1
|
Lirk P, Badaoui J, Stuempflen M, Hedayat M, Freys SM, Joshi GP. PROcedure-SPECific postoperative pain management guideline for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: A systematic review with recommendations for postoperative pain management. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2024; 41:161-173. [PMID: 38298101 DOI: 10.1097/eja.0000000000001945] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2024]
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in women and third most common in men. Laparoscopic resection has become the standard surgical technique worldwide given its notable benefits, mainly the shorter length of stay and less postoperative pain. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current literature on postoperative pain management following laparoscopic colorectal surgery and update previous procedure-specific pain management recommendations. The primary outcomes were postoperative pain scores and opioid requirements. We also considered study quality, clinical relevance of trial design, and a comprehensive risk-benefit assessment of the analgesic intervention. We performed a literature search to identify randomised controlled studies (RCTs) published before January 2022. Seventy-two studies were included in the present analysis. Through the established PROSPECT process, we recommend basic analgesia (paracetamol for rectal surgery, and paracetamol with either a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug or cyclo-oxygenase-2-specific inhibitor for colonic surgery) and wound infiltration as first-line interventions. No consensus could be achieved either for the use of intrathecal morphine or intravenous lidocaine; no recommendation can be made for these interventions. However, intravenous lidocaine may be considered when basic analgesia cannot be provided.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philipp Lirk
- From the Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital (PL, JB, MS), Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA (MH), Department of Surgery, DIAKO Ev. Diakonie-Krankenhaus, Bremen, Germany (SMF) and Department of Anesthesiology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA (GPJ)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zhang X, Yuan H, Tan Z, Li G, Xu Z, Zhou J, Fu J, Wu M, Xi J, Wang Y. Long-term outcomes of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 2023; 23:1204. [PMID: 38062421 PMCID: PMC10702022 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11500-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2022] [Accepted: 10/09/2023] [Indexed: 12/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Though our previous study has demonstrated that the single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS + 1) is safe and feasible for sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer and has better short-term outcomes compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), the long-term outcomes of SILS + 1 remains uncertain and are needed to evaluated by an RCT. METHODS Patients with clinical stage T1-4aN0-2M0 rectosigmoid cancer were enrolled. The participants were randomly assigned to either SILS + 1 (n = 99) or CLS (n = 99). The 3-year DFS, 5-year OS, and recurrence patterns were analyzed. RESULTS Between April 2014 and July 2016, 198 patients were randomly assigned to either the SILS + 1 group (n = 99) or CLS group (n = 99). The median follow-up in the SILS + 1 group was 64.0 months and in CLS group was 65.0 months. The 3-year DFS was 87.8% (95% CI, 81.6-94.8%) in SILS + 1 group and 86.9% (95% CI, 81.3-94.5%) in CLS group (hazard ratio: 1.09 (95% CI, 0.48-2.47; P = 0.84)). The 5-year OS was 86.7% (95% CI,79.6-93.8%) in the SILS + 1 group and 80.5% (95% CI,72.5-88.5%) in the CLS group (hazard ratio: 1.53 (95% CI, 0.74-3.18; P = 0.25)). There were no significant differences in the recurrence patterns between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS We found no significant difference in 3-year DFS and 5-year OS of patients with sigmoid colon and upper rectal cancer treated with SILS + 1 vs. CLS. SILS + 1 is noninferior to CLS when performed by expert surgeons. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02117557 (registered on 21/04/2014).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xuehua Zhang
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Haitao Yuan
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Zilin Tan
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Gaohua Li
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Zhenzhao Xu
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Jinfan Zhou
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Jie Fu
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Mingyi Wu
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China
| | - Jiafei Xi
- Stem Cell and Regenerative Medicine Lab, Beijing Institute of Radiation Medicine, Beijing, 100850, China.
| | - Yanan Wang
- Department of General Surgery, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Precision Medicine for Gastrointestinal Tumor, The First School of Clinical Medicine, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Li FH, Zeng DX, Chen L, Xu CF, Tan L, Zhang P, Xiao JW. Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies. Front Oncol 2022; 12:997894. [PMID: 36324593 PMCID: PMC9621120 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.997894] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2022] [Accepted: 09/22/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Single-incision laparoscopy surgery (SILS) is a new laparoscopic technique that has emerged in the past decade. Whether it has advantages over conventionl laparoscopy surgery (CLS) is inconclusive. This article aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer through high-quality literature text mining and meta-analysis. Methods Relevant articles were searched on the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from January 2012 to November 2021. All data was from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in order to increase the confidence of the analytical results.The main outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications. Results A total of 10 RCTs were included, involving 1609 patients. The quality of the included studies was generally high. No significant difference was found between SILS and CLS in the postoperative complications, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, readmission, reoperation, complication level I- II, complication level IIIa, complication level IIIb, prolonged Ileus, blood loss, infection, anastomotic leakage and operation time. The results showed that SILS group had a higher rate of intraoperative complications, but it had lower incision length and better cosmetic effects. Conclusion These results indicate that SILS did not have a comprehensive and obvious advantage over the CLS. On the contrary, SILS has higher intraoperative complications, which may be related to the more difficulty of SILS operation, but SILS still has better cosmetic effects, which is in line with the concept of surgical development. Therefore, the SILS needs to be selected in patients with higher cosmetic requirements and performed by more experienced surgeons.
Collapse
|
4
|
Oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer (CSILS): study protocol for a multicentre, prospective, open-label, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:743. [PMID: 35799145 PMCID: PMC9264567 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09821-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/25/2022] [Accepted: 06/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Background In most previous studies, single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) was feasible and safe in the short term. However, long-term oncologic outcomes remain uncertain, as only a few studies contained long-term survival data. SILS for CRC is still in the early stages of research. Further studies, particularly large-scale, prospective randomized controlled trials, are necessary to assess the value of SILS for CRC. Methods This study is a prospective, multicentre, open-label, noninferiority, parallel-group randomized controlled trial that investigates the long-term oncologic outcomes of SILS compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for CRC. A total of 710 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to the SILS group or the CLS group at a 1:1 ratio using a central, dynamic, and stratified block randomization method. Patients with ages ranging from 18 to 85 years old, of both sexes, with CRC above the peritoneal reflection diagnosed as cT1-4aN0-2M0 and a tumour size no larger than 5 cm will be considered for the study. The primary endpoint is 3-year disease-free survival (DFS). The secondary endpoints include: intraoperative outcomes, postoperative recovery, postoperative pain assessment, pathological outcomes, early morbidity and mortality rate, cosmetic effects, quality of life, 3-year overall survival (OS), incidence of incisional hernia, 5-year DFS and 5-year OS. The first two follow-up visits will be scheduled at one month and three months postoperatively, then every three months for the first two years and every six months for the next three years. Discussion Currently, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been designed to investigate the long-term oncologic outcomes of SILS for CRC. This study is expected to provide clinical evidence of the oncologic outcomes of SILS compared to CLS for CRC to promote its widespread use. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT 04527861 (registered on August 27, 2020).
Collapse
|