Comparative analysis of open and laparoscopic colectomy for malignancy in a developing country

Colorectal resections for malignancy: A pilot study comparing conventional vs freehand robot-assisted laparoscopic colectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colectomy is widely accepted as a safe operation for colorectal cancer, but we have experienced resistance to the introduction of the FreeHand® robotic camera holder to augment laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

AIM

To compare the initial results between conventional and FreeHand® robot-assisted laparoscopic colectomy in Trinidad and Tobago.

METHODS

This was a prospective study of outcomes from all laparoscopic colectomies performed for colorectal carcinoma from November 29, 2021 to May 30, 2022. The following data were recorded: Operating time, conversions, estimated blood loss, hospitalization, morbidity, surgical resection margins and number of nodes harvested. All data were entered into an excel database and the data were analyzed using SPSS ver 20.0.

RESULTS

There were 23 patients undergoing colectomies for malignant disease: 8 (35%) FreeHand®-assisted and 15 (65%) conventional laparoscopic colectomies. There were no conversions. Operating time was significantly lower in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic colectomy (95.13 ± 9.22 vs 105.67 ± 11.48 min; P = 0.045). Otherwise, there was no difference in estimated blood loss, nodal harvest, hospitalization, morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSION

The FreeHand® robot for colectomies is safe, provides some advantages over conventional laparoscopy and does not compromise oncologic standards in the resource-poor Caribbean setting.

Freehand-robot-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery: Initial experience in the Trinidad and Tobago

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is still developing in the Anglophone Caribbean, having been first performed in the region in the year 2011. We report the initial outcomes using a robot camera holder to assist in laparoscopic colorectal operations.

AIM

To report our initial experience using the FreeHand^® robotic camera holder (Freehand 2010 Ltd., Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom) for laparoscopic colorectal surgery in Trinidad & Tobago.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from all patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal resections using the Freehand^® (Freehand 2010 Ltd., Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom) robotic camera holder between September 30, 2021 and April 30, 2022. The following data were recorded: patient demographics, robotic arm setup time, operating time, conversions to open surgery, conversions to a human camera operator, number and duration of intra-operative lens cleaning. At the termination of the operation, before operating notes were completed, the surgeons were administered a questionnaire recording information on ergonomics, user-difficulty, requirement to convert to a human camera operator and their ability to carry out effective movements to control the robot while operating.

RESULTS

Nine patients at a mean age of 58.9 ± 7.1 years underwent colorectal operations using the FreeHand robot: Right hemicolectomies (5), left hemicolectomy (1), sigmoid colectomies (2) and anterior resection (1). The mean robot docking time was 6.33 minutes (Median 6; Range 4-10; SD ± 1.8). The mean duration of operation was 122.33 ± 78.5 min and estimated blood loss was 113.33 ± 151.08 mL. There were no conversions to a human camera holder. The laparoscope was detached from the robot for lens cleaning/defogging an average of 2.6 ± 0.88 times per case, with cumulative mean interruption time of 4.2 ± 2.15 minutes per case. The mean duration of hospitalization was 3.2 ± 1.30 days and there were no complications recorded. When the surgeons were interviewed after operation, the surgeons reported that there were good ergonomics (100%), with no limitation on instrument movement (100%), stable image (100%) and better control of surgical field (100%).

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery is feasible and safe in the resource-poor Caribbean setting, once there is appropriate training.

Colorectal cancer in an Eastern Caribbean nation: are we missing an opportunity for secondary prevention?

Objective.

To establish whether there was any difference in disease stage in patients with screening-detected colorectal cancer (CRC) in a Caribbean country.

Methods.

The mode of presentation (elective vs. emergent), method of diagnosis (screening vs. symptomatic), and disease stage were retrospectively compared in all consecutive patients who had resections for CRC over a five-year period. Early CRC was defined as disease that could be completely resected with no involvement of adjacent organs, lymph nodes, or distant sites. Locally advanced CRC was disease that involved contiguous organs without distant metastases that was still amenable to curative resection.

Results.

There were 97 patients at a mean age of 64.9 ± 12.2 years treated for CRC, and only 21 (21.6%) had their diagnoses made through screening. Significantly more screening-detected lesions were early-stage CRCs (21.7% vs. 9.3%; p < 0.001). At the time of diagnosis, patients who did not have screening-detected lesions had a greater proportion of locally advanced (42.3% vs. 0) and metastatic (26.8% vs. 0) CRC. Those who did not have screening-detected lesions had a greater incidence of emergency presentations at diagnosis (26.8% vs. 0).

Conclusions.

The incidence of screening-detected CRC in this Caribbean nation was low. Consequently, most patients presented with locally advanced or metastatic CRC, for which there is less opportunity to achieve a cure. Significantly more screening-detected lesions were early-stage CRCs. It is time for policymakers to develop a national CRC screening program.

The importance of surgeons and their peers in adoption and diffusion of innovation: An observational study of laparoscopic colectomy adoption and diffusion in England

Little is known about the role of clinicians in accounting for adoption and diffusion of medical innovations, especially within the English National Health System. This study examines the importance of surgical consultants and their work-based networks on the diffusion of an important innovation, minimally invasive elective laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer. The study used linked patient-level and workforce data on 260,110 elective colectomies and 1288 consultants between 2000 and 2014, to examine adoption of laparoscopic colectomy pre- and post-introduction of clinical guidelines and total share of colectomies performed laparoscopically by adopters. Laparoscopy as a share of elective colectomy increased from 0% in 2000 to 53% in 2014. Surgeons, rather than hospitals, were the principal agents accounting for the increase and explain 46.6% of the variance in laparoscopic colectomy use. Female surgeons, surgeons trained outside the United Kingdom, and recent graduates had higher rates of laparoscopy adoption. More experienced surgeons and surgeons with more peers who perform laparoscopy were more likely to adopt, adopt early and have greater use of laparoscopy. Targeting clinicians, rather than hospitals, is central to increasing adoption and diffusion of new medical technologies.

Cochlear Gene Therapy

Over 450 million people worldwide suffer from hearing loss, leading to an estimated economic burden of ∼$750 billion. The past decade has seen significant advances in the understanding of the molecular mechanisms that contribute to hearing, and the environmental and genetic factors that can go awry and lead to hearing loss. This in turn has sparked enormous interest in developing gene therapy approaches to treat this disorder. This review documents the most recent advances in cochlear gene therapy to restore hearing loss, and will cover viral vectors and construct designs, potential routes of delivery into the inner ear, and, lastly, the most promising genes of interest.

Toward standardization of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer in developing countries: A step by step module

BACKGROUND

Despite the proven benefits, laparoscopic colorectal surgery is still underutilized among surgeons especially in developing countries. Also a steep learning is one of the causes of its limited adoption.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the learning curve of single surgeon experience in laparoscopic colectomy and feasibility of implementing a well standardized step by step operative technique to overcome the beginning technical obstacles.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study included 50 patients with carcinoma of the left colon and rectum recruited from the department of surgical oncology at National Cancer Institute, Cairo University in the period 2012-2016. All the procedures were performed through laparoscopic approach. Intra and post-operative data were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age was 49.7±10.6years (range: 33-74years). They were 29 males and 21 females. The mean operation time was 180min (range 100-370min), and the mean blood loss was 350ml (60-600ml). Six patients (12%) were converted to a laparotomy. The median lymph nodes harvest was 12 (range 7-25). The mean time of passing flatus after surgery was 2days (1-4days) and the mean time of passing stools was 3.3days (2-5) days. The median hospitalization period after surgery was 4days (3-12). 5 patients (10%) had postoperative morbidity, major morbidity occurred in one patient.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal cancer is safe and oncologically sound, standardized well-structured laparoscopic technique masters the procedure even in early learning curve setting.

Two-port laparoscopic anterior resection through a self-made glove device versus conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparison of short-term surgical results

Background

The laparoscopic approach has become increasingly incorporated into the development of new surgical procedures. An ever-increasing number of surgeons desire methods that minimize surgical trauma and provide improved cosmetic outcomes. Since 2014, we have performed two-port laparoscopic surgery using a transumbilical multichannel glove port and a 12-mm port. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term surgical results of two-port laparoscopic anterior resection (TPLAR) with those of conventional laparoscopic anterior resection (CLAR) for rectal cancer.

Methods

Between January 2014 and May 2014, a total of 27 patients underwent TPLAR and 30 patients underwent CLAR for the treatment of rectal cancer. The short-term surgical results of these two groups of patients were analyzed retrospectively.

Results

The differences in operative time, blood loss, conversion rate, complication rate, distal resection margin, number of harvested lymph nodes, duration until ambulation, duration until first flatus, length of postoperative hospital stay, and overall hospital costs between the two groups were not significant. The median (range) length of the abdominal incisions of the TPLAR patients was shorter than the length of the CLAR patients (5.1 (4.5–16.3) cm vs 8.2 (7.0–10.0) cm, respectively; p < 0.001). The respective median (range) postoperative pain scores were lower in the TPLAR than in the CLAR patients at 24 h (4 (1–6) h vs 5 (2–8) h; p = 0.045), 48 h (3 (1–4) h vs 4 (range 1–8) h; P = 0.004) and 72 h (1 (0–3) h vs 2 (1–5) h; p = 0.010). The median overall score on the satisfaction-with-abdominal-incision questionnaire of the TPLAR patients was significantly higher (better) than the score of the CLAR patients.

Conclusions

TPLAR for rectal cancer is safe and feasible, with short-term perioperative and oncological outcomes similar to those of CLAR. TPLAR provides less postoperative pain and better cosmetic outcomes.

Cost minimization analysis of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol: a single-centre, case-matched study

Introduction

The goal of modern medical treatment is to provide high quality medical care in a cost-effective environment.

Aim

To assess the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic colorectal surgery combined with the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol (ERP) in Poland.

Material and methods

We designed a single-centre, case-matched study. Economic and clinical data were collected in 3 groups of patients (33 patients in each group): group 1 – patients undergoing laparoscopy with ERP; group 2 – laparoscopy without ERP; group 3 – open resection without ERP. An independent administrative officer, not involved in the treatment process, matched patients for age, sex and type of resection. Primary outcome was cost analysis. It was carried out incorporating institutional costs: hospital bed stay, anaesthesia, surgical procedure and equipment, drugs and complications. Secondary outcomes were length of stay (LOS), readmission and complication rate.

Results

Cost of laparoscopic procedure alone was significantly more expensive than open resection. However, implementation of the ERAS protocol reduced additional costs. Total cost per patient in group 1 was significantly lower than in groups 2 and 3 (EUR 1826 vs. EUR 2355.3 vs. EUR 2459.5, p < 0.0001). Median LOS was 3, 6 and 9 days in groups 1, 2 and 3 respectively (p < 0.001). Postoperative complications were noted in 5 (15.2%), 6 (18.2%) and 13 (39.4%) patients in groups 1, 2, 3 respectively (p = 0.0435).

Conclusions

In a low medical care expenditure country, minimally invasive surgery combined with ERP can be a safe and a cost-effective alternative to open surgery with traditional perioperative care.