Transanal Endoscopic Surgery: Who Should Be Doing This Procedure?

Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) was introduced in the 1980s, but more widely adopted in the late 2000s with innovations in instrumentation and training. Moreover, the global adoption of minimally invasive approaches to abdominal procedures has led to translatable skills for TES among colorectal and general surgeons. While there are similarities to laparoscopic surgery, TES has unique challenges related to the narrow confines of intraluminal surgery, angled instrumentation, and relatively uncommon indications limiting the opportunity to practice. The following review discusses the current evidence on TES learning curves, including potential limitations related to the broad adoption of TES by general surgeons. This article aims to provide general recommendations for the safe expansion of TES.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Access to Cancer Surgery: Analysis of Surgical Wait Times in British Columbia, Canada.

OBJECTIVE: As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread, efforts were made to preserve resources for the anticipated surge of COVID-19 patients in British Columbia, Canada. However, the relationship between COVID-19 hospitalizations and access to cancer surgery is unclear. In this project, we analyze the impact of COVID-19 patient volumes on wait time for cancer surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study using population-based datasets of regional surgical wait times and COVID-19 patient volumes. Weekly median wait times for urgent, nonurgent, cancer, and noncancer surgeries, and maximum volumes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were studied. The results were qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: A sustained association between weekly median wait time for priority and other cancer surgeries and increase hospital COVID-19 patient volumes was not qualitatively discernable. In response to the first phase of COVID-19 patient volumes, relative to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, wait time were shortened for urgent cancer surgery but increased for nonurgent surgeries. During the second phase, for all diagnostic groups, wait times returned to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels. During the third phase, wait times for all surgeries increased. CONCLUSION: Cancer surgery access may have been influenced by other factors, such as policy directives and local resource issues, independent of hospitalized COVID-19 patient volumes. The initial access limitations gradually improved with provincial and institutional resilience, and vaccine rollout.

Outcomes of laparoscopic colon cancer surgery in a population-based cohort in British Columbia: are they as good as the clinical trials?

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials have shown equivalent outcomes for laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) and open colectomy (OC) when performed by well-trained surgeons experienced in both techniques. Our goal was to evaluate the outcomes of LAC at a population level. METHODS: Using the prospectively collected Gastrointestinal Cancer Outcomes Unit database from the British Columbia Cancer Agency, short- and long-term outcomes in patients with colon cancer treated with LAC and OC were compared from 2003 to 2008 inclusive. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant increase in the proportion of LAC from 2003 to 2008 (P < .001). LAC was more likely to be performed in the elective setting (P < .001) and for smaller tumors (P < .001). A similar proportion of patients had a minimum of 12 lymph nodes identified by pathology (58% vs 60%, P = not significant). Disease-free survival was similar for the 2 groups after adjusting for stage, emergency presentation, and adjuvant chemotherapy. There was no difference in overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of LAC for colon cancer in British Columbia outside of optimized clinical trial conditions appears to be effective and safe.