Clinical outcomes of 103 hand-assisted laparoscopic surgeries for left-sided colon and rectal cancer: single institutional review

Hand Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: Surgical and Oncological Outcomes from a Single Tertiary Referral Centre

The aim of this study was to report overall experience, perioperative and long-term survival results in a single tertiary referral center in Lithuania with hand assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) for colorectal cancer. A prospectively maintained database included 467 patients who underwent HALS for left-sided colon and rectal cancer, from April 2006 to October 2016. All those operations were performed by three consultant surgeons and nine surgical residents, in all cases assisted by one of the same consultant surgeons. There were 230 (49.25%) females, with an average age of 64 ± 9.7 years (range, 26–91 years). The procedures performed included 170 (36.4%) anterior rectal resections with partial mesorectal excision, 160 (34.26%) sigmoid colectomies, 81 (17.35%) left hemicolectomies, 45 (9.64%) low anterior rectal resections with total mesorectal excision, and 11 (2.25%) other procedures. Stage I colorectal cancer was found in 140 (29.98%) patients, 139 (29.76%) stage II, 152 (32.55%) stage III and 36 (7.71%) stage IV. There were five conversions to open surgery (1.1%). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6.9 ± 3.4 days (range, 1–30 days). In total, 33 (7.06%) patients developed postoperative complications. The most common complications were small bowel obstruction (n = 6), anastomotic leakage (n = 5), intraabdominal abscess (n = 4) and dysuria (n = 4). There were two postoperative deaths (0.43%). Overall, 5-year survival for all TNM stages was 85.7%, 93.2% for stage I, 88.5% for stage II and 76.3% for stage III. Hand assisted colorectal surgery for left-sided colon and rectal cancer in a single tertiary referral center was feasible and safe, having all the advantages of minimally invasive surgery, with good perioperative parameters, adequate oncological quality and excellent survival.

Laparoscopic colectomy in obese patients: a comparison of laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic techniques

BACKGROUND

Recent American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP)-based evidence indicates that laparoscopic (LAP) colectomy results in improved outcomes compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy in the general population. Previous comparative studies demonstrated that the HAL technique offers distinct advantages for obese patients. The aim of this study was to perform comparative analyses of HAL and LAP colectomy and low anterior resection (LAR) in obese patients.

METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP public use file and targeted colectomy dataset, 2012-2014, were utilized for patients undergoing colectomy and LAR. Only obese patients (BMI > 30) and laparoscopic or hand-assisted operations were included. Patient, operation, and outcome variables were compared in two separate cohorts: colectomy and LAR. Bivariate analysis compared the approaches, followed by multivariable regression.

RESULTS

Of 9610 obese patients included, HAL and LAP colectomy were performed in 3126 and 3793 patients and LAR in 1431 and 1260 patients, respectively. In comparison to LAP colectomy, HAL colectomy patients had increased comorbidities including class 2 and 3 obesity. HAL colectomy was associated with higher overall morbidity (20 vs. 16%, p < 0.001), infectious complications (10.2 vs. 7.7%, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (3.0 vs. 2.2%, p = 0.03), and ileus (11 vs. 8%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated that overall morbidity (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.44), infectious complications (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14-1.59), and ileus (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12-1.57) were each increased in the HAL colectomy cohort but not different for HAL and LAP LAR.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to LAP colectomy, the HAL technique is used more often in obese patients with an increased operative risk profile. While inherent bias and unmeasured variables limit the analysis, the available data indicate that the HAL technique is associated with increased perioperative morbidity. Alternatively, HAL and LAP LAR are performed in obese patients with a similar risk profile and result in similar postoperative outcomes.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach in Colon Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy with open and laparoscopic colectomy (LP).

STUDY DESIGN

The NSQIP databases were used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent elective colectomy during 2012-2013. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare the three surgical approaches.

RESULTS

We sampled a total of 21,090 patients who underwent colectomy. Of these, 7480 (35.5 %) had open colectomy (OC), 8751 (41.5 %) had a laparoscopic colectomy, 2860 (13.6 %) had a HAL colectomy, and 1999 (9.5 %) had an open procedure converted from LC or HAL. Multivariate regression analysis revealed HAL colectomy had a similar mortality (AOR 0.53, P = 0.07) and a lower morbidity (AOR 0.37, P < 0.01) compared to OC. LC had lower mortality (AOR 0.58, P = 0.02) and morbidity (AOR 0.43, P < 0.01) compared to OC. Mortality of patients who underwent HAL was not significantly different from LC (AOR 0.90, P = 0.79); however, morbidity of such patients was significantly higher than for patients who underwent LC (AOR 1.29, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HAL colectomy is a safe approach with significant advantages compared to open colectomy. Although the morbidity of patients who underwent HAL is higher than patients who underwent LC, the morbidity rate is still lower than OC.

Hand-Assisted Laparoscopic Approach in Colon Surgery

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) colectomy with open and laparoscopic colectomy (LP).

STUDY DESIGN

The NSQIP databases were used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent elective colectomy during 2012-2013. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to compare the three surgical approaches.

RESULTS

We sampled a total of 21,090 patients who underwent colectomy. Of these, 7480 (35.5 %) had open colectomy (OC), 8751 (41.5 %) had a laparoscopic colectomy, 2860 (13.6 %) had a HAL colectomy, and 1999 (9.5 %) had an open procedure converted from LC or HAL. Multivariate regression analysis revealed HAL colectomy had a similar mortality (AOR 0.53, P = 0.07) and a lower morbidity (AOR 0.37, P < 0.01) compared to OC. LC had lower mortality (AOR 0.58, P = 0.02) and morbidity (AOR 0.43, P < 0.01) compared to OC. Mortality of patients who underwent HAL was not significantly different from LC (AOR 0.90, P = 0.79); however, morbidity of such patients was significantly higher than for patients who underwent LC (AOR 1.29, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

HAL colectomy is a safe approach with significant advantages compared to open colectomy. Although the morbidity of patients who underwent HAL is higher than patients who underwent LC, the morbidity rate is still lower than OC.

Preoperative prediction of conversion from laparoscopic rectal resection to open surgery: a clinical study of conversion scoring of laparoscopic rectal resection to open surgery

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this paper were to establish a model for the conversion of laparoscopic rectal resection to open surgery and to predict possible conversion before surgery.

METHODS

The clinical data of 602 cases of laparoscopic rectal resection were retrospectively assessed. Risk factors associated with conversion of laparoscopic rectal resection to open rectal surgery were identified by logistic regression analysis. Also, a scoring system was created to calculate a score for the conversion of laparoscopic rectal resection to predict possible conversion for patients who underwent laparoscopic rectal resection before surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients required conversion (total conversion rate = 14.95%). The established model included six variables: male gender, surgical experience (≤25 cases), history of abdominal surgery, body mass index ≥ 28, tumor diameter ≥ 6 cm, and tumor invasion or metastasis, for which 6, 4, 5, 10, 15, and 21 points were assigned, respectively. A patient with a total score >14.5 points was considered to have a high probability of conversion, whereas a patient with a total score <14.5 points was considered at a low risk.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative determination of conversion score may predict possible conversion of laparoscopic rectal resection and thus reduce unnecessary open rectal surgery.