Comparison of laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer with and without routine resection of the visceral branches of internal iliac artery.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to explore the safety and feasibility of the modified lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) with routine resection of the visceral branches of internal iliac vessels (IIVs) for mid-low-lying rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Consecutive patients undergoing LLND for rectal cancer were divided into the routine visceral branches of the IIVs resection group (RVR group) and the NRVR group (without routine resection). The main outcomes were postoperative complications and the number of lateral lymph nodes harvested. RESULTS: From 2012 to 2021, a total of 75 and 57 patients were included in the RVR and NRVR group, respectively. The operative time was reduced in the RVR group (p = 0.020). No significant difference was observed between the two groups for the incidence of total, major, or minor postoperative complications. Pathologically confirmed LLNM were 24 (32%) patients in the RVR group and 12 (21.1%) in the NRVR group (p = 0.162). The number of lateral lymph nodes harvested had no significant difference between two groups (11 vs. 12, p = 0.329). CONCLUSION: LLND with routine resection of visceral branches of IIVs is safe and feasible, which brings no major complication or long-term urinary disorder.

Low Hartmann's procedure versus abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer, a propensity score matching cohort study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare low Hartmann's procedure (LHP) with abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer (RC) regarding postoperative complications. METHOD: RC patients receiving radical LHP or APR from 2015 to 2019 in our center were retrospectively enrolled. Patients' demographic and surgical information was collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline information. The primary outcome was the incidence of major complications. All the statistical analysis was performed by SPSS 22.0 and R. RESULTS: 342 individuals were primarily included and 134 remained after PSM with a 1:2 ratio (50 in LHP and 84 in APR). Patients in the LHP group were associated with higher tumor height (P < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the two groups for the incidence of major complications (6.0% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.290), and severe pelvic abscess (2% vs. 0%, P = 0.373). However, the occurrence rate of minor complications was significantly higher in the LHP group (52% vs. 21.4%, P < 0.001), and the difference mainly lay in abdominal wound infection (10% vs. 0%, P = 0.006) and bowel obstruction (16% vs. 4.8%, P = 0.028). LHP was not the independent risk factor of pelvic abscess in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated a comparable incidence of major complications between LHP and APR. LHP was still a reliable alternative in selected RC patients when primary anastomosis was not recommended.

Effect of Tumor Location on Outcome After Laparoscopic Low Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dissection of the distal anterolateral aspect of the mesorectum remains a surgical challenge for low rectal cancer, posing a higher risk of residual mesorectum, which might lead to the increased incidence of local recurrence for patients with anterior wall involvement. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the effect of tumor location on outcome after laparoscopic low rectal cancer surgery. DESIGN: This is a single-center, retrospective study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at West China Hospital in China. PATIENTS: Patients with low rectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision from 2011 to 2016 were enrolled. Patients were divided into anterior and nonanterior groups according to tumor location. Propensity score matching analysis was used to reduce the selection bias. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was local recurrence. The secondary end points included overall survival, disease-free survival, and the positive rate of circumferential resection margin. RESULTS: A total of 404 patients were included, and 176 pairs were generated by propensity score matching analysis. Multivariate analysis showed that anterior location was an independent risk factor of local recurrence (HR, 12.6; p = 0.006), overall survival (HR, 3.0; p < 0.001), and disease-free survival (HR, 2.3; p = 0.001). For patients with clinical stage II/III or T3/4, anterior location remained a prognostic factor for higher local recurrence and poorer survival. Local recurrence was rare in patients with clinical stage II/III (1.4%) or T3/4 (1.5%) tumors that were not located anteriorly. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior location is an independent risk factor of local recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival for low rectal cancer. More strict and selective use of neoadjuvant therapy should be considered for patients who have clinical stage II/III or T3/4 tumors that are not located anteriorly. A larger cohort study is warranted to validate the prognostic role of anterior location for low rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B622. IMPACTO DE LA LOCALIZACIN DEL TUMOR EN EL RESULTADO POSTERIOR A CIRUGA LAPAROSCPICA DE CNCER DE RECTO INFERIOR UN PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN POR ANLISIS DE CONCORDANCIA: ANTECEDENTES:La disección de la cara anterolateral distal del mesorrecto sigue siendo un desafío quirúrgico en el cáncer de recto inferior, constituyendo un alto riesgo de mesorrecto residual, que podría ocasionar una mayor incidencia de recurrencia local en pacientes con compromiso de la pared anterior.OBJETIVO:El objetivo del estudio fue evaluar el efecto de la localización del tumor en el resultado posterior a la cirugía laparoscópica de cáncer de recto inferior.DISEÑO:Estudio restrospectivo de un único centro.ÁMBITO:El estudio se realizó en el West China Hospital en China.PACIENTES:Pacientes con cáncer de recto inferior que se sometieron a excisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica entre 2011 y 2016. Los pacientes se dividieron en grupos, anterior y no anterior, según la localización del tumor. Se utilizó un puntaje de propensión por análisis de concordancia para reducir el sesgo de selección.PRINCIPALES VARIABLES EVALUADAS:El objetivo principal fue la recurrencia local. Los objetivos secundarios incluyeron la sobrevida global, la sobrevida libre de enfermedad y la tasa de positividad del margen de resección circunferencial.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 404 pacientes y se generaron 176 pares mediante un puntaje de propensión por análisis de concordancia. El análisis multivariado mostró que la localización anterior era un factor de riesgo independiente de recidiva local (HR = 12,6, p = 0,006), sobrevida global (HR = 3,0, p <0,001) y sobrevida libre de enfermedad (HR = 2,3, p = 0,001). En pacientes con estadio clínico II /III o T3/4, la ubicación anterior continuó como un factor pronóstico para una mayor recurrencia local y una menor sobrevida. La recidiva local fue excepcional en pacientes con tumores en estadio clínico II / III (1,4%) o T3 / 4 (1,5%) que no estaban localizados hacia anterior.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su carácter retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:La localización anterior es un factor de riesgo independiente de recidiva local, sobrevida global y sobrevida libre de enfermedad para el cáncer de recto inferior. Se debe considerar un uso más estricto y selectivo de la terapia neoadyuvante para pacientes en estadio clínico II / III o T3 /4 de tumores que no se localizan hacia anterior. Se justifica un estudio de cohorte más grande para validar el impacto pronóstico de una ubicación anterior del cáncer de recto inferior. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B622. (Traducción-Dr. Lisbeth Alarcon-Bernes).

Distinctive features of small vessels on the mesorectal and parietal pelvic fascia as important landmarks in guiding precise inter-fascial dissection for low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The confinement of the pelvis and the complexity of pelvic fascial anatomy still pose difficulties in achieving good quality surgery for rectal cancer. We aimed to introduce small vessels on the mesorectal fascia and the parietal pelvic fascia as novel landmarks to aid in the identification of the inter-fascial dissection plane. Besides, the perioperative, survival, and functional outcomes of this surgical technique were reported. METHODS: We first described that small vessels running on the mesorectal fascia and the parietal pelvic fascia showed distinctive features, which included (1) small vessels on the parietal fascia took the same orientation as the ureter or the sympathetic and parasympathetic nerve; (2) small vessels on the mesorectal fascia were coursing cranially and medially on the anterolateral aspect, and medially and caudally on the posterolateral aspect; (3) small vessels on the mesorectal fascia became invisible at the interface between the pelvic wall and the mesorectal fascia. These features could be applied in fascial identification and separation. Then, we reported the outcomes of low rectal cancer surgery with small vessels-guided technique. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2016, a consecutive series of 310 patients with low rectal cancer underwent laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with small vessels-guided technique. The positive rate of circumferential resection margin was 3.2%, and complete mesorectal excision was achieved in 97.8% (303/310) patients. The 3-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence rates were 89.4%, 79.7%, and 2.6%, respectively. The urinary function was considered normal in 96.8% of patients, with a moderate dysfunction in 3.2% of patients. Besides, 29.5% of male patients occurred sexual function injury. CONCLUSION: Distinctive features of small vessels on the parietal pelvic fascia and the mesorectal fascia can serve as novel and additive landmarks in guiding precise inter-fascial dissection for low rectal cancer.

Frailty index is useful for predicting postoperative morbidity in older patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Many assessment tools have been used to identify frail surgical patients. This study was designed to explore the prediction value of the frailty index (FI) for postoperative morbidity in older patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: Between January 2019 and September 2020, we conducted a prospective study in our hospital, and patients aged over 65 years were enrolled. The FI assessment was conducted by two specialist nurses based on the 38-item scale, and patients were considered frail if the FI score was ≥ 0.25. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative morbidity. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to find the risk factors related to postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: A total of 246 consecutive patients were enrolled, for whom the median age was 72.0 [interquartile range (IQR): 67.0-77.0] years old, and 175 (71.1%) were male. Of these, 47 (19.1%) were frail. Patients with frailty were associated with older age (p < 0.001), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade (p = 0.006), lower body mass index (p = 0.001), lower albumin (p = 0.003) and haemoglobin (p < 0.001) levels, increased blood loss (p = 0.034), increased risk of postoperative morbidity (p < 0.001), increased median length of stay (p = 0.017), and increased median postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.003). Multivariable analysis revealed that ASA grade [odds ratio (OR): 2.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19-5.64, p = 0.016], FI score (OR 7.68, 95% CI 3.19-18.48, p < 0.001) and surgical complexity (OR 22.83, 95% CI 5.46-95.51, p < 0.001) were independent predictors of 30-day postoperative morbidity. However, for patients with major surgery, FI score was the only independent predictor (OR 8.67, 95% CI 3.23-23.25, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Frailty was associated with adverse perioperative outcomes, and the 38-item FI scale was a useful frailty screening tool for older patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery. For patients with major surgery, frailty was a more reliable predictor of postoperative 30-day morbidity than age and ASA grade.

A Modified Technique of Laparoscopic Lateral Lymph Node Dissection Combining Fascia-Oriented Dissection and Routine Upfront Distal Visceral Vessels Ligation for Mid- to Low-Lying Rectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Lateral pelvic recurrence can be a cause of local failure after surgery for low rectal cancer. Lateral lymph node dissection is often performed in East Asia for patients with enlarged lateral lymph nodes or because of the presence of risk factors. However, the outcomes of the conventional lateral lymph node dissection are unsatisfactory, with a considerably high local recurrence rate for patients with positive lateral nodes. Here, we introduce a modified technique to improve lateral nodes clearance. TECHNIQUE: This modified technique has 4 key steps: 1) separation of the ureterohypogastric nerve fascia medially, 2) identification of the visceral pelvic fascia and dissection along the inferior vesical or vaginal veins down to the pelvic floor, 3) division of the distal ends of visceral vessels according to the orientation of ureterohypogastric nerve fascia and visceral pelvic fascia for better nerve preservation, and 4) en bloc dissection through a lateral approach over the surfaces of the sacral plexus and piriformis muscle to reveal the course of distal internal iliac vessels before the division of visceral veins. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients underwent laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection successively with no conversion. The median blood loss for each lateral procedure was 37.5 mL (range, 0-300.0 mL). Eleven lateral nodes (median; range, 1-22 lateral nodes) were harvested for each lateral side. There was no perioperative mortality, and 4 patients developed major complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV). CONCLUSION: This modified technique characterized by the routine division of visceral vessels based on ureterohypogastric nerve fascia and visceral pelvic fascia is feasible and safe. It provides good lymph node harvest, autonomic nerve preservation, and improved bleeding control. Additional investigation is warranted to evaluate the safety, functional outcomes, and oncologic outcomes.

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies.

PURPOSE: To compare single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and multiport laparoscopic surgery (MLS) for colorectal cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies comparing SILS and MLS for colorectal cancer were enrolled. Outcomes of interests included intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and survival outcomes. RESULTS: Sixteen studies (6 RCTs and 10 PSM studies) published between 2012 and 2020 with a total of 2425 patients were enrolled. Compared with MLS, SILS was associated with less postoperative pain at postoperative day (POD) 1 (P = 0.02, MWD = -0.73, 95%CI: -1.37, -0.09) and POD2 (P < 0.001, MWD= -1.10, 95%CI: -1.45, -0.74) and shorter length of total incision length (P < 0.001, MWD = -3.31, 95%CI: -3.95, -2.67). No differences were observed in terms of operative time, blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative complications, incision hernia, and pathological or survival outcomes between SILS and MLS. Subgroup analysis for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid colon cancer showed that the SILS group was only associated with less postoperative pain and shorter total incision length. The surgical and pathological outcomes were comparable between SILS and MLS. CONCLUSIONS: SILS is a beneficial alternative to MLS in select colorectal cancer patients, especially for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid cancer, with better cosmetic effects and less postoperative pain. Simultaneously, SILS does not compromise intraoperative and postoperative complications, surgical quality, or long-term outcomes.

Prediction of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula after pancreatic surgery using preoperative CT scan: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Body composition analysis has emerged as a practical tool for predicting outcomes following pancreatic surgery. However, the impact of body composition disorders on clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) remains inconclusive. The aim of this study was to review and analyse whether radiographically assessed body composition is predictive of CR-POPF. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched up to January 2020 to identify relevant studies. CR-POPF was defined according to the definition and grading system proposed by the International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS). Pooled odds ratios (OR) for CR-POPF were calculated to evaluate the predictive values of radiographically assessed body composition. RESULTS: Fifteen studies published between 2008 and 2019 with a total of 3136 patients were included. There was a significant increase in the incidence of CR-POPF in patients with visceral obesity (OR 2.97, 95% CI 2.05-4.29, P < 0.00001) and sarcopenic obesity (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.31-6.34, P = 0.009). Conversely, the impact of sarcopenia (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.65-1.28, P = 0.59) and low muscle attenuation (MA) on CR-POPF did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Preoperative visceral obesity and sarcopenic obesity are more effective at predicting CR-POPF than decreased muscle quantity and quality. This finding may lead to appropriate management and early intervention of patients at risk of CR-POPF.

Low-residual diet versus clear-liquid diet for bowel preparation before colonoscopy: meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare a low-residual diet (LRD) with a clear-liquid diet (CLD) for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane databases for randomized clinical trials comparing LRD with CLD for bowel preparation before colonoscopy. The last search was performed on September 20, 2019. The primary outcome was adequate bowel preparation. The outcomes were compared using systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA). RESULTS: Twenty randomized controlled trials published between 2005 and 2019 with 4323 participants were included. LRD was comparable with CLD for adequate bowel preparation (P = .79; odds ratio [OR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72-1.29). The detection rates for polyps (P = .68; OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.86-1.27) or adenomas (P = .78; OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.86-1.23) were similar between the groups. There were significantly fewer advents in individuals in the LRD group: nausea (P = .02; OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.94), vomiting (P = .04; OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38-0.98), hunger (P < .001; OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.24-0.53), and headache (P = .02; OR ,0.64; 95% CI, 0.44-0.93). In addition, significantly more individuals in the LRD group found it easy to complete the diet (P = .01; OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.15-3.00) and showed willingness to repeat it (P = .005; OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.28-3.89). TSA demonstrated that the cumulative Z curve crossed both the traditional boundary and the trial sequential monitoring boundary for adequate bowel preparation. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that LRD was comparable with CLD in the quality of bowel preparation before colonoscopy. More clinical trials are needed to confirm other outcomes.

Oxaliplatin versus mitomycin C in HIPEC for peritoneal metastasis from colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.

BACKGROUND: Hyperthermic intraperitoneal perfusion chemotherapy (HIPEC) following cytoreductive surgery (CRS) has been applied for peritoneal metastasis (PM) from colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to compare oxaliplatin (OX) with mitomycin C (MMC) in HIPEC for PM from CRC in surgical and survival outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Ovid databases for studies comparing OX with MMC in HIPEC for PM from CRC. The last search was performed on June 21, 2020. RESULTS: Eleven articles published between 2006 and 2020 with 2091 patients were included. When compared with MMC group, the OX group showed significantly higher rate of major complications (P = 0.006, OR = 1.57, 95% CI [1.14, 2.16], I2 = 0%). Besides, no significant difference was observed between the two groups for survival outcomes, regardless of 3-year overall survival (P = 0.98, OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.83, 1.22], I2 = 0%), 3-year disease-free survival (P = 0.98, OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.83, 1.22], I2 = 0%), or 5-year overall survival (P = 0.91, OR = 1.01, 95% CI [0.81, 1.26], I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: OX and MMC could achieve comparable survival in HIPEC for PM from CRC. However, in consideration of the high incidence of major complication in OX group, MMC might be the safer one in clinical routines.

The effect of increased body mass index values on surgical outcomes after radical resection for low rectal cancer.

PURPOSES: This study aimed to explore the effect of increased body mass index (BMI) values (overweight: BMI ≥ 25-30 kg/m2; obese: BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) on surgical outcomes after radical resection for low rectal cancer (LRC). METHODS: Patients with LRC who underwent radical surgery from January 2009 to December 2013 were included. The patients were divided into three groups according to their BMI values (control group: BMI < 25 kg/m2; overweight group: BMI 25 to < 30 kg/m2; obese group: BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). The patients' clinicopathological characteristics and survival data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 792 patients were enrolled in this study finally (control, n = 624; overweight, n = 147; obese, n = 21). The baseline characteristics of the three groups were similar. We found that an increased BMI was associated with a longer operative time (P < 0.001) and length of postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.032). Patients with increased BMI values had a significantly higher incidence of postoperative complications, including pulmonary infection (P = 0.008), anastomotic leakage (P = 0.029), allergy (P = 0.017) and incisional hernia (P = 0.045). The limited data showed that the pathological outcomes of the three groups did not differ to a statistically significant extent. A multivariate analysis showed that increased BMI was not associated with poorer OS or DFS. CONCLUSION: In LRC resection, an increased BMI was associated with a longer operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and an increased number of postoperative complications. However, it did not contribute to poorer pathological or survival outcomes.

Laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery in T4 rectal cancer: A case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery (LAS) for T4 rectal cancer (RC) is still controversial. This study aims to compare LAS with conventional open surgery in patients with T4 RC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing laparoscopic or open curative resection for T4 RC from January 2010 to September 2014 in our hospital were enrolled. Patients' clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes were collected and compared. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 22.0. RESULTS: A total of 125 patients (39 open, 86 LAS) were included in this study finally. The baseline information between the two groups were comparable except that LAS group had a more anterior resection (P = 0.012) and less combined resection (P = 0.003). The results demonstrated that patients in LAS group had less blood loss (P < 0.001), smaller incision length (P < 0.001), faster time to first soft diet (P = 0.010) and less incidence of post-operative complications, although it was not significantly different (P = 0.063). In addition, the operative time was also comparable (P = 0.140) and the conversion rate was low (2/86). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was 71.8%, 79.1% in open, LAS group respectively and the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 66.7%, 68.6% in open, laparoscopic group, respectively. The Kaplan curves demonstrated that there was no significant difference between the two groups in OS (P = 0.981) or DFS (P = 0.900). CONCLUSIONS: LAS is safe and feasible in selected patients with T4 RC. It can achieve a better perioperative outcomes, and the long-time survival is not inferior to open surgery. Prospective studies should be conducted in the future to reduce the selection bias.

Marked paper: Type 2 diabetes mellitus indicates increased postoperative complications and poor prognosis in colorectal cancer patients receiving curative surgery.

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on the short-term outcomes and long-term survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) who underwent curative resection. Methods: This study retrospectively included 136 patients (T2DM group) with resectable CRC and T2DM from Jan 2013 to Dec 2017. Propensity score-matched control group consisting of 136 patients (non-T2DM group) were selected from 1143 CRC patients without T2DM. The short-term outcomes and prognosis were compared between the T2DM and non-T2DM group. Results: A total of 272 patients (136 patients for each group) were included in this study. Patients in T2DM group had higher body mass index (BMI), higher proportion of hypertension and cerebrovascular diseases (P<0.05). T2DM group had more overall complications (P=0.001), more major complications (P=0.003) and higher risk of reoperation (P=0.007) when compared with non-T2DM patients. T2DM patients had longer hospitalization time than non-T2DM (20.7 ± 10.2 vs. 17.5 ± 6.2, P=0.002). As for the prognosis, T2DM patients had worse 5-year overall survival (OS) (P=0.024) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) (P=0.019) in all stage. Moreover, T2DM and TNM stage were the independent predictors of OS and DFS for CRC patients. Conclusions: T2DM increases overall complications and major complications, and prolongs the hospitalization time after CRC surgery. In addition, T2DM indicates the poor prognosis of CRC patients. A prospective study with large sample size is required to confirm our findings.

Artificial Intelligence-Aided Colonoscopy for Polyp Detection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Background: This study aimed to compare artificial intelligence (AI)-aided colonoscopy with conventional colonoscopy for polyp detection. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Ovid for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing AI-aided colonoscopy with conventional colonoscopy for polyp detection. The last search was performed on July 22, 2020. The primary outcome was polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). Results: Seven RCTs published between 2019 and 2020 with a total of 5427 individuals were included. When compared with conventional colonoscopy, AI-aided colonoscopy significantly improved PDR (P < .001, odds ratio [OR] = 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.75 to 2.19, I2 = 0%) and ADR (P < .001, OR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.52 to 1.95, I2 = 33%). Besides, polyps in the AI-aided group were significantly smaller in size than those in conventional group (P = .004, weighted mean difference = -0.48, 95% CI: -0.81 to -0.15, I2 = 0%). In addition, AI-aided group detected significantly less proportion of advanced adenoma (P = .03, OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.97, I2 = 46%), pedicle polyps (P < .001, OR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.83, I2 = 0%), and pedicle adenomas (P < .001, OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.80, I2 = 0%). Conclusion: AI-aided colonoscopy could significantly increase the PDR and ADR, especially for those with small size. Besides, the shape and pathology recognition of the AI technique should be further improved in the future.

Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision combined with en-bloc seminal vesicle and prostate resection for rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to explore the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) combined with en-bloc seminal vesicle resection (SVR) and partial prostate resection (PPR) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) after chemoradiotherapy (CRT). METHODS: Patients receiving TME combined with en-bloc SVR and PPR for LARC after CRT from 2014 to 2019 were enrolled retrospectively. Patients' characteristics and surgical outcomes were collected and analysed. RESULTS: A total of six male patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, four patients proved to be T4b stage including three Denonvilliers fascia invasion and one seminal vesicle invasion. R0 resection was achieved in all patients. With a median follow-up time of 24 months, no local recurrence was observed. CONCLUSION: It is safe and feasible to perform laparoscopic TME combined with en-bloc SVR and PPR in selected LARC patients after neoadjuvant CRT. It can provide a safe circumferential resection margin and R0 resection. More studies are warranted to improve the diagnostic accuracy for T4b stage after CRT and avoid unnecessary extended resection.

Comparison of short and long-time outcomes between laparoscopic and conventional open multivisceral resection for primary T4b colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare laparoscopic multivisceral resection (LMVR) with conventional open multivisceral resection (OMVR) for primary T4b colorectal cancer (CRC) in short and long-time outcomes. METHODS: Patients receiving LMVR or OMVR for primary T4b CRC from January 2009 to June 2016 were enrolled. Patients' clinicopathological characteristics and survival data were collected and analyzed. Multivariable analysis was performed to find the factors related with survival. All statistical analysis was performed by SPSS 22.0. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients (LMVR 38, OMVR 53) were included in this study. Patients undergoing LMVR were associated with smaller incision length (P < 0.001), less blood loss (P = 0.01) and comparable operative time (P = 0.071). Patients in LMVR group also had less time to first flatus (P = 0.025). The results also suggested LMVR could reduce the incidence of postoperative complication. The conversion rate was 28.9%. The 3-year OS was 64.2%, 68.4% in OMVR, LMVR group respectively and the 3-year DFS was 56.6%, 52.6% in OMVR, LMVR group respectively. The Kaplan curves demonstrated that LMVR group had similar OS (P = 0.896) and DFS (P = 0.806) when compared with OMVR group. In addition, the multivariate analysis demonstrated that laparoscopic surgery was not associated with poorer survival. CONCLUSION: Not all MVR for T4b CRC should be performed by open procedure, LMVR can be safe and feasible for primary T4b CRC in selected patients. It can faster the postoperative recovery and reduce the incidence of postoperative complication. The OS and DFS are also not inferior to open group.

Preservation versus non-preservation of left colic artery in colorectal cancer surgery: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether or not preservation of the left colic artery (LCA) for colorectal cancer surgery. The objective of this updated systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the current scientific evidence of LCA non-preservation versus LCA preservation in colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in the Medline, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, and reference without limits. Quality of studies was evaluated by using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias. Effective sizes were pooled under a random- or fixed-effects model. The funnel plot was used to assess the publication bias. The outcomes of interest were oncologic consideration including the number of apical lymph nodes, overall recurrence, 5-years overall survival, and 5-years disease-free survival (DFS); safety consideration including overall 30-day postoperative morbidity and overall 30-day postoperative mortality; anatomic consideration including anastomotic circulation, anastomotic leakage, urogenital, and defaecatory dysfunction. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies including 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 20 cohort studies with a total of 8456 patients (4058 patients underwent LCA non-preservation surgery vs 4398 patients underwent LCA preservation surgery) were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The preservation of LCA was associated with significantly less anastomotic leakage (odds ratio 1.23, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.48, P = .03). In term of sexual dysfunction, urinary retention, the number of apical lymph nodes, and long-term oncologic outcomes, there were no significant differences between the LCA non-preservation and LCA preservation group. It was hard to draw definitive conclusions on other outcomes including operation time, blood loss, the first postoperative exhaust time, and perioperative morbidity and mortality for insufficient data and highly significant heterogeneity among studies. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled data provided evidence to support the LCA preservation preferred over LCA non-preservation in anastomotic leakage. Future more large-volume, well-designed RCTs with extensive follow-up are needed to draw a definitive conclusion on this dilemma.