Short-term results in a population based study indicate advantage for minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery versus open.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine if minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for rectal cancer is non-inferior to open surgery (OPEN) regarding adequacy of cancer resection in a population based setting. METHODS: All 9,464 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer 2012-2018 who underwent curative surgery were included from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: Positive circumferential resection margin (CRM < 1 mm) and positive resection margin (R1). Non-inferiority margins used were 2.4% and 4%. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: 30- and 90-day mortality, clinical anastomotic leak, re-operation < 30 days, 30- and 90-day re-admission, length of stay (LOS), distal resection margin < 1 mm and < 12 resected lymph nodes. Analyses were performed by intention-to-treat using unweighted and weighted multiple regression analyses. RESULTS: The CRM was positive in 3.8% of the MIS group and 5.4% of the OPEN group, risk difference -1.6% (95% CI -1.623, -1.622). R1 was recorded in 2.8% of patients in the MIS group and in 4.4% of patients in the OPEN group, risk difference -1.6% (95% CI -1.649, -1.633). There were no differences between the groups in adjusted unweighted and weighted analyses. All analyses demonstrated decreased mortality and re-admissions at 30 and 90 days as well as shorter LOS following MIS. CONCLUSIONS: In this population based setting MIS for rectal cancer was non-inferior to OPEN regarding adequacy of cancer resection with favorable short-term outcomes.

Short term results in a population based study indicate advantage for laparoscopic colon cancer surgery versus open.

The aim of this study was to compare LAP with OPEN regarding short-term mortality, morbidity and completeness of the cancer resection for colon cancer in a routine health care setting using population based register data. All 13,683 patients who were diagnosed 2012-2018 and underwent elective surgery for right-sided or sigmoid colon cancer were included from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and the National Patient Registry. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, reoperation, readmission and positive resection margin (R1). Weighted and unweighted multi regression analyses were performed. There were no difference in 30-day mortality: LAP (0.9%) and OPEN (1.3%) (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.62-1.29, P = 0.545). The weighted analyses showed an increased 90-day mortality following OPEN, P < 0.001. Re-operations and re-admission were more frequent after OPEN and length of hospital stay was 2.9 days shorter following LAP (P < 0.001). R1 resections were significantly more common in the OPEN group in the unweighted and weighted analysis with P = 0.004 and P < 0.001 respectively. Therefore, the favourable short-term outcomes following elective LAP versus OPEN resection for colon cancer in routine health care indicate an advantage of laparoscopic surgery.

Long-term oncological outcomes for minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer-a population-based nationwide study with a non-inferiority design.

AIM: The study aimed to compare 5-year overall survival in a national cohort of patients undergoing curative abdominal resection for colon cancer by minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or by the open (OPEN) technique. METHODS: All patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 in Sweden with pathological Union International Contre le Cancer Stages I-III colon cancer localized in the caecum, ascending colon, hepatic flexure or sigmoid colon and those who underwent curative right sided hemicolectomy, sigmoid resection or high anterior resection by MIS or OPEN were included. Patients were identified in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry from which all data were retrieved. The analyses were performed as intention-to-treat and the relationship between surgical technique (MIS or OPEN) and overall mortality within 5 years was analysed. For the primary research question a non-inferiority hypothesis was assumed with a statistical power of 90%, a one-side type I error of 2.5% and a non-inferiority margin of 2%. For the secondary analyses, multilevel survival regression models with the patients matched by propensity scores were employed, adjusted for patient- and tumour-related variables. RESULTS: A total of 11 605 pathological Union International Contre le Cancer Stages I-III patients were included with 3297 MIS (28.4%) and 8308 OPEN (71.6%) and were followed until 31 December 2020. The primary analysis demonstrated superiority for MIS compared to OPEN. The multilevel survival regression analyses confirmed that 5-year overall survival was higher in MIS with a hazard ratio of 0.874 (95% confidence interval 0.791-0.965), and if excluding pT4 the outcome was similar, with a hazard ratio of 0.847 (95% confidence interval 0.756-0.948). CONCLUSION: This observational study demonstrated that MIS was favourable to OPEN with regard to 5-year overall survival. These results support the use of laparoscopic colon cancer surgery in routine practice.

Long term oncological outcomes for laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer - A population-based nationwide noninferiority study.

AIM: The aim of this work was to compare the 5-year overall survival in a national cohort of patients undergoing curative abdominal resection for rectal cancer by laparoscopic (LAP) or open (OPEN) surgery. METHOD: All patients diagnosed with clinical Stage I-III rectal cancer and who underwent LAP or OPEN abdominal curative surgery in Sweden between 2010 and 2016 were retrieved from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. A noninferiority study design was employed with a statistical power of 90%, a one-side type I error of 2.5% and a noninferiority margin of 2%. The analyses were performed as intention-to-treat and the relationship between surgical technique and overall mortality within 5 years was analysed. Multilevel regression models with the patients matched by propensity scores adjusted for patient- and tumour-related variables were used. RESULTS: A total of 8410 Stage I-III cancer patients were included. This group underwent 2094 LAP (24.9%) and 6316 OPEN (75.1%) procedures and were followed until 31 December 2020. Multivariable Cox regression demonstrated that 5-year overall survival was higher in the LAP group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.877; 95% CI 0.775-0.993]. [Correction added on 21 November 2022, after first online publication: In the preceding sentence, the CI value for LAP group has been corrected from "0.877" to "0.775" in this version.] The outcome was similar when multiple imputation and propensity score matching were employed. When cT4 patients were excluded there was no difference (HR 0.885; 95% CI 0.790-1.033). At 5-years' follow-up local recurrence was not different, at 2.9% for the LAP group and 3.6% for the OPEN group (p = 0.075), while metastatic disease was more frequent in the OPEN group (19.6% compared with 15.6% for LAP; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the LAP technique was not inferior to OPEN surgery with regard to overall 5-year survival. These results support the use of laparoscopic surgery.

Single-dermatome single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

We describe a novel single-incision laparoscopy right hemicolectomy technique using a single-dermatomal, muscle-splitting approach through a 4-cm incision located between the right anterior superior iliac spine and pubic tubercle. This new technique may be superior to traditional single-incision laparoscopy colectomy with the potential benefits of less post-operative pain, lower opioid requirements, lower risk of incisional hernia and better cosmesis but requires further validation.

Bowel Obstruction and Ventral Hernia After Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer in A Randomized Trial (COLOR II).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of bowel obstruction, incisional, and parastomal hernia following laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been adopted worldwide, after trials reported similar oncological outcomes compared with open surgery. Little is known about long-term morbidity, including bowel obstruction, incisional, and parastomal hernia following surgery. METHODS: Patients included in the international, multicenter, noninferior, open-label, randomized COLOR II trial were followed for five years. Primary endpoint was local recurrence at 3-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included bowel obstruction, incisional and parastomal hernia within 5 years, and the current article reports on these secondary endpoints. RESULTS: All 1044 patients included in the COLOR II trial were analyzed. There was no difference in risk of bowel obstruction, incisional, or parastomal hernia following laparoscopic or open surgery for rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: Based on long-term morbidity outcomes, laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer could be considered a routine technique as there are no differences with open surgery.