Single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer in elderly patients

Short-term outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in patients over 90 years old: a Japanese multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The effect of laparoscopic surgery on short-term outcomes in colorectal cancer patients over 90 years old has remained unclear.

METHODS

We reviewed 87 colorectal cancer patients aged over 90 years who underwent surgery between 2016 and 2022. Patients were divided into an open surgery group (n = 22) and a laparoscopic surgery group (n = 65). The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of laparoscopic surgery on postoperative outcome in elderly colorectal cancer patients, as compared to open surgery.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients (89.7%) had comorbidities. Frequency of advanced T stage was lower with laparoscopic surgery (p = 0.021). Operation time was longer (open surgery 146 min vs. laparoscopic surgery 203 min; p = 0.002) and blood loss was less (105 mL vs. 20 mL, respectively; p < 0.001) with laparoscopic surgery. Length of hospitalization was longer with open surgery (22 days vs. 18 days, respectively; p = 0.007). Frequency of infectious complications was lower with laparoscopic surgery (18.5%) than with open surgery (45.5%; p = 0.021). Multivariate analysis revealed open surgery (p = 0.026; odds ratio, 3.535; 95% confidence interval, 1.159-10.781) as an independent predictor of postoperative infectious complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colorectal resection for patients over 90 years old is a useful procedure that reduces postoperative infectious complications.

Stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic versus conventional multi-port laparoscopic Miles's procedure for low rectal cancer: A prospective, randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of patients with low rectal cancer after stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic Miles procedure or conventional multi-port laparoscopic Miles procedure, as well as to evaluate the safety and efficacy of stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic surgery in low rectal cancer.

METHODS

Between September 2020 and September 2021, 51 low rectal cancer patients scheduled for Miles procedure at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery of Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College were randomly assigned to the single-port laparoscopic surgery group (SPLS) and the multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) group. The perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In this study, 25 patients underwent SPLS and 26 underwent MPLS. All patients completed the study, and there were no perioperative deaths in either group. Observation indicators such as intraoperative bleeding (39 mL vs. 41 mL), number of lymph nodes (20.12 ± 3.29 vs. 21.84 ± 3.74), average hospital stay (7.15 ± 1.52 vs. 7.64 ± 1.66), and time to flatulence (2.5d vs. 2.5d) showed no significant differences between the SPLS and MPLS groups (p > 0.05). However, the operation duration (180 min vs. 118 min) and perioperative complications showed statistically significant differences between the two groups (p < 0.05). In addition, patients in the SPLS group had significantly higher satisfaction scores than those in the MPLS group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

For patients with low rectal cancer requiring Miles surgery, stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic surgery has comparable safety and efficacy to multi-port laparoscopic surgery.

A Systematic Review of Comparing Single-incision Versus Traditional Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy For Right Colon Diseases

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILS) has been promoted in clinic since 2008, but a systematic review of comparing SILS and traditional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (TLS) with long-term follow-up is rare. Here, in this study, comparison of SILS and TLS with long-term follow-up was evaluated by a meta-analysis method.

METHODS

All studies about SILS and TLS for right hemicolectomy from 2010 to 2018 were searched from databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Wanfang. Operation index, recovery, and midterm follow-up data were evaluated by fixed-effects models, random-effects models, and Begg test.

RESULTS

We collected 22 studies with 2218 patients. SILS groups contained 1038 (46.7%) patients, and 1180 (53.3%) patients were observed in the TLS group. Patients' baseline data were similar in the 2 groups. Compared with TLS, SILS had shorter operation duration [standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.61 to -0.08, P<0.001, χ=49.40], shorter hospitalization time (SMD: -0.27, 95% CI: -0.37 to -0.16, P<0.001, χ=9.17), slightly less blood loss (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.36 to -0.10; P<0.001; χ=5.36), and smaller incision length (SMD: -2.19, 95% CI: -3.66 to -0.71, P<0.001; χ=316.1). No statistical differences were observed in other figures.

CONCLUSION

SILS is more convenient and has better efficacy than TLS and could provide a promising surgical approach for right colon diseases.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Single-Incision Versus Multiport Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision Colectomy for Colon Cancer

Background. Our aim was to compare the emerging technique of single-incision laparoscopic surgery complete mesocolic excision (SILS CME) colectomy with the standard multiport laparoscopic CME (MPL CME) colectomy. Methods. MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane library were searched. Studies comparing the SILS CME with MPL CME in adults with colon adenocarcinoma were included. The Jadad and Newcastle Ottawa Scales were used to critically appraise the studies. The presence of statistical heterogeneity or publication bias was examined. Results. Seven studies (3 randomized) with a total number of 1344 patients were included (546 SILS CME and 798 MPL CME). No difference was found in anastomotic leakage (odds ratio [OR] = 0.79 [0.31 to 2.03]; P = .63), number of lymph nodes (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.85 [-0.97 to 2.66]; P = .36), hospital stay (WMD = 0.01 [-0.19 to 0.20]; P = .96), overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.19 [0.29 to 4.80]; P = .81), and disease-free survival (HR = 1.30 [0.30 to 5.61]; P = .72). Skin incision was shorter in SILS CME group (WMD = -3.02 [-3.25 to -2.80]; P < .00001) but with no difference in pain reported in postoperative day 1 (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.21 [-0.50 to 0.09]; P = .17) or day 2 (SMD = 0.16 [-0.52 to 0.84]; P = .64). Conclusions. SILS CME, although technically more demanding, has equivalent short- and long-term outcomes when compared with MPL CME. Potential benefits in cosmesis or postoperative pain need to be further explored by high-quality randomized controlled trials.

Systematic review of comparing single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer

Background

Single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILS) has long used in surgery for a long time. However, there is barely a systemic review related to the comparison between the SILS and the conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (CLS) for the right colon cancer in the long term follow-up. Herein, we used the most recent articles to compare these two techniques by meta-analysis.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Wanfang databases to compare SILS with CLS for right colon cancer up to May 2019. The operative, postoperative, pathological and mid-term follow-up outcomes of nine studies were extracted and compared.

Results

A total of 1356 patients participated in 9 studies, while 653 patients were assigned to the SILS group and 703 patients were assigned to the CLS group. The patients’ baselines in the SILS group were consistent with those in the CLS group. Compared to the CLS group, the SILS group had a shorter operation duration (SMD − 23.49, 95%CI − 36.71 to − 10.27, P < 0.001, chi-square = 24.11), shorter hospital stay (SMD − 0.76, 95% `CI − 1.07 to − 0.45, P < 0.001, chi-square = 9.85), less blood loss (SMD − 8.46, 95% CI − 14.59 to − 2.34; P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.26), smaller incision length (SMD − 1.60, 95% CI − 2.66 to − 0.55, P < 0.001; chi-square = 280.44), more lymph node harvested (SMD − 0.98, 95% CI − 1.79 to − 0.16, P < 0.05; chi-square = 4.61), and a longer proximal surgical edge (SMD − 0.51, 95% CI − 0.93 to − 0.09, P < 0.05; chi-square = 2.42). No significant difference was found in other indexes. After we removed a single large study, we performed another meta-analysis again. The operation duration in the SILS group was still better than that in the CLS group.

Conclusion

SILS could be a faster and more reliable approach than CLS for the right colon cancer and could accelerate patient recovery, especially for patients with a low BMI.

Outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery in the nonagenarians: 20-year result from a tertiary center

Background

There is a foreseeable trend that life expectancy is on the rise in many parts of the world. More and more patients will present with colorectal cancer at extreme old age and advanced age is a well-known risk factor for adverse outcomes after surgery. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery in patients aged 90 or above.

Method

A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients aged 90 or above who underwent operations for colorectal cancer between January 1996 and December 2015 was performed. The primary outcomes were the complications rate, 30-day and 180-day mortality rates.

Results

A total of 57 patients were included in the analysis. The majority of them were women (64.9%). The median age was 92 years. Most of the surgery was of curative intent (77.2%), performed under elective setting (57.9%) and with open approach (78.9%). 36.8% of patients had postoperative complications, with pneumonia being the commonest. The 30-day and 180-day mortality rate was 7 and 31.6% respectively. History of ischemic heart disease and surgery under emergency setting were predictors of postoperative complications. Pneumonia, preoperative leukocytosis and Charlson comorbidity score ≥ 9 were predictors of 180-day mortality. The one and two-year survival rate for elective surgery was 69.7 and 54.5% respectively.

Conclusion

The outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery for nonagenarians could be favorable in a selected group of patients. Future study on better risk profiling and ways to improve outcomes is warranted.

Systematic review of single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer

Objectives

To explore whether single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has the better short-term clinical and pathological outcomes than conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer.

Methods

A literature investigation of MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biological Medicine (CBM), and Wanfang databases for relevant researches was performed. Fixed effects and random effects models were used to calculate the corresponding outcomes. Standardized mean difference and risk ratio were calculated for continuous and dichotomous variables separately.

Results

Nine clinical controlled trials were composed of two randomized clinical trials and seven non-randomized clinical trials with a total of 829 patients. Two hundred ninety-nine (36.1%) patients underwent SILS, and 530 (63.9%) patients underwent CLS. The meta-analysis showed that SILS had more lymph node resection (SMD − 0.25, 95% CI − 0.50 to − 0.002) and less defecation time (SMD − 0.46, 95% CI − 0.75 to − 0.17), exhaust time (SMD − 0.46, 95% CI − 0.75 to − 0.18), and hospital stay (SMD − 0.30, 95% CI − 0.45 to − 0.15 than CLS. SILS was also accompanied with shorter incision length (SMD − 2.46, 95% CI − 4.02 to − 0.90), less pain score (SMD − 0.56, 95% CI − 0.91 to − 0.21), and lower complication rate (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.91). Blood loss, operative time, distal margin, conversion rate, anastomotic fistula, readmission, local recurrence, and distant metastasis showed no statistical differences in two groups. In all subgroup analysis, SILS also had advantages of incision length, operative time, defecation time, exhaust time, and hospitalization time than CLS.

Conclusion

SILS could be a more safe and reliable surgical technique than CLS for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer. However, further high-quality studies between these two techniques need to be further developed.

Utility of Laparoscopic Surgery for Multiple Synchronous Colorectal Cancers With Two Anastomotic Sites

The frequency of multiple synchronous colorectal cancers is reported to be 2% to 7%. The surgical resection of 2 lesions and having 2 anastomotic sites are rare. According to previous studies, even if there are 2 anastomotic sites, the rate of complications associated with laparotomy will not increase. However, the number of studies confined to cases of laparoscopic surgery is limited. This study investigated effective methods for laparoscopic colorectal resection and their short-term results in cases of multiple synchronous colorectal cancers with 2 anastomotic sites. The safety of these methods were also evaluated. The study was comprised of 4 patients with multiple synchronous colorectal cancers who underwent resection using laparoscopy between January 2011 and March 2015. We retrospectively examined patients with 2 anastomosis sites. A total of 3 patients underwent multiport laparoscopic surgery (5-port) and 1 patient underwent single-port laparoscopic surgery. Complications due to the conversion to laparotomy or intraoperative or postoperative complications were not observed in any patient. Laparoscopic colorectal resection, resulting in 2 anastomosis sites, was performed safely. Compared to open colorectal resection with 2 anastomotic sites, laparoscopic resection was a smaller incision and minimally invasive. Therefore, laparoscopic colorectal resection with 2 anastomotic sites is regarded as a feasible and safe option for multiple synchronous colorectal cancers when tumors are located distantly from each other.