Comparison of short-term efficacy analysis of medium-rectal cancer surgery with robotic natural orifice specimen extraction and robotic transabdominal specimen extraction.

BACKGROUND: With the development of minimally invasive technology, the trauma caused by surgery get smaller, At the same time, the specimen extraction surgery through the natural orifice is more favored by experts domestically and abroad, robotic surgery has further promoted the development of specimen extraction surgery through the natural orifice. The aim of current study is to compare the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSES ) and transabdominal specimen extraction(TRSE ) in median rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: From January 2020 to January 2023, 87 patients who underwent the NOSES or TRSE at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University were included in the study, 4 patients were excluded due to liver metastasis. Of these, 50 patients were in the TRSE and 33 patients in the NOSES. Short-term efficacy was compared in the two groups. RESULTS: The NOSES group had less operation time (P < 0.001), faster recovery of gastrointestinal function (P < 0.001), shorter abdominal incisions (P < 0.001), lower pain scores(P < 0.001). lower Inflammatory indicators of the white blood cell count and C-reactive protein content at 1, 3, and 5 days after surgery (P < 0.001, P = 0.037). There were 9 complications in the NOSES group and 11 complications in the TRSE group(P = 0.583). However, there were no wound complications in the NOSES group. The number of postoperative hospital stays seems to be same in the two groups. And there was no significant difference in postoperative anus function (P = 0.591). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that NOSES and TRSE can achieve similar radical treatment effects, NOSES is a feasible and safe way to take specimens for rectal cancer surgery in accordance with the indication for NOSES.

Stratifin Promotes Hepatocellular Carcinoma Progression by Modulating the Wnt/ß-Catenin Pathway.

Abnormal stratifin (SFN) expression is closely related to the progression of several human cancers, but the potential roles of SFN in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remain largely unknown. In this study, we found that SFN was upregulated in HCC cell lines and tissues and was positively associated with tumor size, poor differentiation, Tumor Node Metastasis (TNM) stage, and vascular invasion. In addition, high expression levels of SFN were associated with poor overall survival and disease-free survival. Biologically, downregulation of SFN suppressed tumor cell proliferation, epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), invasion, and migration in vitro and tumor growth in vivo. However, overexpression of SFN promoted cell proliferation, EMT, invasion, and migration in vitro and tumor growth in vivo. Mechanistically, overexpression of SFN activated the Wnt/ß-catenin pathway by promoting Glycogen synthase kinase-3 beta (GSK-3ß) phosphorylation, decreasing ß-catenin phosphorylation, promoting ß-catenin transport into the nucleus, and enhancing the expression of c-Myc, whereas depletion of SFN inhibited the Wnt/ß-catenin pathway. In addition, TOPFlash/FOPFlash reporter assays showed that overexpression or downregulation of SFN obviously increased or decreased, respectively, the activity of the Wnt/ß-catenin pathway. Our results indicated that SFN plays an important role in HCC, possibly providing a prognostic factor and therapeutic target for HCC.

Comparison of robotic-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in short-terms outcomes of middle rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is becoming less invasive as technology advances. Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) ushered in a new era of minimally invasive techniques. At the same time, NOSES is gaining popularity in the world. With their distinct advantages, surgical robots have advanced the development of NOSES. The aim of current study was to compare the short-term outcomes between robotic-assisted NOSES and laparoscopic-assisted NOSES for the treatment of middle rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients with middle rectal cancer who underwent robotic-assisted or laparoscopic-assisted NOSES at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between January 2020 and June 2022 had their clinicopathological data collected retrospectively. 46 patients were enrolled in the study: 23 in the robotic group and 23 in the laparoscopic group. Short-term outcomes and postoperative anal function in the two groups were compared. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the clinicopathological data between the two groups. The robotic group had less intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.04), less postoperative abdominal drainage (p = 0.02), lower postoperative white blood cell counts (p = 0.024) and C-reactive protein levels (p = 0.017), and shorter catheter removal time when compared to the laparoscopic group (p = 0.003). Furthermore, there were no significant difference in mean operative time (159 ± 31 min vs 172 ± 41 min) between the robotic and laparoscopic groups (p = 0.235), but time to naked the rectum (86.4 ± 20.9 min vs. 103.8 ± 31.5 min p = 0.033) and time of digestive tract reconstruction (15.6 ± 3.88 min vs. 22.1 ± 2.81 min p < 0.01) in the robotic group were significantly shorter than laparoscopic group. The robotic group had lower postoperative Wexner scores than the laparoscopic group. CONCLUSIONS: This research reveals that combining a robotic surgical system and NOSES results in superior outcomes, with short-term outcomes preferable to laparoscopic-assisted NOSES.

Screening of Serum Exosomal miRNAs as Diagnostic Biomarkers for Gastric Cancer Using Small RNA Sequencing.

Background/Aim: Exosomal miRNAs are promising tumor biomarkers. This research explored the diagnostic value of serum exosomal miRNAs by analyzing the exosomal miRNAs derived from the serum of gastric cancer patients. Methods: Deep sequencing of exosomal miRNAs was performed using an Illumina HiSeq2500 sequencer on serum samples from three healthy subjects in the normal control group (group N) and six gastric cancer patients in the gastric cancer treatment group (group T). Bioinformatics analysis was performed on exosomal miRNA profiles to screen differentially expressed miRNA. In addition, target gene prediction, GO, and KEGG pathway enrichment analyses were performed. Finally, the serum exocrine bodies of 24 patients with gastric cancer and 24 normal controls were verified by quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) to confirm the findings. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the subjects was plotted, and the area under the curve (AUC) was calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The exosomes were successfully extracted from the serum of gastric cancer patients, which showed a form of goblet vesicles or irregular circles, with an average particle size of approximately 102.3 nm. The exosomal marker proteins, CD9, CD63, TSG101, and calnexin, were positively expressed. Small RNA sequencing detected 15 different types of RNA components in the serum exosomes, and the most abundant one was miRNA. In the screened cohort, the downregulation of seven existing miRNAs and the upregulation of one existing miRNA were observed. Four of them were selected for confirmation, revealing that the expression of miR-10401-3p, miR-1255b-5p, and miR-6736-5p declined significantly in group T (P < 0.05). In addition, the ROC curve showed that the AUC values for these three miRNAs were 0.8333, 0.8316, and 0.8142, respectively; all of them are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The above three miRNAs found in the serum exosomes from gastric cancer patients might serve as diagnostic biomarkers for gastric cancer.

Role of minimally invasive techniques in gastrointestinal surgery: Current status and future perspectives.

In recent years, the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer has remained high. Currently, surgical resection is still the most effective method for treating gastrointestinal cancer. Traditionally, radical surgery depends on open surgery. However, traditional open surgery inflicts great trauma and is associated with a slow recovery. Minimally invasive surgery, which aims to reduce postoperative complications and accelerate postoperative recovery, has been rapidly developed in the last two decades; it is increasingly used in the field of gastrointestinal surgery and widely used in early-stage gastrointestinal cancer. Nevertheless, many operations for gastrointestinal cancer treatment are still performed by open surgery. One reason for this may be the challenges of minimally invasive technology, especially when operating in narrow spaces, such as within the pelvis or near the upper edge of the pancreas. Moreover, some of the current literature has questioned oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. Overall, the current evidence suggests that minimally invasive techniques are safe and feasible in gastrointestinal cancer surgery, but most of the studies published in this field are retrospective studies and case-matched studies. Large-scale randomized prospective studies are needed to further support the application of minimally invasive surgery. In this review, we summarize several common minimally invasive methods used to treat gastrointestinal cancer and discuss the advances in the minimally invasive treatment of gastrointestinal cancer in detail.

Postoperative complications after robotic resection of colorectal cancer: An analysis based on 5-year experience at a large-scale center.

BACKGROUND: As a common gastrointestinal malignancy, colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a serious health threat globally. Robotic surgery is one of the future trends in surgical treatment of CRC. Robotic surgery has several technical advantages over laparoscopic surgery, including 3D visualization, elimination of the fulcrum effect, and better ergonomic positioning, which together lead to better surgical outcomes and faster recovery. However, analysis of independent factors of postoperative complications after robotic surgery is still insufficient. AIM: To analyze the incidence and risk factors for postoperative complications after robotic surgery in patients with CRC. METHODS: In total, 1040 patients who had undergone robotic surgical resection for CRC between May 2015 and May 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative complications were categorized according to the Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification, and possible risk factors were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 1040 patients who had undergone robotic surgery for CRC, the overall, severe, local, and systemic complication rates were 12.2%, 2.4%, 8.8%, and 3.5%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and level III American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P = 0.006) were independent risk factors for overall complications. Multivariate analysis identified multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and comorbidities (P = 0.029) as independent risk factors for severe complications (C-D grade III or higher). Regarding local complications, multiple organ resection (P = 0.002) and multiple bowel resection (P = 0.027) were independent risk factors. Multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and level III ASA score (P = 0.007) were independent risk factors for systemic complications. Additionally, sigmoid colectomy had a lower incidence of overall complications (6.4%; P = 0.006) and local complications (4.7%; P = 0.028) than other types of colorectal surgery. CONCLUSION: Multiple organ resection, level III ASA score, comorbidities, and multiple bowel resection were risk factors for postoperative complications, with multiple organ resection being the most likely.

Robotic- vs laparoscopic-assisted proctectomy for locally advanced rectal cancer based on propensity score matching: Short-term outcomes at a colorectal center in China.

BACKGROUND: Reports in the field of robotic surgery for rectal cancer are increasing year by year. However, most of these studies enroll patients at a relatively early stage and have small sample sizes. In fact, studies only on patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and with relatively large sample sizes are lacking. AIM: To investigate whether the short-term outcomes differed between robotic-assisted proctectomy (RAP) and laparoscopic-assisted proctectomy (LAP) for LARC. METHODS: The clinicopathological data of patients with LARC who underwent robotic- or laparoscopic-assisted radical surgery between January 2015 and October 2019 were collected retrospectively. To reduce patient selection bias, we used the clinical baseline characteristics of the two groups of patients as covariates for propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis. Short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The clinical features were well matched in the PSM cohort. Compared with the LAP group, the RAP group had less intraoperative blood loss, lower volume of pelvic cavity drainage, less time to remove the pelvic drainage tube and urinary catheter, longer distal resection margin and lower rates of conversion (P < 0.05). However, the time to recover bowel function, the harvested lymph nodes, the postoperative length of hospital stay, and the rate of unplanned readmission within 30 days postoperatively showed no difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). The rates of total complications and all individual complications were similar between the RAP and LAP groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This retrospective study indicated that RAP is a safe and feasible method for LARC with better short-term outcomes than LAP, but we have to admit that the clinically significant of part of indicators are relatively small in the practical situation.

Robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer based on propensity score matching: short-term outcomes at a high-capacity center.

Reports in the field of robotic surgery for gastric cancer are increasing. However, studies only on patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) are lacking. This retrospective study was to compare the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) and laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC. From December 2014 to November 2019, 683 consecutive patients with AGC underwent mini-invasive assisted distal gastrectomy. Propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis was conducted to reduce patient selection bias. Short-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. The clinical features were well matched in the PSM cohort. Compared with the LADG group, the RADG group was associated with less operative blood loss, a lower rate of postoperative blood transfusion, less volume of abdominal drainage, less time to remove abdominal drainage tube, retrieved more lymph node, and lower rates of surgical complications and pancreatic fistula (P <0.05). However, the time to recovery bowel function, the length of postoperative stay, the rates of other subgroups of complications and unplanned readmission were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). This study suggests that RADG is a safe and feasible technique with better short-term outcomes than LADG for AGC.

Robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for advanced gastric cancer: short-term outcomes at a mono-institution.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted surgery, a developed technology, is becoming more and more accepted by surgeons. However, the comparison between robotic-assisted total gastrectomy (RATG) and conventional laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy (LATG) for advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is seldom reported, or usually the sample sizes reported are small. The current research was designed to compare the short-term outcomes of RATG and LATG with D2 lymphadenectomy for AGC in a mono-institution from China. METHODS: A total of 205 patients from June 2015 to October 2018 were included in this study. Among them, 106 patients underwent LATG, and 99 patients underwent RATG. The patients' clinicopathological characteristics, surgical performance and short-term outcomes were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The clinicopathological characteristics showed no difference between the LATG group and the RATG group. However, compared with the LATG group, the operation time was longer (P = 0.000), and the operative blood loss (P = 0.000) and the volume of abdominal drainage was less (P = 0.000) in the RATG group. Moreover, the RATG took less time to remove abdominal drainage tube than LATG (P = 0.000). The plasma levels of CRP at 72 h post-operation was lower (P = 0.000), and the number of retrieved lymph nodes was more (P = 0.000) in the RATG group. Nevertheless, the postoperative length of stay (P = 0.890), the time to first flatus (P = 0.448), the postoperative complication (P = 0.915) and the visual analogue pain score at 24 h post-operation (P = 0.457) were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: RATG with D2 lymphadenectomy shows safety and feasibility for AGC and could be served as an alternative treatment for AGC in the future.

Mini-invasive vs open resection of colorectal cancer and liver metastases: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The safety and feasibility of the simultaneous resection of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM) have been demonstrated in some studies. Combined resection is expected to be the optimal strategy for patients with CRC and SCRLM. However, traditional laparotomy is traumatic, and the treatment outcome of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is still obscure. AIM: To compare the treatment outcomes of MIS and open surgery (OS) for the simultaneous resection of CRC and SCRLM. METHODS: A systematic search through December 22, 2018 was conducted in electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library). All studies comparing the clinical outcomes of MIS and OS for patients with CRC and SCRLM were included by eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager Software. The quality of the pooled study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The publication bias was evaluated by a funnel plot and the Begg's and Egger's tests. Fixed- and random-effects models were applied according to heterogeneity. RESULTS: Ten retrospective cohort studies involving 502 patients (216 patients in the MIS group and 286 patients in the OS group) were included in this study. MIS was associated with less intraoperative blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -130.09, 95% confidence interval (CI): -210.95 to -49.23, P = 0.002] and blood transfusion [odds ratio (OR) = 0.53, 95%CI: 0.29 to 0.95, P = 0.03], faster recovery of intestinal function (WMD = -0.88 d, 95%CI: -1.58 to -0.19, P = 0.01) and diet (WMD = -1.54 d, 95%CI: -2.30 to -0.78, P < 0.0001), shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -4.06 d, 95%CI: -5.95 to -2.18, P < 0.0001), and lower rates of surgical complications (OR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.37 to 0.99, P = 0.04). However, the operation time, rates and severity of overall complications, and rates of general complications showed no significant differences between the MIS and OS groups. Moreover, the overall survival and disease-free survival after MIS were equivalent to those after OS. CONCLUSION: Considering the studies included in this meta-analysis, MIS is a safe and effective alternative technique for the simultaneous resection of CRC and SCRLM. Compared with OS, MIS has less intraoperative blood loss and blood transfusion and quicker postoperative recovery. Furthermore, the two groups show equivalent long-term outcomes.

Risk factors for 30-day unplanned reoperation after pancreatoduodenectomy: A single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the rate and reasons and also the risk factors for unplanned reoperation after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in a single center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients who underwent PD in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between January 2010 and January 2018. The patients were divided into nonreoperation and reoperation groups according to whether they underwent unplanned reoperation following the primary PD. The incidence and reasons were examined. In addition, multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the risk factors for unplanned reoperation. RESULTS: Of the 330 patients who underwent PD operations, 22 (6.67%) underwent unplanned reoperation. The main reasons for reoperation were postpancreaticoduodenectomy hemorrhage (PPH) (12/22 [54.5%]) and pancreaticoenteric anastomotic (PEA) leak (5/22 [22.7%]). Multivariate logistic regression analyses identified that diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 3.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-12.90; P = 0.04), intraoperative blood loss ≥400 mL (OR, 4.06; 95% CI, 1.29-12.84; P = 0.02), occurrence of postoperative complications in the form of PPH (OR, 30.67; 95% CI, 8.85-106.31; P < 0.001), and PEA leak (OR, 11.53; 95% CI, 3.03-43.98, P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for unplanned reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that diabetes, intraoperative blood loss ≥400 mL, PPH, and PEA leak were independent risk factors for unplanned reoperation after primary PD.