The safety and short-term effect of mixed approach in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer compared with middle approach: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether the mixed approach is a safe and advantageous way to operate laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on 316 patients who underwent laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in our center. They were assigned to the middle approach group (n = 158) and the mixed approach group (n = 158) according to the surgical approaches. The baseline data like gender、age and body mass index as well as the intraoperative and postoperative conditions including operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay and complications were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, ASA grade and tumor characteristics between the two groups. Compared with the middle approach group, the mixed approach group was significantly lower in terms of operation time (217.61 min vs 154.31 min, p < 0.001), intraoperative blood loss (73.8 ml vs 37.97 ml, p < 0.001) and postoperative drainage volume. There was no significant difference in the postoperative complications like postoperative anastomotic leakage, postoperative infection and postoperative intestinal obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the middle approach, the mixed approach is a safe and advantageous way that can significantly shorten the operation time, reduce intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage volume, and does not prolong the length of hospital stay or increase the morbidity postoperative complications.

Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Emergency Surgery for Complex Colorectal Cancer: Protocol and Piloting of the Surgical Utilization and Recovery Patterns for Advanced Stage Colorectal Cancer Study.

Introduction: Globally, cancer is the leading cause of mortality, with colorectal neoplasia ranking third in terms of incidence and mortality worldwide. Patients face disease- and treatment-specific impacts, which can significantly influence their quality of life (QoL). Aim: This study aimed to propose a protocol to measure in-hospital and long-term QoL in patients with complicated colorectal cancer (CRC). Material and Methods: multicenter prospective observational cohort study. Results: QoL is a multidimensional concept that includes criteria for physical, mental, emotional, and social functionality as perceived by the patient. Periodically evaluating QoL offers measurable and objective tools to intervene at the appropriate time to decrease the Years of Life Lost and Years Lived with Disabilities for CRC patients. However, a structured and functional system requires dedicated and common institutional effort. A pilot study using this protocol included 69 patients, 65.12+-10.92 years, M:F ratio = 56.5:43.5%. Surgical procedure was right hemicolectomy, left colectomy, transverse colectomy, sigmoidectomy, total colectomy, rectal resection, and colorectal resection with stoma (ileostomy or colostomy) in 21.7%, 11.6%, 2.9%, 11.6%, 1.4%, 23.2%, and 27.5% of the cases, respectively. The mean Global Health Status Score, Symptom Score, and Functional Score was 82.36+-18.60, 11.89+-10.27, and 86.27, 74.50-94.11, respectively. Conclusions: CRC diagnosis has major effects on patients physical and psychological status, and concentrated efforts should be made by the involved medical team and healthcare systems to improve QoL throughout the treatment pathway.

Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection for the treatment of stage II and III sigmoid colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection is a novel technique. However, evidence in the literature regarding the advantages of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RLS) is insufficient. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of RLS versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for the treatment of sigmoid colon cancer. We performed a retrospective study at the Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital. Patients diagnosed with sigmoid colon cancer and underwent anterior resection between January 2019 to September 2023 were included in the study. We compared the basic characteristics of the patients and the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients in the two groups. A total of 452 patients were included. Based on propensity score matching, 212 patients (RLS, n = 106; CLS, n = 106) were included. The baseline data in RLS group was comparable to that in CLS group. Compared with CLS group, RLS group exhibited less estimated blood loss (P = 0.015), more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.005), longer operation time (P < 0.001) and higher total hospitalization costs (P < 0.001). Meanwhile, there were no significant differences in other perioperative or pathologic outcomes between the two groups. For 3-year prognosis, overall survival rates were 92.5% in the RLS group and 90.6% in the CLS group (HR 0.700, 95% CI 0.276-1.774, P = 0.452); disease-free survival rates were 91.5% in the RLS group and 87.7% in the CLS group (HR 0.613, 95% CI 0.262-1.435, P = 0.259). Compared with CLS, RLS for sigmoid colon cancer was found to be associated with a higher number of lymph nodes harvested, similar perioperative outcomes and long-term survival outcomes. High total hospitalization costs of RLS did not translate into better long-term oncology outcomes.

Robotic ambulatory colorectal resections: a systematic review.

Colorectal surgery has progressed greatly via minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic and robotic. With the advent of ERAS protocols, patient recovery times have greatly shortened, allowing for same day discharges (SDD). Although SDD have been explored through laparoscopic colectomy reviews, no reviews surrounding robotic ambulatory colorectal resections (RACrR) exist to date. A systematic search was carried out across three databases and internet searches. Data were selected and extracted by two independent reviewers. Inclusion criteria included robotic colorectal resections with a length of hospital stay of less than one day or 24 h. 4 studies comprising 136 patients were retrieved. 56% of patients were female and were aged between 21 and 89 years. Main surgery indications were colorectal cancer and recurrent sigmoid diverticulitis (43% each). Most patients had low anterior resections (48%). Overall, there was a 4% complication rate postoperatively, with only 1 patient requiring readmission due to postoperative urinary retention (< 1%). Patient selection criteria involved ASA score cut-offs, nutritional status, and specific health conditions. Protocols employed shared similarities including ERAS education, transabdominal plane blocks, early removal of urinary catheters, an opioid-sparing regime, and encouraged early oral intake and ambulation prior to discharge. All 4 studies had various follow-up methods involving telemedicine, face-to-face consultations, and virtual ward teams. RACrRs is safe and feasible in a highly specific patient population; however, further high-quality studies with larger sample sizes are needed to draw more significant conclusions. Several limitations included small sample size and the potential of recall bias due to retrospective nature of 2 studies.

Effects of Preoperative COVID-19 Status on Emergent or Urgent Colectomy Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has been described as eliciting a powerful immune response. The association of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection with diseases requiring emergent or urgent colectomies may exacerbate the risk of surgical complications. We investigated the effect of preoperative COVID-19 infection on the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent a nonelective colectomy in 2021. METHODS: We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Targeted Colectomy database for all of the patients who underwent a colectomy in 2021 and filtered for patients classified as "Urgent" or "Emergent." Two groups were created based on preoperative COVID-19 status: COVID+ (n = 242) and COVID- cohorts (n = 11,049). Several clinical variables were compared. RESULTS: Before filtering for urgent/emergent operations, a large percentage of COVID+ patients were found to have undergone an urgent or emergency colectomy (68.36% vs 25.05%). Preoperatively, these patients were more likely to be taking steroids (21.49% vs 12.41%) or have a bleeding issue requiring a transfusion (19.42% vs 11.00%). A larger percentage of infected patients returned to the operating room (14.05% vs 8.13%) and had a hospital stay >30 days (18.18% vs 5.35%). COVID-19 infection was associated with a higher rate of mortality (14.05% vs 8.08%) but did not independently predict it (odds ratio 1.25, P = 0.233), with all P ≤ 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: Urgent or emergent colectomy patients who were COVID-19+ preoperatively were more likely to present with comorbidities, which, along with the recent viral infection, contributed to markedly worse clinical outcomes, including an increased rate of mortality.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols mitigate the weekend effect on length of stay following elective colectomy.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the effect of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols on the weekend effect after elective colectomies. METHODS: This was a retrospective study on all elective colorectal surgeries at a single institution in New York City between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020. The length of stay (LOS) by day of the week of surgery and the effect of ERAS using univariable and multivariable analyses were compared. RESULTS: A total of 605 patients were included in the study. Of note, 41 cases were performed on Mondays, 197 cases were performed on Tuesdays, 45 cases were performed on Wednesdays, 187 cases were performed on Thursdays, and 135 cases were performed on Fridays. Univariate analysis showed that, for patients who did not undergo ERAS, Monday and Tuesday were significantly associated with decreased LOS (P < .001). For patients who underwent ERAS, there was no statistically significant difference in LOS (P = .06) when operated on early in the week vs later. After controlling for age, race/ethnicity, comorbidities, complications, functional health status, operation type, duration of surgery, presence of ostomy, and albumin level, adhering to the ERAS protocol was significantly associated with a shorter LOS (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that ERAS can mitigate the weekend effect on LOS. ERAS protocols may provide more structure to the expected hospital course and allow patients to reach recovery milestones earlier, facilitating discharge even by covering teams.

LapEmerge trial: study protocol for a laparoscopic approach for emergency colon resection-a multicenter, open label, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Due to faster recovery and lower morbidity rates, laparoscopy has become the gold standard in elective colorectal surgery for both the benign and malignant forms of the disease. A substantial proportion of colorectal operations are, however, carried out in emergency settings, and most of the emergency resections are still performed open. The aim of this study is to compare the laparoscopic versus open approach for emergency colorectal surgery. METHOD/DESIGN: This is a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial including adult patients presenting with a condition requiring emergency colorectal resection. DISCUSSION: Previous studies cautiously recommend wider use of laparoscopy in emergency colorectal resections, but all earlier reports are retrospective, are mostly single-center studies, and have limited numbers of patients. Laparoscopy may involve some unpredictable risks that have not yet been reported because of the infrequent use of the techniqueded to assess the safety of laparoscopy as well as the advantages and disadvantages of open compared with laparoscopic emergency surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number:  ClinicalTrials.gov   NCT05005117 . Registered on August 12, 2021.

Occult appendix pathology in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection and prophylactic appendectomy.

BACKGROUND: The risk-benefit balance of prophylactic appendectomy in patients undergoing left colorectal cancer resection is unclear. The aim of this report is to assess the proportion of histologically abnormal appendices in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection in a unit where standard of care is appendectomy, with consent, when left-sided resection is performed. METHODS: A retrospective study on a prospectively collected database was conducted in a single tertiary-care center. Overall, 717 consecutive patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection between January 2015 and June 2021 were analyzed. The primary outcome was the proportion of histologically abnormal appendix specimens at prophylactic appendectomy. The secondary outcome was complications from prophylactic appendectomy. RESULTS: Overall, 576/717 (80%) patients had appendectomy at colorectal cancer surgery. In total, 234/576 (41%) had a right-/extended-right hemicolectomy or subtotal colectomy which incorporates appendectomy, and 342/576 (59%) had left-sided resection (left-hemicolectomy, anterior resection or abdominoperineal excision) with prophylactic appendectomy. At definitive histology, 534/576 (92.7%) had a normal appendix. The remaining 42/576 (7.3%) showed abnormal findings, including: 14/576 (2.4%) inflammatory appendix pathology, 2/576 (0.3%) endometriosis, 8/576 (1.4%) hyperplastic polyp, and 18/576 (3.1%) appendix tumors, which encompassed six low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (LAMNs), three carcinoids, and nine serrated polyps. In the 342 patients who had prophylactic appendectomy, 10 (2.9%) had a neoplasm (two LAMN, three carcinoids, and five serrated polyps). There were no complications attributable to appendectomy. CONCLUSION: Occult appendix pathology in patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection is uncommon when prophylactic appendectomy was performed. However, approximately 3% of patients had a synchronous appendix neoplasm.

Robotic assisted surgery reduces ergonomic risk during minimally invasive colorectal resection: the VOLCANO randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Minimally invasive surgery benefits patients but poor operating ergonomics causes musculoskeletal injuries in surgeons. This randomised controlled trial aims to assess whether robotic-assisted surgery with the open-console Versius® system can reduce surgeons' ergonomic risks during major colorectal resections. METHODS: Prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05262296) in March 2022. Adult patients requiring a minimally invasive colorectal resection were potentially eligible. Photographs taken at 2-min intervals were analysed using the objective Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) posture analysis scale to calculate intraoperative surgeon ergonomic risk. Secondary outcomes included team communication (Oxford NOTECHS II), surgeon cognitive strain (modified NASA-TLX scale), and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty patients were randomised in a 2:1 ratio (40 robot, 20 laparoscopic). Mean age was 65yrs and 34 (57%) were male. Body Mass Index did not differ between the 2 groups (overall mean 29.0 ± 5) and there were equal proportions of left and right-colonic resections. REBA was significantly lower in the robotic arm (median robot REBA score 3 vs lap REBA 5 [p < 0.001]), equating to an injury risk category drop from "medium" to "low risk". There were no significant differences in team communication, operative duration, or patient outcomes. Surgeon cognitive strain was lower in robotic cases (mean robot 32.4 ± 10.3 vs lap 45.6 ± 14.3 [p < 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: This trial demonstrates that robotic surgery with an open-console system reduces ergonomic risk scores and cognitive strain during colorectal resections, with no apparent detriment to team communication. This may therefore be a safe & feasible solution to the increasing problem of work-related musculoskeletal injuries in surgeons.

Unveiling the hidden: identification and management of overlooked blood vessels in laparoscopic left hemicolectomy for splenic flexure cancer.

BACKGROUND: During laparoscopic left hemicolectomy procedures, a previously overlooked consistently thick blood vessel within the gastrocolic ligament near the splenic hilum may contribute to post-operative bleeding complications. The purpose of this study was to investigate the identification and management of the previously overlooked blood vessel. METHODS: This is a retrospective descriptive study of patients undergoing laparoscopic left colectomy for splenic fexure cancer conducted at a national gastrointestinal surgery centre in China. Consecutive patients with splenic fexure cancer who underwent laparoscopic left colectomy using our"five-step process"(n = 34) between January 2021 and July 2023 were included. RESULTS: The vessels can be effectively exposed using the aforementioned "five-step process." It was observed that the overlooked vessels consistently present in all patients were identified as the omental branch of the left gastroepiploic artery and vein. CONCLUSION: We have identified the origin of previously overlooked blood vessels and recommended a safe method for their management. This may offer advantages to colorectal surgeons performing laparoscopic left colectomy for splenic flexure cancer.

Simultaneous resection for colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: current state-of-the-art.

BACKGROUND: A large proportion of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) presents with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM) at diagnosis. Surgical approaches for patients with sCRLM have evolved over the past decades. Simultaneous resection (SR) of CRC and sCRLM for selected patients has emerged as a safe and efficient alternative approach to traditional staged resections. METHODS: A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed and Web of Science databases with the end of search date October 30, 2023. The MeSH terms "simultaneous resections" and "combined resections" in combination with "colorectal liver metastases," "colorectal cancer," "liver resection," and "hepatectomy" were searched in the title and/or abstract. RESULTS: SRs aim to achieve maximal tumor clearance, minimizing the risk of disease progression and optimizing the potential for long-term survival. Improvements in perioperative care, advances in surgical techniques, and a better understanding of patient selection criteria have collectively contributed to reducing morbidity and mortality associated with these complex procedures. Several studies have demonstrated that SR are associated with reduced overall length of stay and lower costs with comparable morbidity and long-term outcomes. In light of these outcomes, the proportion of patients undergoing SR for CRC and sCRLM has increased substantially over the past 2 decades. CONCLUSION: For patients with sCRLM, SR represents an attractive alternative to the traditional staged approach and should be selectively used; however, the decision on whether to proceed with a simultaneous versus staged approach should be individualized based on several patient- and disease-related factors.

Restoration of intestinal continuity following emergency sigmoid colectomy for sigmoid volvulus: An American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis using coarsened exact matching.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data to guide decision-making between performing a primary anastomosis and fashioning an end colostomy following emergency sigmoid colectomy for patients with sigmoid volvulus. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of these two approaches. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2006 to 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. Missing data were multiply imputed, and coarsened exact matching was performed to generate matched cohorts. Rates of major complications and other postoperative outcomes were evaluated among patients who had a primary anastomosis as compared with matched controls who had an end colostomy following emergency sigmoid colectomy. RESULTS: Overall, 4041 patients who had a primary anastomosis and 1240 who had an end colostomy met the inclusion criteria. After multiple imputation and coarsened exact matching, 895 patients who had a primary anastomosis had a matched control. The rate of major complications was lower in patients who had an end colostomy (33.2% vs. 36.7%), but this difference was not statistically significant (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70-1.05). Results were similar in subgroup analyses of higher-risk patients. There were no significant differences in overall complication rate, mortality, length of hospital stay, or readmission rate. Patients with a colostomy were more likely to be discharged to a care facility (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.67). CONCLUSION: Differences in rates of major complications and many other outcomes after primary anastomosis as compared with end colostomy were not statistically significant following emergency sigmoid colectomy for sigmoid volvulus.

Colorectal procedures with the novel Hugo™ RAS system: training process and case series report from a non-robotic surgical team.

BACKGROUND: The landscape of robotic surgery is evolving with the emergence of new platforms. However, reports on their applicability in different surgical fields are still limited and come from teams with robotics experience. This study aims to describe the training process for colorectal surgery with the Hugo™ RAS system of a robotics-inexperienced surgical team and present the initial patient series. METHODS: The training process is depicted, and data from the first 10 consecutive patients operated on for colorectal conditions with the Hugo™ RAS system by a surgical team with no prior experience in robotic surgery were prospectively recorded and analysed. RESULTS: The team received intensive training in robotic surgery and specifically in the Hugo™ RAS system previously to the first case. Between May 2023 and December 2023, 10 patients underwent colorectal procedures: 5 right colectomies, 3 sigmoid resections, 1 high rectal resection and 1 ventral mesh rectopexy. The first case was proctored by an expert. Median docking time was 14 min and median total operative time was 185 min. The only technical difficulty during the procedures was occasional clashing of robotic arms. None had to be converted, and no intraoperative or postoperative morbidity was recorded. Hospital stays ranged from 2 to 4 days. A median of 21 lymph nodes were yielded in the operations for malignant conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Common colorectal procedures can be safely performed using the Hugo™ RAS platform. Prior experience in robotic surgery is not a necessary requirement, but following a structured training program is essential.

Timing of readmissions for complications following emergency colectomy: follow-up beyond post-operative day 30 matters.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Emergency colectomies are associated with a higher risk of complications compared to elective ones. A critical assessment of complications occurring beyond post-operative day 30 (POD30) is lacking. This study aimed to assess the readmission rate and factors associated with readmission 6-months following emergency colectomy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent emergency colectomy (2010-2018) was performed using the Nationwide Readmissions Database. The cohort was divided into two groups: (i) no readmission and (ii) emergency readmission(s) for complications related to colectomy (defined using ICD-9/10 codes). Readmissions were categorized as either "early" (POD0-30) or "late" (> POD30). Differences between groups were described and multivariable regression controlling for relevant covariates defined a priori were used to identify factors associated with timing of readmission and cost. RESULTS: Of 141,481 eligible cases, 13.22% (n = 18,699) were readmitted within 6-months of emergency colectomy for colectomy-related complications, 61.63% of which were "late" readmissions (> POD30). The most common reasons for "late" readmission were for bleeding, gastrointestinal, and infectious complications (20.80%, 25.30%, and 32.75%, respectively). On multiple logistic regression, female gender (OR 1.12; 95%CI 1.04-1.21), open procedures (OR 1.12, 95%CI 1.011-1.24), and sigmoidectomies (OR 1.51, 95%CI 1.39-1.65, relative to right hemicolectomies) were the strongest predictors of "late" readmission. On multiple linear regression, "late" readmissions were associated with a $1717.09 USD (95%CI $1717.05-$1717.12) increased cost compared to "early" readmissions. DISCUSSION: The majority of colectomy-related readmissions following emergency colectomy occur beyond POD30 and are associated with cases that are of overall higher morbidity, as well as open sigmoidectomies. Given the associated increased cost of care, mitigation of such readmissions by close follow-up prior to and beyond POD30 is advisable.

Use of Simulation For Training Advanced Colorectal Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: Simulation training for minimally invasive colorectal procedures is in developing stages. This study aims to assess the impact of simulation on procedural knowledge and simulated performance in laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) and robotic right colectomy (RRC). DESIGN: LLAR and RRC simulation procedures were designed using human cadaveric models. Resident case experience and simulation selfassessments scores for operative ability and knowledge were collected before and after the simulation. Colorectal faculty assessed resident simulation performance using validated assessment scales (OSATS-GRS, GEARS). Paired t-tests, unpaired t-tests, Pearson's correlation, and descriptive statistics were applied in analyses. SETTING: Barnes-Jewish Hospital/Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Missouri. PARTICIPANTS: Senior general surgery residents at large academic surgery program. RESULTS: Fifteen PGY4/PGY5 general surgery residents participated in each simulation. Mean LLAR knowledge score increased overall from 10.0 ±  2.0 to 11.5  ±  1.6 of 15 points (p = 0.0018); when stratified, this increase remained significant for the PGY4 cohort only. Mean confidence in ability to complete LLAR increased overall from 2.0 ±  0.8 to 2.8  ± 0.9 on a 5-point rating scale (p = 0.0013); when stratified, this increase remained significant for the PGY4 cohort only. Mean total OSATS GRS score was 28  ±  6.3 of 35 and had strong positive correlation with previous laparoscopic colorectal experience (r = 0.64, p = 0.0092). Mean RRC knowledge score increased from 9.4 ±  2.2 to 11.1 ±  1.5 of 15 points (p = 0.0030); when stratified, this increase again remained significant for the PGY4 cohort only. Mean confidence in ability to complete RRC increased from 1.9 ±  0.9 to 3.2  ±  1.1 (p = 0.0002) and was significant for both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical trainees require opportunities to practice advanced minimally invasive colorectal procedures. Our simulation approach promotes increased procedural knowledge and resident confidence and offers a safe complement to live operative experience for trainee development. In the future, simulations will target trainees on the earlier part of the learning curve and be paired with live operative assessments to characterize longitudinal skill progression.

Effect of complete mesocolic excision (cme) on long-term survival after right colectomy for cancer: multivariate meta-analysis and restricted mean survival time estimation.

INTRODUCTION: Debate exists concerning the impact of complete mesocolic excision (CME) on long-term oncological outcomes. The aim of this review was to condense the updated literature and assess the effect of CME on long-term survival after right colectomy for cancer. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through July 2023. The included studies evaluated the effect of CME on survival. The primary outcome was long-term overall survival. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. GRADE methodology was used to summarize the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Ten studies (3665 patients) were included. Overall, 1443 (39.4%) underwent CME. The RMSTD analysis shows that at 60-month follow-up, stage I-III CME patients lived 2.5 months (95% CI 1.1-4.1) more on average compared with noCME patients. Similarly, stage III patients that underwent CME lived longer compared to noCME patients at 55-month follow-up (6.1 months; 95% CI 3.4-8.5). The time-dependent HRs analysis for CME vs. noCME (stage I-III disease) shows a higher mortality hazard in patients with noCME at 6 months (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.71), 12 months (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43-0.73), and 24 months (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.92) up to 27 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that CME is associated with unclear OS benefit in stage I-III disease. Caution is recommended to avoid overestimation of the effect of CME in stage III disease since the marginal benefit of a more extended resection may have been influenced by tumor biology/molecular profile and multimodal adjuvant treatments.

A sutureless overlapped anastomosis technique using linear staplers with reinforced bioabsorbable material in robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis.

AIM: Creation of an overlapped anastomosis using handsewn sutures for common enterotomy is very popular in robotic right colectomy (RRC) with intracorpareal anastomosis (IA). The aim of this study is to present a simple method for constructing a sutureless overlapped anastomosis using a 60 mm linear stapler with a reinforced bioabsorbable material in RRC with IA. METHOD: The distal ileum and proximal colon were put in overlapping positions. Enterotomies were created 2 cm proximal to the ileal stump and 8 cm distal to the colonic stump on the antimesenteric side. Subsequently, a 60 mm linear stapler with a reinforced bioabsorbable material was inserted into each lumen and fired. Finally, the bowel was elevated while holding the bioabsorbable material, and the common enterotomy was grasped with the robotic instrument in the middle and closed using a linear stapler with a reinforced bioabsorbable material. RESULTS: This technique was applied to 10 patients with tumours of the caecum, ascending colon, or transverse colon. The median operating time, anastomosis construction time, blood loss, and postoperative stay were 281 min (range 228-459 min), 12 min (range 11-17 min), 10 mL (range 0-110 mL), and 10 days (range 8-15 days), respectively. No adverse intraoperative events were observed. Postoperatively, one patient developed chylous ascites, but there were no other complications. CONCLUSION: The simple technique for constructing a sutureless overlapped anastomosis using a 60 mm linear stapler with a reinforced bioabsorbable material in robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis appears to be safe and feasible.

Surgical quality assessment for the prospective study of oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic modified complete mesocolic excision for nonmetastatic right colon cancer (PIONEER study).

BACKGROUND: The modified complete mesocolic excision (mCME) procedure for right-sided colon cancer is a tailored approach based on the original complete mesocolic excision (CME) methodology. Limited studies evaluated the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic mCME using objective surgical quality assessments in patients with right colon cancer. The objectives of the PIONEER study were to evaluate oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic mCME and to identify optimal clinically relevant endpoints and values for standardizing laparoscopic right colon cancer surgery based on short-term outcomes of procedures performed by expert laparoscopic surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is an ongoing prospective, multi-institutional, single-arm study conducted at five tertiary colorectal cancer centers in South Korea. Study registrants included 250 patients scheduled for laparoscopic mCME with right-sided colon adenocarcinoma (from the appendix to the proximal half of the transverse colon). The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included 3-year overall survival, incidence of morbidity in the first 4 weeks postoperatively, completeness of mCME, central radicality, and distribution of metastatic lymph nodes. Survival data will be available after the final follow-up date (June 2024). RESULTS: The postoperative complication rate was 12.9%, with a major complication rate of 2.7%. In 87% of patients, central radicality was achieved with dissection at or beyond the level of complete exposure of the superior mesenteric vein. Mesocolic plane resection with an intact mesocolon was achieved in 75.9% of patients, as assessed through photographs. Metastatic lymph node distribution varied by tumor location and extent. Seven optimal clinically relevant endpoints and values were identified based on the analysis of complications in low-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic mCME for right-sided colon cancer produced favorable short-term postoperative outcomes. The identified optimal clinically relevant endpoints and values can serve as a reference for evaluating surgical performance of this procedure.

Comparative long-term outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is currently widely used in left-sided colorectal cancer. Some clinical comparative studies have been conducted, providing evidence of its safety and oncological benefits. However, these studies are typically characterized by small sample sizes and short postoperative follow-up periods. Consequently, in this research, the authors adopt the propensity score matching method to undertake a large-scale retrospective comparative study on NOSES colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer, with the goal of further augmenting the body of evidence-based medical support for NOSES. METHODS: This retrospective study involved patients who underwent NOSES colectomy and conventional laparoscopic (CL) colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer between January 2014 and April 2021. In the NOSES group, specimens were extracted through the anus with the help of a Cai tube (homemade invention: ZL201410168748.2). The patients were matched at a ratio of 1:1 according to age, sex, BMI, tumor diameter, tumor location (descending and splenic flexure colon/ sigmoid colon/ middle and upper rectum), tumor height from anal verge, ASA grade, previous abdominal surgery, clinical pathologic stage, preoperative CEA. After matching, 132 patients in the NOSES group and 132 patients in the CL group were eligible for analysis. RESULTS: Compared with CL group, NOSES group was associated with decreased postoperative maximum pain score (2.6±0.7 vs. 4.7±1.7, P=0.000), less additional analgesia required (6.8 vs. 34.8%, P=0.000), faster time to passage of flatus (2.3±0.6 days vs. 3.3±0.7 days, P=0.000), less wound infection (0.0 vs. 6.1%, P=0.007), and longer operative time (212.5±45.8 min vs. 178.0±43.4 min, P=0.000). No significant differences were observed in estimated blood loss, time to resume regular diet, postoperative hospital stay, conversion to open surgery or conventional minilaparotomy, total morbidity, readmission, mortality, pathologic outcomes, and Wexner incontinence score between groups. After a median follow-up of 63.0 months, the 5-year overall survival rates were 88.3 versus 85.0% (P=0.487), disease-free survival rates were 82.9 versus 83.6% (P=0.824), and the local recurrence rates were 4.4 versus 4.0% (P=0.667) in the NOSES and CL groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that NOSES colectomy using a Cai tube for left-sided colorectal cancer is a safe and feasible option with better cosmetic results, less pain, faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, and comparable long-term clinical and oncologic outcomes to CL colectomy.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a systematic review of the evidence.

Robotics may facilitate the realization of fully minimally invasive right hemicolectomy, including intra-corporeal anastomosis and off-midline extraction, when compared to laparoscopy. Our aim was to compare laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with robotic right hemicolectomy in terms of peri-operative outcomes. MEDLINE was searched for original studies comparing laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with robotic right hemicolectomy in terms of peri-operative outcomes. The systematic review complied with the PRISMA 2020 recommendations. Variables related to patients' demographics, surgical procedures, post-operative recovery and pathological outcomes were collected and qualitatively assessed. Two-hundred and ninety-three publications were screened, 277 were excluded and 16 were retained for qualitative analysis. The majority of included studies were observational and of limited sample size. When the type of anastomosis was left at surgeon's discretion, intra-corporeal anastomosis was favoured in robotic right hemicolectomy (4/4 studies). When compared to laparoscopy, robotics allowed harvesting more lymph nodes (4/15 studies), a lower conversion rate to open surgery (5/14 studies), a shorter time to faeces (2/3 studies) and a shorter length of stay (5/14 studies), at the cost of a longer operative time (13/14 studies). Systematic review of existing studies, which are mostly non-randomized, suggests that robotic surgery may facilitate fully minimally invasive right hemicolectomy, including intra-corporeal anastomosis, and offer improved post-operative recovery.