Permanent stoma rate and long-term stoma complications in laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and transanal total mesorectal excisions: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The surgical resection of rectal carcinoma is associated with a high risk of permanent stoma rate. Primary anastomosis rate is suggested to be higher in robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excision, but permanent stoma rate is unknown. METHODS: Patients undergoing total mesorectal excision for MRI-defined rectal cancer between 2015 and 2017 in 11 centers highly experienced in laparoscopic, robot-assisted or transanal total mesorectal excision were included in this retrospective study. Permanent stoma rate, stoma-related complications, readmissions, and reoperations were registered. A multivariable regression analysis was performed for permanent stoma rate, stoma-related complications, and stoma-related reoperations. RESULTS: In total, 1198 patients were included. Permanent stoma rate after low anterior resection (with anastomosis or with an end colostomy) was 40.1% in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery, 21.3% in patients undergoing robot-assisted surgery, and 25.6% in patients undergoing transanal surgery (P < 0.001). Permanent stoma rate after low anterior resection with an anastomosis was 17.3%, 11.8%, and 15.1%, respectively. The robot-assisted and transanal techniques were independently associated with a reduction in permanent stoma rate in patients who underwent a low anterior resection (with anastomosis or with an end colostomy) (OR 0.39 [95% CI 0.25, 0.59] and OR 0.35 [95% CI 0.22, 0.55]), while this was not seen in patients who underwent a restorative low anterior resection. 45.4% of the patients who had a stoma experienced stoma-related complications, 4.0% were at least once readmitted, and 8.9% underwent at least one reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: The robot-assisted and transanal techniques are associated with a lower permanent stoma rate in patients who underwent a low anterior resection.

Risk factors for a permanent stoma after resection of left-sided obstructive colon cancer - A prediction model.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with left-sided obstructive colon cancer (LSOCC), a stoma is often constructed as part of primary treatment, but with a considerable risk of becoming a permanent stoma (PS). The aim of this retrospective multicentre cohort is to identify risk factors for a PS in LSOCC and to develop a pre- and postoperative prediction model for PS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data was retrospectively obtained from 75 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients who had curative resection of LSOCC between January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2016 were included with a minimum follow-up of 6 months after resection. The interventions analysed were emergency resection, decompressing stoma or stent as bridge-to-elective resection. Main outcome measure was presence of PS at the end of follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for PS at primary presentation (T0) and after resection, in patients having a stoma in situ (T1). These risk factors were used to construct a web-based prediction tool. RESULTS: Of 2099 patients included in the study (T0), 779 had a PS (37%). A total of 1275 patients had a stoma in situ directly after resection (T1), of whom 674 had a PS (53%). Median follow-up was 34 months. Multivariable analysis showed that older patients, female sex, high ASA-score and open approach were independent predictors for PS in both the T0 and T1 population. Other predictors at T0 were sigmoid location, low Hb, high CRP, cM1 stage, and emergency resection. At T1, subtotal colectomy, no primary anastomosis, not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy and high pTNM stage were additional predictors. Two predictive models were built, with an AUC of 0.74 for T0 and an AUC of 0.81 for T1. CONCLUSIONS: PS is seen in 37% of the patients who have resection of LSOCC. In patients with a stoma in situ directly after resection, 53% PS are seen due to non-reversal. Not only baseline characteristics, but also treatment strategies determine the risk of a PS in patients with LSOCC. The developed predictive models will give physicians insight in the role of the individual variables on the risk of a PS and help in informing the patient about the probability of a PS.

Assessing the learning curve of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision: a multicenter study considering procedural safety, pathological safety, and efficiency.

PURPOSE: Evidence regarding the learning curve of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision is scarce and of low quality. Case-mix is mostly not taken into account, and learning curves are based on operative time, while preferably clinical outcomes and literature-based limits should be used. Therefore, this study aims to assess the learning curve of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in four Dutch centers. The primary aim was to assess the safety of the individual and institutional learning curves using a RA-CUSUM analysis based on intraoperative complications, major postoperative complications, and compound pathological outcome (positive circumferential margin or incomplete TME specimen). The learning curve for efficiency was assessed using a LC-CUSUM analysis for operative time. Outcomes of patients before and after the learning curve were compared. RESULTS: In this study, seven participating surgeons performed robot-assisted total mesorectal excisions in 531 patients. Learning curves for intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and compound pathological outcome did not exceed predefined literature-based limits. The LC-CUSUM for operative time showed lengths of the learning curve ranging from 12 to 35 cases. Intraoperative, postoperative, and pathological outcomes did not differ between patients operated during and after the learning curve. CONCLUSION: The learning curve of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision based on intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and compound pathological outcome did not exceed predefined limits and is therefore suggested to be safe. Using operative time as a surrogate for efficiency, the learning curve is estimated to be between 12 and 35 procedures.

Local recurrence of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision: a multicentre cohort study evaluating the initial cases.

PURPOSE: Evidence regarding local recurrence rates in the initial cases after implementation of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision is limited. This study aims to describe local recurrence rates in four large Dutch centres during their initial cases. METHODS: Four large Dutch centres started with the implementation of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision in respectively 2011, 2012, 2015, and 2016. Patients who underwent robot-assisted total mesorectal excision with curative intent in an elective setting for rectal carcinoma defined according to the sigmoid take-off were included. Overall survival, disease-free survival, systemic recurrence, and local recurrence were assessed at 3 years postoperatively. Subsequently, outcomes between the initial 10 cases, cases 11-40, and the subsequent cases per surgeon were compared using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: In total, 531 patients were included. Median follow-up time was 32 months (IQR: 19-50]. During the initial 10 cases, overall survival was 89.5%, disease-free survival was 73.1%, and local recurrence was 4.9%. During cases 11-40, this was 87.7%, 74.1%, and 6.6% respectively. Multivariable Cox regression did not reveal differences in local recurrence between the different case groups. CONCLUSION: Local recurrence rate during the initial phases of implantation of robot-assisted total mesorectal procedures is low. Implementation of the robot-assisted technique can safely be performed, without additional cases of local recurrence during the initial cases, if performed by surgeons experienced in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

Predictive value of selected geriatric parameters for postoperative outcomes in older patients with rectal cancer - A multicenter cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Older patients have a higher risk for complications after rectal cancer surgery. Although screening for geriatric impairments may improve risk prediction in this group, it has not been studied previously. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated patients ≥70 years with elective surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer between 2014 and 2018 in nine Dutch hospitals. The predictive value of six geriatric parameters in combination with standard preoperative predictors was studied for postoperative complications, delirium, and length of stay (LOS) using logistic regression analyses. The geriatric parameters included the four VMS-questionnaire items pertaining to functional impairment, fall risk, delirium risk, and malnutrition, as well as mobility problems and polypharmacy. Standard predictors included age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA)-classification, comorbidities, tumor stage, and neoadjuvant therapy. Changes in model performance were evaluated by comparing Area Under the Curve (AUC) of the regression models with and without geriatric parameters. RESULTS: We included 575 patients (median age 75 years; 32% female). None of the geriatric parameters improved risk prediction for complications or LOS. The addition of delirium risk to the standard preoperative prediction model improved model performance for predicting postoperative delirium (AUC 0.75 vs 0.65, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Geriatric parameters did not improve risk prediction for postoperative complications or LOS in older patients with rectal cancer. Delirium risk screening using the VMS-questionnaire improved risk prediction for delirium. Older patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery are a pre-selected group with few impairments. Geriatric screening may have additional value earlier in the care pathway before treatment decisions are made.

Laparoscopic Versus Robot-Assisted Versus Transanal Low Anterior Resection: 3-Year Oncologic Results for a Population-Based Cohort in Experienced Centers.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and transanal total mesorectal excision are the minimally invasive techniques used most for rectal cancer surgery. Because data regarding oncologic results are lacking, this study aimed to compare these three techniques while taking the learning curve into account. METHODS: This retrospective population-based study cohort included all patients between 2015 and 2017 who underwent a low anterior resection at 11 dedicated centers that had completed the learning curve of the specific technique. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) during a 3-year follow-up period. The secondary outcomes were 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 3-year local recurrence rate. Statistical analysis was performed using Cox-regression. RESULTS: The 617 patients enrolled in the study included 252 who underwent a laparoscopic resection, 205 who underwent a robot-assisted resection, and 160 who underwent a transanal low anterior resection. The oncologic outcomes were equal between the three techniques. The 3-year OS rate was 90% for laparoscopic resection, 90.4% for robot-assisted resection, and 87.6% for transanal low anterior resection. The 3-year DFS rate was 77.8% for laparoscopic resection, 75.8% for robot-assisted resection, and 78.8% for transanal low anterior resection. The 3-year local recurrence rate was in 6.1% for laparoscopic resection, 6.4% for robot-assisted resection, and 5.7% for transanal procedures. Cox-regression did not show a significant difference between the techniques while taking confounders into account. CONCLUSION: The oncologic results during the 3-year follow-up were good and comparable between laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and transanal total mesorectal technique at experienced centers. These techniques can be performed safely in experienced hands.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted versus transanal total mesorectal excision surgery for rectal cancer: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study of short-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery for rectal cancer has important technical limitations. Robot-assisted and transanal TME (TaTME) may overcome these limitations, potentially leading to lower conversion rates and reduced morbidity. However, comparative data between the three approaches are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes for laparoscopic TME, robot-assisted TME and TaTME in expert centres. METHODS: Patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery between 2015 and 2017 in expert centres for laparoscopic, robot-assisted or TaTME were included. Outcomes for TME surgery performed by the specialized technique in the expert centres were compared after propensity score matching. The primary outcome was conversion rate. Secondary outcomes were morbidity and pathological outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 1078 patients were included. In rectal cancer surgery in general, the overall rate of primary anastomosis was 39.4, 61.9 and 61.9 per cent in laparoscopic, robot-assisted and TaTME centres respectively (P < 0.001). For specialized techniques in expert centres excluding abdominoperineal resection (APR), the rate of primary anastomosis was 66.7 per cent in laparoscopic, 89.8 per cent in robot-assisted and 84.3 per cent in TaTME (P < 0.001). Conversion rates were 3.7 , 4.6 and 1.9 per cent in laparoscopic, robot-assisted and TaTME respectively (P = 0.134). The number of incomplete specimens, circumferential resection margin involvement rate and morbidity rates did not differ. CONCLUSION: In the minimally invasive treatment of rectal cancer more primary anastomoses are created in robotic and TaTME expert centres.

The results of this study showed similar and acceptable short-term results for laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excision performed in expert centres. In centres with robot-assisted or transanal technique, more primary anastomoses were made.

In vivo sentinel lymph node identification using fluorescent tracer imaging in colon cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The use of fluorescence might improve the performance of the sentinel lymph node procedure in patients with colon cancer. This systematic review was conducted to gain insight in the performance and applicability of the sentinel lymph node procedure using fluorescence. METHOD: A systematic literature search was performed. Databases were searched for prospective studies concerning sentinel node identification using fluorescence in colon cancer. Detection rate, accuracy rate and sensitivity of the sentinel lymph node procedure were calculated for early stage (T1-T2) and more invasive (T3-T4) tumours. RESULTS: Analyses of five included studies showed for respectively T3-T4 and T1-T2 tumours a detection rate of 90 % and 91 %, an accuracy rate of 77 % and 98 %, and a sensitivity of 30 % and 80 %. CONCLUSION: The sentinel lymph node procedure using fluorescence in early stage (T1-T2) colon cancer seems to be promising. Larger cohorts are necessary to confirm these results.

Intestinal motility distal of a deviating ileostomy after rectal resection with the construction of a primary anastomosis: results of the prospective COLO-MOVE study.

PURPOSE: No consensus exists regarding the use of preoperative bowel preparation for patients undergoing a low anterior resection (LAR). Several comparative studies show similar outcomes when a single time enema (STE) is compared with mechanical bowel preparation (MBP). It is hypothesized that STE is comparable with MBP due to a decrease in intestinal motility distal of a newly constructed diverting ileostomy (DI). METHODS: In this prospective single-centre cohort study, patients undergoing a LAR with primary anastomosis and DI construction were given a STE 2 h pre-operatively. Radio-opaque markers were inserted in the efferent loop of the DI during surgery, and plain abdominal X-rays were made during the first, third, fifth and seventh postoperative day to visualize intestinal motility. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were included. Radio-opaque markers were situated in the ileum or right colon in 100%, 100% and 97.1% of the patients during respectively the first, third and fifth postoperative day. One patient had its most distal marker situated in the left colon during day five. In none of the patients, the markers were seen distal of the anastomosis. CONCLUSION: Intestinal motility distally of the DI is decreased in patients who undergo a LAR resection with the construction of an anastomosis and DI, while preoperatively receiving a STE.