Non-anatomical colonic resections: splenic flexure and transverse colectomy. Central vascular ligation is crucial for survival

Impact of primary tumor resection on the survival of patients with unresectable colon cancer liver metastasis at different colonic subsites: a propensity score matching analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) on the prognosis of patients with unresectable colon cancer liver metastasis (UCCLM) at seven colonic subsites using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

METHODS

Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to balance selection bias using all available variables that could be of potential relevance. After matching, the groups were redefined in a 1:1 ratio using the nearest method. Cancer-specific survival (CSS) was compared among the patients of PTR and non-PTR groups. Cox regression models were used to identify the prognostic factors for CSS.

RESULTS

CSS was significantly different between all groups. Cox regression analysis showed that PTR was an independent prognostic factor for all groups. After PSM, PTR significantly prolonged CSS for all groups. Subgroup analysis showed that PTR did not improve the prognosis of N2 stage patients in the cecum, ascending colon, and descending colon groups; T1 + T2 stage patients in the hepatic flexure group; and patients with a tumor size ≤5 cm in the splenic flexure group. Segmental colectomy could prolong CSS of patients in the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, splenic flexure, and sigmoid colon groups, while extended colectomy could prolong CSS of patients in the hepatic flexure and descending colon groups.

CONCLUSION

At different colonic subsites, UCCLM patients had different CSS. PTR could improve their prognosis, however, N stage, T stage, and tumor size are important reference indicators. In addition to patients in the hepatic flexure and descending colon groups, we suggested that patients in other groups should choose segmental colectomy.

Short and long-term oncologic outcomes of patients with colon cancer of the splenic flexure

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus on surgical management of splenic flexure adenocarcinoma (SFA).

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgical resection for SFA between 1993 and 2015 were identified. Postoperative outcomes were compared between patients who underwent segmental (SR) vs. anatomical resection (AR).

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirteen patients underwent SR and 89 underwent AR. More patients in the SR group had open resections, but there were otherwise no differences in demographics or surgical characteristics between the two groups. There were no differences in overall (p = 0.29) or recurrence-free(p = 0.37) survival. On multivariable analysis, increased age (HR 1.04, 1.01-1.07, p = 0.005), higher American Society of Anesthesiology classification (HR 3.1, 1.7-5.71, p < 0.001), and higher tumor stage (HR 8.84, 3.76-20.82, p < 0.001) were predictive of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Short and long-term outcomes after SR and AR for SFA are not different, making SR a viable option for SFA surgical management.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN)

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes.

METHODS

This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate.

RESULTS

A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

Segmental resection of splenic flexure colon cancers provides an adequate lymph node harvest and is a safe operative approach - an analysis of the ACS-NSQIP database

Introduction

Fewer than 10% of colon cancers are found at the splenic flexure. A standard surgical approach to these cancers has not been defined. The goal of this study was to compare lymph node harvest and post-operative morbidity between segmental resection and formal left hemicolectomy for splenic flexure colon cancers.

Method

Patients diagnosed with a splenic flexure cancer were identified from the 2012–2018 ACS-NSQIP colectomy-targeted database. Patients were categorized based on type of surgical resection – left hemicolectomy with colorectal anastomosis or segmental colectomy with colocolonic anastomosis. Demographic, clinicopathologic, and post-operative outcomes were compared between groups. Factors independently associated with lymph node harvest, operative time, and post-operative morbidity were investigated by linear and binomial logistic regression models.

Results

A total of 3,049 patients underwent colectomy for a splenic flexure cancer. Of these, 83.6% had a segmental colectomy and 73% were performed by a minimally invasive approach. T- and N-stage did not differ between segmental and left hemicolectomy groups (p = 0.703 and p = 0.429, respectively). Inadequate nodal harvest (< 12 nodes) was infrequent and similar between the two procedures (7.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.13). Operative time was significantly shorter for segmental colectomy (213 ± 83.5 min vs. 193 ± 84.1 min, p < 0.0001) and major morbidity was similar between the two surgical techniques (8.4% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.75). After accounting for demographic, clinicopathologic, and operative factors, binomial logistic regression showed that type of procedure was not significantly associated with LN harvest (OR 0.80, 95%CI 0.54–1.17) or major morbidity (OR 1.17, 95%CI 0.36–3.81). However, on linear regression, segmental splenic flexure resection was associated with shorter operative time (estimate 20.29, 95%CI 12.61–27.97, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Splenic flexure resection for colon cancer is associated with an adequate lymph node harvest. Compared to a formal left hemicolectomy, a segmental resection also has a shorter operative time with equivalent post-operative morbidity.

Primary tumor resection improves prognosis of unresectable carcinomas of the transverse colon including flexures with liver metastasis: a preliminary population-based analysis

Purpose

Studies on unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastasis(CRLM) rarely analyze the prognosis of the patients from the point of colonic subsites. We aimed to evaluate the effect of primary tumor resection (PTR) and different scope of colectomy on the prognosis of patients with unresectable transverse colon cancer liver metastasis (UTCLM), hepatic flexure cancer liver metastasis (UHFLM), and splenic flexure cancer liver metastasis (USFLM).

Patients and methods

The patients were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database from 2010 to 2015. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to identify prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) and cause-specific survival (CSS). Kaplan-Meier analyses and log-rank tests were conducted to assess the effectiveness of PTR on survival.

Results

In total, this study included a cohort of 1960 patients: 556 cases of UHFLM, 1008 cases of UTCLM, and 396 cases of USFLM. The median survival time of whole patients was 11.0 months, ranging from 7.0 months for UHFLM patients to 15.0 months for USFLM patients. USFLM patients had the best OS and CSS, followed by UTCLM patients. UHFLM patients had the worst OS and CSS (All P < 0.001). PTR could improve the OS and CSS of UTCLM, UHFLM, and USFLM (All P < 0.001). Subgroups analysis revealed that USFLM patients with tumor size≤5 cm and negative CEA had not demonstrated an improved OS and CSS after PTR. Multivariate analysis showed that PTR and perioperative chemotherapy were common independent prognostic factors for UHFLM, UTCLM, and USFLM patients. There was no difference between segmental colon resection and larger colon resection on CSS of UHFLM, UTCLM, and USFLM patients.

Conclusions

We confirmed the different survival of patients with UTCLM, UHFLM, and USFLM, and for the first time, we proved that PTR could provide survival benefits for patients with unresectable CRLM from the perspective of colonic subsites of transverse colon, hepatic flexure, and splenic flexure. Besides, PTR may not improve the prognosis of USFLM patients with CEA- negative or tumor size≤5 cm. For oncologic outcomes, we concluded that segmental colon resection seemed an effective surgical procedure for UTCLM, UHFLM, and USFLM.

Surgical Approach to Transverse Colon Cancer: Analysis of Current Practice and Oncological Outcomes Using the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment for transverse colon cancer involves either extended colectomy or segmental resection, depending on the location of the tumor and surgeon perspective. However, the oncological safety of segmental resection has not yet been established in large cohort studies.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare segmental resection versus extended colectomy for transverse colon cancer in terms of oncological outcomes.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted using a nationwide cohort.

PATIENTS

A total of 66,062 patients who underwent colectomy with curative intent for transverse stage I to III adenocarcinoma were identified in the National Cancer Database (2004-2015).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients were divided in 2 groups based on the type of surgery received (extended versus segmental resection). The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were 30- and 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate within 30 days of surgical discharge.

RESULTS

Extended colectomy was performed in 44,417 (67.2%) patients, whereas 21,645 (32.8%) patients underwent segmental resection. Extended colectomy was associated with lower survival at multivariate analysis (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10; p < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed that extended resection was independently associated with poorer survival in mid transverse colon cancers (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04-1.12; p < 0.001) and in stage III tumors (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.18; p < 0.001). The number of at least 12 harvested lymph nodes was an independent predictor of improved survival in both overall and subgroup analyses.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Extended colectomy was not associated with a survival advantage compared with segmental resection. On the contrary, extended colectomy was associated with slightly poorer survival in mid transverse cancers and locally advanced tumors. Segmental resection was found to be safe when appropriate margins and adequate lymph node harvest were achieved. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B454.

ABORDAJE QUIRRGICO DEL CNCER DE COLON TRANSVERSO ANLISIS DE LA PRCTICA ACTUAL Y LOS RESULTADOS ONCOLGICOS UTILIZANDO LA BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL DE CNCER

ANTECEDENTES:El tratamiento quirúrgico para el cáncer de colon transverso implica colectomía extendida o resección segmentaria, según la ubicación del tumor y la perspectiva del cirujano. Sin embargo, la seguridad oncológica de la resección segmentaria aún no se ha establecido en estudios de cohortes grandes.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo comparar la resección segmentaria versus la colectomía extendida para el cáncer de colon transverso en términos de resultados oncológicos.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se realizó utilizando una cohorte a nivel nacional.PACIENTES:Un total de 66,062 pacientes que se sometieron a colectomía con intención curativa por adenocarcinoma de colon transverso en estadio I-III fueron identificados en la Base de Datos Nacional del Cáncer (2004-2015).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los pacientes se dividieron en dos grupos según el tipo de cirugía recibida (resección extendida versus resección segmentaria). El resultado primario fue la supervivencia global. Los resultados secundarios fueron la mortalidad a los 30 y 90 días, la duración de la estancia hospitalaria y la tasa de reingreso dentro de los 30 días posteriores al alta quirúrgica.RESULTADOS:Se realizó colectomía extendida en 44,417 (67.2%) casos, mientras que 21,645 (32.8%) pacientes fueron sometidos a resección segmentaria. La colectomía extendida se asoció con una menor supervivencia en el análisis multivariado (HR 1.07 IC 95% 1.04-1.10; p <0.001). El análisis de subgrupos mostró que la resección extendida se asoció de forma independiente con una menor supervivencia en los cánceres de colon transverso medio (HR 1.08 IC 95% 1.04-1.12; p <0.001) y en tumores en estadio III (HR 1.11 IC 95% 1.04-1.18; p <0.001). Un número de al menos 12 ganglios linfáticos cosechados fue un predictor independiente de una mejor supervivencia en los análisis general y de subgrupos.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:La colectomía extendida no se asoció con una ventaja de supervivencia en comparación con la resección segmentaria. Por el contrario, la colectomía extendida se asoció con una supervivencia levemente menor en cánceres de colon transverso medio y tumores localmente avanzados. Se encontró que la resección segmentaria es segura cuando se logran los márgenes apropiados y la cosecha adecuada de ganglios linfáticos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B454.

Segmental Colonic Resection Is a Safe and Effective Treatment Option for Colon Cancer of the Splenic Flexure: A Nationwide Retrospective Study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network Collaborative Group

BACKGROUND

Global experience with splenic flexure cancer is limited because of its low incidence. Both limited (segmental) and extended resections are performed, because agreement on which is the adequate procedure has not been reached.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether segmental resection is as safe and effective as extended resection.

DESIGN

This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive resections of splenic flecure cancer between January 2006 and December 2016 using data from the National Colorectal Cancer Network of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology following the guidelines set out in the STROBE statement.

SETTING

Data were obtained for 31 Italian Referral Centers for Colorectal Surgery.

PATIENTS

A total of 1304 patients were submitted to resection of the splenic flexure (n = 791, 60.7%) or extended procedures (extended right and left colectomies; n = 513, 39.3%).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We evaluated Clavien-Dindo ≥3 postoperative complications and oncological (number of lymph nodes removed, length of free proximal and distal margins, rate of R0 resections) and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

The 2 arms were well balanced in regard to sex, BMI, ASA and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores, and disease stage. Limited resection was performed more frequently using a minimally invasive approach (62.1% vs 50.9%, p < 0.001) and with shorter operation times than extended procedures (165 vs 189 minutes, p < 0.001), but the same Clavien-Dindo ≥3 postoperative complications (6.44% vs 6.43%, p = 0.99), 30-day mortality (0.63% vs 0.38%), oncological outcomes, and survival rates (5-year overall survival 0.84 vs 0.83, 5-year progression-free survival 0.85 vs 0.84).

LIMITATIONS

There are limitations inherent to the retrospective nature of the study and a potential lack of consistency in treatment across centers over time. Indications as to why a specific operation was chosen were based mostly on surgeons' beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS

Segmental resection is a safe and effective treatment option for cancer of the splenic flexure. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B307. LA RESECCIÓN DE COLON SEGMENTARIA ES UNA OPCIÓN DE TRATAMIENTO SEGURA Y EFICAZ PARA EL CÁNCER DE COLON DE LA FLEXIÓN ESPLÉNICA: UN ESTUDIO RETROSPECTIVO A NIVEL NACIONAL DE LA SOCIEDAD ITALIANA DE ONCOLOGÍA QUIRÚRGICA - GRUPO COLABORATIVO RED DE CÁNCER COLORRECTAL: La experiencia global con el cáncer de flexión esplénica es limitada debido a su baja incidencia. Se realizan resecciones limitadas (segmentarias) y extendidas, ya que no se ha llegado a un acuerdo sobre cuál es el procedimiento adecuado.El propósito de este estudio fue investigar si la resección segmentaria es tan segura y efectiva como la resección extendida.Este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo a nivel nacional incluyó todas las resecciones consecutivas de cáncer de flecura esplénica entre enero de 2006 y diciembre de 2016 utilizando datos de la Red Nacional de Cáncer Colorrectal de la Sociedad Italiana de Oncología Quirúrgica siguiendo las pautas establecidas en la declaración STROBE.Se obtuvieron datos para 31 centros de referencia italianos para cirugía colorrectal.Un total de 1304 pacientes fueron sometidos a resección de la flexión esplénica (n = 791, 60.7%) o procedimientos extendidos (colectomías extendidas derecha e izquierda; n = 513, 39.3%).Evaluamos Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complicaciones postoperatorias y oncológicas (número de ganglios linfáticos extirpados, longitud de márgenes proximales y distales libres, tasa de resecciones R0) y resultados de supervivencia.Los dos brazos estaban bien equilibrados en cuanto a sexo, IMC, ASA y puntajes ECOG, y etapa de la enfermedad. La resección limitada se realizó con mayor frecuencia utilizando un enfoque mínimamente invasivo (62.1% versus 50,9%, p < 0.001) y con tiempos de operación más cortos que los procedimientos extendidos (165 min versus 189 min, p <0.001), pero el mismo Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complicaciones postoperatorias (6,44% versus 6,43%, p = 0.99), mortalidad a los 30 días (0,63% versus 0,38%), resultados oncológicos y tasas de supervivencia (5-y OS 0,84 versus 0,83, 5-PFS 0,85 versus 0,84).Existen limitaciones inherentes a la naturaleza retrospectiva del estudio y una posible falta de consistencia en el tratamiento entre centros a lo largo del tiempo. Las indicaciones de por qué se eligió una operación específica se basaron principalmente en crieterios de los cirujanos.La resección segmentaria es una opción de tratamiento segura y efectiva para el cáncer de la flexión esplénica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B307. (Traducción-Dr. Adrian Ortega).