscopic and robot-assisted right colectomy was conducted. The primary outcome of this review was postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, length of stay, conversion to open surgery, and bowel recovery.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies including 4450 patients were evaluated. 47.7% of patients had IC anastomosis and 52.3% had EC anastomosis. The weighted mean length of extraction site incision in the IC group was shorter than the EC group. The EC group had significantly higher odds of conversion to open surgery (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1-3.45, p = 0.046), total complications (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.05-2.11, p = 0.007), anastomotic leakage (AL) (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.4-2.7, p = 0.003), surgical site infection (SSI) (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.4-2.6, p = 0.002), and incisional hernia (OR 3.14, 95% CI 1.85-5.33, p < 0.001) compared to the IC group. Both groups had similar rates of ileus, small bowel obstruction, bleeding, and intra-abdominal infection.

CONCLUSION

IC anastomosis was associated with significantly shorter extraction site incisions, earlier bowel recovery, fewer complications, and lower rates of conversion, AL, SSI, and incisional hernia than has the EC anastomosis.