Conventional Laparoscopic Colectomy Research Articles

Learning curve and safety of the implementation of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with intracorporeal anastomosis for right-sided colon cancer: results from a propensity score-matched study.

Retrospective studies and randomized controlled trials support the safety of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) for the treatment of right-sided colon cancer (RSCC). Few studies, however, examine the learning curve of this operation and its impact on safety during an implementation period. We aim to evaluate the learning curve and safety of the implementation of laparoscopic CME with intracorporeal anastomosis for RSCC. Consecutive patients undergoing a laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for RSCC between January 2016 and June 2023 were included. Clinical, perioperative, and histopathological variables were collected. Correlation and cumulative sum (CUSUM) analyses between the operating time and case number were performed. Breakpoints of the learning curve were estimated using the broken-line model. CME and conventional laparoscopic right colectomy outcomes were compared after propensity score matching (PSM). Two hundred and ninety patients underwent laparoscopic right colectomy during study period. One hundred and eight met inclusion criteria. After PSM, 56 non-CME and 28 CME patients were compared. CME group had a non-statistically significant tendency to a longer operating time (201 versus 195min; p = 0.657) and a shorter hospital stay (3 versus 4days; p = 0.279). No significant differences were found in total complication rates or their profile. Correlation analysis identified a significant trend toward operating time reduction with increasing case numbers (Pearson correlation coefficient = - 0.624; p = 0.001). According to the CUSUM analysis, an institutional learning curve was deemed completed after 13 cases and the broken-line model identified three phases: learning (1-6 cases), consolidation (7-13 cases), and mastery (after 13 cases). The learning curve of laparoscopic CME for RSCC can be achieved after 13 cases in centers with experience in advanced laparoscopic surgery and surgeons with familiarity with this technique. Its implementation within this setting seems to be as safe as performing a conventional right colectomy.

A commentary on 'Comparative long-term outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis'.

A commentary on 'Comparative long-term outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis'.

Vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for cecal cancer.

Vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) for colorectal cancer utilizes transvaginal access for bowel mobilization, vascular pedicle ligation, oncological resection, and bowel anastomosis, along with subsequent transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE), reducing or eliminating the need for transabdominal access. In this report, we describe the technique of vNOTES right hemicolectomy for cecal cancer, with intracorporeal anastomosis and transvaginal NOSE, including a step-by-step operative video. The patient was a 59-year-old Chinese female (body mass index 32.0kg/m2) with a cT3N0M0 3 cm cecal adenocarcinoma. Posterior colpotomy was created with insertion of a dual-ring wound protector. vNOTES D2 right hemicolectomy witha fully stapled intracorporeal anastomosis was performed via a homemade transvaginal glove port, using extra-long rigid instruments. A 10 mm, 30° rigid laparoscope was used for operative visualization through a transumbilical port, without additional percutaneous trocars. Operative difficulties pertained to suboptimal instrument reach, lack of triangulation, and frequent clashing within the restricted access space. Surgical duration was 300min, with 50ml of blood loss. There was minimal postoperative pain. Return of bowel function occurred on postoperative day 2, with discharge from hospital on postoperative day 3. The patient resumed normal daily activities and regular diet by 1-week post-surgery. Self-reported cosmetic satisfaction score was excellent. No operative complications were observed at 2 months' follow-up. vNOTES right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis is safe and feasible in highly selected colon cancer patients. Operators should be proficient in conventional laparoscopic colectomy and transvaginal NOSE. More experience with the vNOTES technique is required to ascertain best practices.

Comparative long-term outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is currently widely used in left-sided colorectal cancer. Some clinical comparative studies have been conducted, providing evidence of its safety and oncological benefits. However, these studies are typically characterized by small sample sizes and short postoperative follow-up periods. Consequently, in this research, the authors adopt the propensity score matching method to undertake a large-scale retrospective comparative study on NOSES colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer, with the goal of further augmenting the body of evidence-based medical support for NOSES. This retrospective study involved patients who underwent NOSES colectomy and conventional laparoscopic (CL) colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer between January 2014 and April 2021. In the NOSES group, specimens were extracted through the anus with the help of a Cai tube (homemade invention: ZL201410168748.2). The patients were matched at a ratio of 1:1 according to age, sex, BMI, tumor diameter, tumor location (descending and splenic flexure colon/ sigmoid colon/ middle and upper rectum), tumor height from anal verge, ASA grade, previous abdominal surgery, clinical pathologic stage, preoperative CEA. After matching, 132 patients in the NOSES group and 132 patients in the CL group were eligible for analysis. Compared with CL group, NOSES group was associated with decreased postoperative maximum pain score (2.6±0.7 vs. 4.7±1.7, P=0.000), less additional analgesia required (6.8 vs. 34.8%, P=0.000), faster time to passage of flatus (2.3±0.6 days vs. 3.3±0.7 days, P=0.000), less wound infection (0.0 vs. 6.1%, P=0.007), and longer operative time (212.5±45.8min vs. 178.0±43.4min, P=0.000). No significant differences were observed in estimated blood loss, time to resume regular diet, postoperative hospital stay, conversion to open surgery or conventional minilaparotomy, total morbidity, readmission, mortality, pathologic outcomes, and Wexner incontinence score between groups. After a median follow-up of 63.0 months, the 5-year overall survival rates were 88.3 versus 85.0% (P=0.487), disease-free survival rates were 82.9 versus 83.6% (P=0.824), and the local recurrence rates were 4.4 versus 4.0% (P=0.667) in the NOSES and CL groups, respectively. This study suggests that NOSES colectomy using a Cai tube for left-sided colorectal cancer is a safe and feasible option with better cosmetic results, less pain, faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, and comparable long-term clinical and oncologic outcomes to CL colectomy.

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

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

Short-term outcomes of single-incision robotic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer.

Since the da Vinci SP (dVSP) surgical system was introduced, single-incision robotic surgery (SIRS) for colorectal diseases has gained increasing acceptance. Comparison of the short-term outcomes between SIRS using dVSP and those of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CMLS) was performed to verify its efficacy and safety in colon cancer. The medical records of 237 patients who underwent curative resection for colon cancer by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to surgical modality: SIRS (RS group) and CMLS (LS group). Intra- and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Of the 237 patients, 140 were included in the analysis. Patients in the RS group (n = 43) were predominantly female, younger, and had better general performance than those in the LS group (n = 97). The total operation time was longer in the RS group than in the LS group (232.8 ± 46.0 vs. 204.1 ± 41.7min, P < 0.001). The RS group showed faster first flatus passing (2.5 ± 0.9 vs. 3.1 ± 1.2days, P = 0.003) and less opioid analgesic requirement (analgesic withdrawal within 3 postoperative days: 37.2% vs. 18.6%, P = 0.018) than the LS group. The RS group showed a higher immediate postoperative albumin level (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.6 ± 0.4g/dL, P < 0.001) and lower C-reactive protein level (6.6 ± 5.2 vs. 9.3 ± 5.5mg/dL, P = 0.007) than the LS group during the postoperative period. On multivariate analysis after adjusting for deviated patient characteristics, no significant difference was observed in short-term outcomes, except for operation time. SIRS with dVSP showed short-term outcomes comparable with those of CMLS for colon cancer.

Preliminary surgical outcomes of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transrectal specimen extraction: a propensity score matching study of 120 cases (with video).

Compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has many advantages. Laparoscopic right colectomy with transvaginal specimen extraction has been reported, but the safety and feasibility of transrectal specimen extraction in male patients with ascending colon cancer remain to be verified. This study aimed to preliminarily evaluate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transrectal specimen extraction. The study was conducted at a single tertiary medical center in China. A total of 494 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic right colectomy between September 2018 and September 2020 were included. Transrectal specimen extraction was performed in 40 male patients (the NOSES group). Patients in the NOSES group were matched to the conventional laparoscopic group using propensity score matching at a 1:2 ratio. Short-term and long-term outcomes between the two groups were compared and evaluated. Forty patients in the NOSES group and 80 patients in the conventional laparoscopic group were matched for analysis. Baseline characteristics were balanced after propensity matching. The operative features, including operating time, intraoperative bleeding, and the number of harvested lymph nodes, were statistically comparable in both groups. In terms of post-operative recovery, patients in the NOSES group showed preferable outcomes, as evidenced by less post-operative pain and faster return to flatus, defecation, and discharge. The post-operative complications rate, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system, was similar in both groups. No differences in overall survival or disease-free survival were observed between the two groups. Laparoscopic right colectomy with transrectal specimen extraction is oncologically safe. Compared with conventional laparoscopic right colectomy, it can reduce post-operative pain, accelerate post-operative recovery, shorten the hospital stay, and achieve better cosmetic effect.

Comparison between laparoscopic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for left colorectal cancer: a randomized controlled study with 3-year follow-up results

Objective: To evaluate the mid-term efficacy of laparoscopic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) colectomy using the Cai tube in the treatment of left colorectal cancer. Methods: A prospective randomized control trial (China Clinical Trials Registration Number: ChiCTR-OOR-15007060) was performed. Sixty patients with left colorectal cancer at Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery of Zhongshan Hospital from September 2015 to August 2017 were prospectively enrolled. Case inclusion criteria: (1) left colorectal adenocarcinoma (rectal cancer with distance ≥ 8 cm from tumor low margin to anal edge, sigmoid colon cancer, descending colon cancer and left transverse colon cancer) confirmed by preoperative pathology; (2) satisfactory conditions of conventional laparoscopic surgery; (3) maximum diameter of the tumor < 4.5 cm confirmed by preoperative abdominal and pelvic CT or MRI; (4) BMI < 30 kg/m2. Case exclusion criteria: (1) benign lesions, mucinous adenocarcinoma, signet-ring cell carcinoma and other special pathological types of tumors confirmed by preoperative pathological examination; (2) multiple or recurrent cancers; (3) with a history of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; (4) obvious regional infiltration or distant metastasis indicated by preoperative imaging examination; (5) intestinal obstruction, intestinal perforation, etc. Participants were randomly assigned to NOSES group (using the Cai tube) and conventional laparoscopy (CL) group by random number table method. Clinical data between two groups were compared and analyzed, including perioperative conditions, tumor exfoliation cell detection and bacterial culture results of intraperitoneal lavage fluid, postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grading), postoperative pain [visual simulation scoring (VAS) assessment], anal function (Kirwan anal function grading assessment), and postoperative 3-year disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), overall recurrence rate, and local recurrence rate. Results: A total of 60 patients were enrolled, with 30 in the NOSES group and 30 in the CL group. All the patients in the NOSES group successfully completed operation with Cai tube. Baseline data between the two groups were not significantly different (all P>0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between two groups in conversion rate to open surgery, number of lymph node harivested, proximal and distal resection margin of tumor, negative rate of circumferential margin, operation time, blood loss, inflammatory indexes, postoperative anal function, postoperative hospital stay, hospitalization cost, morbidity of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade II or above) (all P>0.05). Compared to the CL group, the NOSES group had lower maximum postoperative VAS score (2.5±0.3 vs. 5.1±0.4, t=3.187, P<0.01), and fewer use of additional postoperative analgesia [6.7% (2/30) vs. 33.3% (10/30),χ2=6.670, P=0.02]. The postoperative time to gas passage was shorter in the NOSES group [(2.2±1.4) days vs. (3.1±1.2) days,P=0.026]. No tumor cells and bacterial contamination were found in abdominal lavage fluid before and after operation in either group. The anal function at postoperative 3-month of all the patients in the NOSES group was Kirwan grade I to II, while in the CL group, anal function of 2 cases (6.7%) was Kirwan grade III, and of 28 cases was also Kirwan grade I to II, whose difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). In the NOSES group and the CL group, 3-year DFS was 96.7% and 83.3% (P=0.090), OS was 100% and 90% (P=0.096), overall recurrence rate was 3.3% and 10.0% (P=0.166), and local recurrence rate was 3.3% and 3.3% (P=0.999), respectively, whose differences were not statistically significant (all P>0.05). Conclusions: In the treatment of left colorectal cancer, compared with conventional laparoscopic colectomy, NOSES colectomy using Cai tube exhibits less scar, less postoperative pain, shorter recovery of gastrointestinal function, and similar mid-term outcomes. Given proper surgical indications, the surgical procedure is safe and feasible.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a retrospective cohort study of the Binational Colorectal Cancer Database.

Robotic right hemicolectomy (RRC) may have technical advantages over the conventional laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) due to higher degrees of rotation, articulation, and tri-dimensional imaging. There is growing literature describing advantages of RRC compared to LRC; however, there is a lack of evidence about safety, oncologic quality of surgery and cost. This study aimed to analyse complication rates, length of stay and nodal harvest in patients undergoing minimally invasive right hemicolectomy for colon cancer from a prospective Australasian colorectal cancer database. This was a retrospective cohort study using nearest neighbour matching. The Binational Colorectal Cancer Audit (BCCA) provided the data for analysis. The primary outcome was length of stay. Secondary outcomes were harvested lymph node count, anastomotic leak, postoperative haemorrhage, abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, wound infections and non-surgical complications. 4977 patients who underwent robotic (n = 146) or laparoscopic (n = 4831) right hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer were included. For RRC, LOS was shorter (5 vs 6.9days, p = 0.01) and nodal harvest was higher (22 vs 19, p = 0.04). For RRC, surgical complications (5.9% vs 14.2%, p < 0.004) and non-surgical complications (4.6% vs 11.7%, p = 0.007) were lower though there was no difference in return to theatre or inpatient death. Robotic right hemicolectomy is associated shorter LOS and marginally higher lymph node count, though this may reflect anastomotic technique rather than surgical platform. Longer term studies are required to establish differences in overall survival, incisional hernia rates and cost effectiveness.

Three-dimensional versus conventional two-dimensional laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer: A 3-year follow-up study.

Background:Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy was developed to overcome the drawbacks of two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy, namely lack of depth perception. However, the benefit of 3D laparoscopy in colorectal surgery is inconclusive. Here, we compare the 3-year follow-up outcomes of 3D and 2D laparoscopic colectomy.Patients and Methods:A total of 91 consecutive patients who underwent either 3D or 2D laparoscopy colectomy from October 2015 to November 2017 by a single surgical team for colon cancer were enrolled. Data were collected from a prospectively constructed database, including clinico-pathological features and operative parameters. The pathological results, recurrence, survival and systemic treatment were collected from the Taiwan Cancer Database.Results:There were 47 patients in the 3D group and 44 in the 2D group. There were no significant differences in characteristics of patients, operation data, pathological results, complications, operative time, blood loss or the number of lymph node harvested between the two groups. In addition, disease-free survival and overall survival were equal between the two groups.Conclusions:This is the first long-term result of a 3D laparoscopic colectomy. In our 3-year follow-up, there was no difference in long-term outcomes between 2D and 3D laparoscopy for colorectal surgery in an experienced centre.

Natural orifice specimen extraction for colorectal surgery: Early adoption in a Western population.

Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) challenges the limits of minimally invasive colorectal surgery by exploiting a natural opening for specimen delivery. Technically challenging, it is less painful, requires smaller wounds and abolishes the possibility of incisional hernia. These advantages of NOSE are seen in the obese (body mass index [BMI] >30kg/m2 ). This audit aims to demonstrate the feasibility of NOSE colectomy in an Australian population. Prospective data collected from 2007 to the present were retrospectively analysed. Only patients with mucosally benign colorectal conditions were included: complex diverticulosis, post-malignant polypectomy and volvulus. Left sided mucosal malignancies were excluded. Study end-points included postoperative length of stay, anastomotic leak rate and wound complications. In total, 159 patients underwent NOSE, mean age 59years (19-88), mean BMI 28.2kg/m2 (17-45). Ten (6.2%) patients developed retroperitoneal small bowel herniation; seven required further surgery. There were five (3.1%) anastomotic leaks, seven (4.4%) postoperative ileus and three (1.9%) anastomotic bleeds. One (0.6%) patient had a superficial wound infection. There were no port site hernias. Patients with BMI <30kg/m2 (98 patients) and BMI >30kg/m2 (59 patients) were compared; there was no difference in anastomotic leak rate (P=0.60), complication rate (P=0.71) and length of stay (P=0.63). However, duration of operation increased with BMI (P=0.000). This large series of NOSE colectomy from Australia suggests that NOSE is comparable to conventional laparoscopic colectomy in terms of postoperative outcome. Given that obesity has not featured in the NOSE literature, our study suggests that NOSE, for benign disease, is safe in obese patients, without added morbidity.

Robotic complete mesocolic excision for transverse colon cancer can be performed with a morbidity profile similar to that of conventionallaparoscopic colectomy.

In minimally invasive surgery, complete mesocolic excision (CME) for transverse colon cancer is challenging; thus, non-CME resections are commonly preferred when laparoscopy is used. Robotic technology has been developed to reduce the limitations of laparoscopy. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether robotic CME for transverse colon cancer can be performed with short-term outcomes similar to those of laparoscopic conventional colectomy (CC). A retrospective review of 118 consecutive patients having robotic CME or laparoscopic CC for transverse colon cancer in two specialized centers between May 2011 and September 2018 was performed. Perioperative 30-day outcomes of the two procedures were compared. There were 38 and 80 patients in the robotic CME group and laparoscopic CC group, respectively. The groups were comparable regarding preoperative characteristics. Intraoperative results were similar, including blood loss (median 50 vs 25ml), complications (5.3% vs 3.8%), and conversions (none vs 7.5%). The rate of intracorporeal anastomosis was significantly higher (86.8% vs 20.0%), mean operative time was longer (325.0 ± 123.2 vs 159.3 ± 56.1min (p < 0.001), and the mean number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the robotic CME group (46.1 ± 22.2 vs 39.1 ± 17.8, p = 0.047). There were only minor differences in length of hospital stay (7.2 ± 3.1 vs 7.9 ± 4.0days), anastomotic leak (none vs 2.6%), bleeding (none vs 1.3%), surgical site infections (10.5% vs 12.5%), and reoperations (2.6% vs 6.3%). Robotic CME can be performed with a similar morbidity profile as laparoscopic CC for transverse colon cancer along with a higher rate of intracorporeal anastomosis, and higher number of lymph nodes retrieved, but longer operative times.

Three-Port Laparoscopic Right Colectomy Versus Conventional Five-Port Laparoscopy for Right-Sided Colon Cancer.

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of three-port laparoscopic right colectomy (3-LRC) for right-sided colon cancer compared with conventional five-port laparoscopic right colectomy (5-LRC). One hundred sixty-three patients diagnosed with right-sided colon adenocarcinoma underwent laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) between April 2011 and December 2017. Seventy-four of these patients underwent 3-LRC procedure and 89 patients underwent 5-LRC. Clinical characteristics, perioperative short-term outcomes, and pathologic data were analyzed. There were no differences in TNM stage, tumor location, estimated blood loss, complications, and open conversion rates. The operation time was shorter in the 3-LRC group than in 5-LRC group (140.9 ± 27.5 minutes versus 178.2 ± 38.2 minutes; P = .001). The number of harvested lymph nodes (28.5 ± 13.9 versus 22.6 ± 11.7; P = .004) was also higher in the 3-LRC group. The first passage of flatus and first oral diet were significantly faster in the 3-LRC group than in the 5-LRC group (2.8 ± 1.0 days versus 4.0 ± 1.2 days; P = .001, 3.6 ± 2.9 days versus 5.0 ± 1.5 days; P = .001). The number of patients who required analgesics is less in the 3-LRC group (32.4% versus 43.8%; P = .583). 3-LRC for right-sided colon cancer is technically feasible and is associated with a short operation time. We believe that 3-LRC effectively reduces the costs associated with equipment and manpower and represents a standard procedure.

Left colon resection with transrectal specimen extraction: current status.

Full laparoscopic left colectomy with transrectal specimen extraction is proposed as an improvement of the minimally invasive surgical technique. This paper reviews in detail the current status of left-sided colectomy and upper rectum resection with transrectal specimen extraction. A systematic review was performed of all types of publications on colorectal resection with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE). We only included studies reporting on left colectomy, sigmoidectomy, and high anterior resection with transrectal specimen extraction (TRSE), excluding transanal (TASE), transvaginal, or transcolonic specimen extraction. Surgical techniques, patient characteristics, and outcomes were reviewed in detail. Thirty-five papers reported on TRSE (2 randomized clinical trials, 7 case-matched series, 19 case series, 5 case reports, and 2 articles on surgical technique). We found a wide variety of innovative anastomotic and specimen extraction techniques. After excluding duplicates and papers reporting mixed TRSE and TASE results, outcomes in patients undergoing TRSE from 23 publications showed a conversion rate to conventional laparoscopy of 3.7% (21/559), overall morbidity 9.5% (53/559) [major in 2.9% (16/559), intra-abdominal infection in 2.1% (12/559)]. No mortality was reported. Postoperative anal incontinence was rarely reported. Several studies showed a decrease in postoperative pain and some in length of hospital stay. Colectomy with TRSE is feasible and seems safe in selected patients. Reported outcomes seem in general similar to conventional laparoscopic colectomy with a possible benefit in postoperative pain and length of hospital stay. Obvious selection bias and lack of high quality trials do not allow firm conclusions to be drawn.

Procedural difficulty differences according to tumor location do not compromise the clinical outcome of laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer: a retrospective analysis.

Laparoscopic colectomy procedures and their corresponding difficulty levels may vary depending on the tumor location within the colon, and a laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central vascular ligation (CVL) would require more proficiency than a conventional laparoscopic colectomy. We aimed to report our laparoscopic CME with CVL data and to investigate the clinical outcome differences of laparoscopic CME with CVL by various tumor sub-site locations. Prospectively collected clinical data of consecutive patients who received laparoscopic colectomy for primary colon cancer between April 1995 and December 2010 from single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. All of the included surgery was performed on the basis of CME with CVL principle with no-touch isolation technique. Data were analyzed and compared among three groups; patients who received right or extended right hemicolectomy (group A, n = 142), transverse colectomy or left or extended left hemicolectomy (group B, n = 59), and sigmoidectomy or anterior resection (group C, n = 210). Female patients were more common in group A (53.5% vs. 37.3% vs. 39.5%, p = 0.020). Other baseline characteristics were comparable. Operative time was shorter in group C than the other groups (309.0 ± 74.7 vs. 324.3 ± 89.1 vs. 280.1 ± 93.1 min, p = 0.000). There was no significant difference among groups in perioperative complication and patient recovery. Five-year overall survival, disease-free survival and local recurrence rate showed no difference for a median follow up period of 73 (1–120) months. In conclusion, laparoscopic tumor-specific CME and CVL for colon cancer can be performed with comparable short- and long-term outcomes regardless of tumor sub-site location except for the operative time.

Long-term Outcomes of Single-Site Laparoscopic Colectomy With Complete Mesocolic Excision for Colon Cancer: Comparison With Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Colectomy Using Propensity Score Matching.

Complete mesocolic excision has been suggested to improve oncological outcomes for patients with colon cancer. However, the long-term outcomes of single-site laparoscopic colectomy with complete mesocolic excision remain unclear. We evaluated the long-term outcomes of single-site laparoscopic colectomy with complete mesocolic excision compared with conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer, as well as the short-term outcomes. This is a single-center, retrospective study. The study was conducted at Osaka University Hospital in Japan. A total of 971 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer between 2008 and 2014 were included. Of these patients, 517 were analyzed using propensity score matching (231 with single-site laparoscopic colectomy and 286 with conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy). Recurrence, survival, intraoperative morbidity, and postoperative complications were analyzed. Before propensity score matching, the single-site laparoscopic colectomy group had greater proportions of women and of patients with right-sided and early stage tumors compared with the conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy group. After matching, the 2 groups each included 200 patients and did not significantly differ in any patient characteristics. The median follow-up period was 41.4 months. The 2 groups showed similar rates of intraoperative morbidity (p = 0.22) and postoperative complications (p = 0.87). Rates of 3-year disease-free and overall survival in single-site laparoscopic colectomy and conventional, multiport, laparoscopic colectomy groups were 95.5% and 91.3% (p = 0.44) and 100.0% and 98.7% (p = 0.24). The 3-year disease-free and overall survival rates in each stage did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. This study was limited by its retrospective nature. Single-site laparoscopic colectomy with complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer provided acceptable perioperative outcomes and oncological outcomes, similar to those achieved with conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy. Evidence accumulation from randomized controlled trials will be necessary to promote the wide acceptance of single-site laparoscopic colectomy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A326.

Hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery colectomy versus conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colonic tumors: intermediate follow up of a randomized trial

Background: In 2009, we have described a novel technique of laparoscopic colectomy without abdominal incision [hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) colectomy] where laparoscopic dissection and intra-corporeal anastomosis were performed as usual but the specimen was delivered through the anus with the use of transanal endoscopic operation (TEO) device set-up without mini-laparotomy. We have completed a randomized trial comparing this technique with conventional laparoscopic colectomy (CL) for left sided colonic tumors, and early short term results had showed that in selected group of patients, they can enjoy the full benefit of minimally invasive surgery with significant lesser wound pain as well as a lower wound infection rate. This study is a follow up of previous trial, and aims to report immediate outcome between the two groups. Method: All 70 patients including 35 patients in the hybrid NOTES group and 35 patients in conventional colectomy group were continued to follow up in our outpatient clinic with regular surveillance. Patients were compared for clinicopathological variables, disease recurrence and survival rates. Results: Clinicopathological details were comparable between the two groups. Within median follow up of 37–45 months in the two groups, no statistically significant difference was observed in disease recurrence rate (conventional: 8.57%; hybrid: 5.71%; P value: 0.22) and 3-year disease free survival rates (conventional: 42%; hybrid: 62%; P value: 0.144). While the overall 3-year survival rate is statistically shorter in the conventional group (conventional: 54%; hybrid: 71%; P value Conclusions: It is safe for us to offer hybrid colectomy for selected patients with left sided colonic cancer, without adversely affect their oncological outcome and survival, while at the same time, benefit of minimally invasive surgery can be fully expressed.

Single-incision versus standard multi-incision laparoscopic colectomy in patients with malignant or benign colonic disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis and assessment of the evidence.

BackgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) requires only one umbilical port site and (depending on technique) a specimen extraction site.The aim of this study was the assessment of the available evidence for the comparison of SILC to conventional multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MLC) in adult patients, in whom elective colectomy is indicated because of malignant or benign disease. First, previous meta-analyses on this topic were assessed. Secondly, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, was performed.MethodsElectronic literature searches (CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE; up to March 2016) were performed. Additionally, we searched clinical trials registries and abstracts from surgical society meetings. For meta-analysis, risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals were calculated and pooled. The quality of previous meta-analyses was evaluated against established criteria (AMSTAR) and their reported results were investigated for consistency.ResultsWe identified 6 previous meta-analyses of mostly low methodological quality (AMSTAR total score: 2 − 5 out of 11 items). To fill the evidence gaps, all these meta-analyses had included non-randomised studies, but usually without assessing their risk of bias. In our systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials exclusively, we included two randomised controlled trials with a total of 82 colorectal cancer patients. There was insufficient evidence to clarify whether SILC leads to less local complications (RR = 0.52, 95 % CI 0.14 − 1.94) or lower mortality (1 death per treatment group). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SILC group (MD = -1.20 days, 95 % CI -1.95 to -0.44). One of the two studies found postoperative pain intensity to be lower at the first day. We also identified 7 ongoing trials with a total sample size of over 1000 patients.ConclusionThe currently available study results are too sparse to detect (or rule out) relevant differences between SILC and MLC. The quality of the current evidence is low, and the additional analysis of non-randomised data attempts, but does not solve this problem. SILC should still be considered as an experimental procedure, since the evidence of well-designed randomised controlled trials is too sparse to allow any recommendation.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

To determine the effect of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) for colorectal cancer on short-term clinical and oncological outcomes by comparison with multiport conventional laparoscopic colectomy (CLC). A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE for the time period of 2008 to December 2014 to retrieve all relevant literature. The search terms were "laparoscopy", "single incision", "single port", "single site", "SILS", "LESS" and "colorectal cancer". Publications were included if they were randomized controlled trials, case-matched controlled studies, or comparative studies, in which patients underwent single-incision (SILS or LESS) laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Studies were excluded if they were non-comparative, or not including surgery involving the colon or rectum. A total of 15 studies with 589 patients who underwent SILC for colorectal cancer were selected. No significant differences between the groups were noted in terms of mortality or morbidity. The benefit of the SILC approach included reduction in conversion rate to laparotomy, but there were no significant differences in other short-term clinical outcomes between the groups. Satisfactory oncological surgical quality was also demonstrated for SILC for the treatment of colorectal cancer with a similar average lymph node harvest and proximal and distal resection margin length as multiport CLC. SILC can be performed safely with similar short-term clinical and oncological outcomes as multiport CLC.

Hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery colectomy versus conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colonic tumors: intermediate follow up of a randomized trial

Hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery colectomy versus conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colonic tumors: intermediate follow up of a randomized trial