[Late anastomotic leakage in right-sided hemicolectomy with robot-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis technique].

A 65-year-old male with disseminated prostate cancer and newly diagnosed colonic cancer underwent elective robotic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis and had an uncomplicated short-term postoperative course. More than two years after the index operation, the patient presented with a late anastomotic leakage and underwent reoperation with re-anastomosis. This case report describes an atypical late anastomotic leakage in a patient treated with intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis.

The effect of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in robotic right colectomy on perianastomotic perfusion: a substudy to a multicenter RCT.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have shown that intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) in minimally invasive right colectomy may improve postoperative recovery compared with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). It has been hypothesized that creating the anastomosis extracorporeally may cause mesenteric traction and compromised intestinal perfusion. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of either ICA or ECA on intestinal perfusion. METHOD: This was a substudy to a multicenter, triple-blind randomized clinical trial comparing ICA with ECA in patients undergoing robotic right colectomy for colonic cancer. Videos from intraoperative Indocyanine Green (ICG) fluorescence imaging were analyzed with quantitative ICG perfusion assessment (q-ICG). q-ICG was performed by extracting perfusion metrics from a time-intensity curve generated from an image analysis software: FMAX: maximal fluorescence intensity, TMAX: time until maximal fluorescent signal, T1/2MAX: time until half-maximal fluorescent signal, time ratio (T1/2MAX/TMAX) and slope. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients (33 ICA and 35 ECA) were available for analysis. Demographics were similar between the groups, except for mean arterial blood pressure at the time of ICG infusion, which was significantly lower in the ICA group. We found a significantly steeper slope in the ICA group compared to the ECA group (6.3 vs. 4.7 AU/sec, P = .048). There were no significant differences in FMAX, TMAX, T1/2MAX, and time ratio. CONCLUSION: We found evidence of an improved intestinal perfusion following ICA compared with ECA. This finding may be related to patient outcomes and should be explored further in the future. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT03130166.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients undergoing colonic resection for locally advanced nonmetastatic colon cancer: A nationwide propensity score matched cohort study.

AIM: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for nonmetastatic colon cancer is not routinely used, and is currently only recommended as a treatment option for a subgroup of patients with T4b colon cancers in clinical guidelines. However, NCT may cause downstaging of the tumour, increase resectability, eradicate micrometastases and thereby improve long-term outcomes for patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the short-term postoperative outcomes in a nationwide cohort of patients with locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) receiving NCT. METHOD: Using the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database, data were retrieved on patients diagnosed with LACC (defined as clinical T3 with extramural tumour invasion >5 mm or T4) and treated with resection with a curative intent between 2015 and 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) in a 1:1 ratio was performed to compare short-term surgical and oncological outcomes in patients receiving NCT with patients operated on without receiving NCT. RESULTS: A total of 179 LACC patients were treated with NCT and 1131 were not. After PSM, 145 patients remained in each group. We found no significant differences in any short-term postoperative outcomes between the two groups. We found significant differences in favour of NCT regarding radicality and pathological N category [86% vs. 81% R0 (P = 0.029) and 51% vs. 46% pN0 (P = 0.017), respectively]. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for LACC does not result in worse short-term postoperative outcomes and may increase the R0 rate as well as node-negative disease. Results on long-term benefits including survival are awaited from several ongoing randomized controlled trials.

Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Robotic Right Colectomy: A Multicenter, Triple-blind, Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if minimally invasive right colectomy with intra-corporeal anastomosis improves postoperative recovery compared to extra-corporeal anastomosis. BACKGROUND: Previous trials have shown that intracorporeal anastomosis improves postoperative recovery; however, it has not yet been evaluated in a setting with optimized perioperative care or with patient-related outcome measures. METHODS: This was a multicenter, triple-blind, randomized clinical trial at two high-volume colorectal centers with strict adherence to optimized perioperative care pathways. The patients underwent robotic right colectomy with either intracorporeal or extracorporeal anastomosis. The primary outcome was patient-reported postoperative recovery measured using the "Quality of Recovery-15" questionnaire. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130166. RESULTS: A total of 89 patients were randomized and analyzed according to the "Intention-to-treat"-principle. We found no statistically significant differences in patient-reported recovery between the groups. Postoperative pain, nausea, time to ambulation, time to first passage of flatus/stool, length of hospital stay, and pathophysiological tests showed no differences either. The duration of time to create the anastomosis was significantly longer with intracorporeal anastomosis (17 vs 13 min, P = 0.003), while all other intraoperative, postoperative, and pathology variables showed no difference. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in postoperative recovery between the two groups.