2D versus 3D laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a developmental multicentre randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: The role of laparoscopy in rectal cancer has been questioned. 3D laparoscopic systems are suggested to aid optimal surgical performance but have not been evaluated in advanced procedures. We hypothesised that stereoscopic imaging could improve the performance of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME). METHODS: A multicentre developmental randomised controlled trial comparing 2D and 3D laparoscopic TME was performed (ISRCTN59485808). Trial surgeons were colorectal consultants that had completed their TME proficiency curve and underwent stereoscopic visual testing. Patients requiring elective laparoscopic TME with curative intent were centrally randomised (1:1) to 2D or 3D using Karl Storz IMAGE1 S D3-Link™ and 10-mm TIPCAM®1S 3D passive polarising laparoscopic systems. Outcomes were enacted adverse events as assessed by the observational clinical human reliability analysis technique, intraoperative data, 30-day patient outcomes, histopathological specimen assessment and surgeon cognitive load. RESULTS: 88 patients were included. There were no differences in patient or tumour demographics, surgeon stereopsis, case difficulty, cognitive load, operative time, blood loss or conversion between the trial arms. 1377 intraoperative adverse events were identified (median 18 per case, IQR 14-21, range 2-49) with no differences seen between the 2D and 3D arms (18 (95% CI 17-21) vs. 17 (95% CI 16-19), p = 0.437). 3D laparoscopy had non-significantly higher mesorectal fascial plane resections (94 vs. 77%, p = 0.059; OR 0.23 (95% CI 0.05-1.16)) but equal lymph node yield and circumferential margin distance and involvement. 30-day morbidity, anastomotic leak, re-operation, length of stay and readmission rates were equal between the 2D and 3D arms. CONCLUSION: Feasibility of performing multicentre 3D laparoscopic multicentre trials of specialist performed complex procedures is shown. 3D imaging did not alter the number of intraoperative adverse events; however, a potential improvement in mesorectal specimen quality was observed and should form the focus of future 3D laparoscopic TME trials.

Can the combination of laparoscopy and enhanced recovery improve long-term survival after elective colorectal cancer surgery?

AIM: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes and laparoscopic techniques both provide short-term benefits to patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. ERAS protocol compliance may improve long-term survival in those undergoing open colorectal resection but as laparoscopic data has not been reported. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the impact of the combination of laparoscopy and ERAS management on 5-year overall survival. METHODS: A dedicated prospectively populated colorectal cancer surgery database was reviewed. Patient inclusion criteria were biopsy-proven colorectal adenocarcinoma, undergoing elective surgery undertaken with curative intent. All patients were managed within an established ERAS programme and routinely followed up for 5 years. Overall survival was measured using the log-rank Kaplan-Meier method at 5 years. RESULTS: Eight hundred fifty-four patients met the inclusion criteria. Four hundred eighty-one (56%) cases were laparoscopic with 98 patients (20%) requiring conversion. There were no differences in patient or tumour demographics between the surgical groups. Median ERAS protocol compliance was 93% (range 53-100%). Five-year overall survival was superior in laparoscopic cases compared with that of converted and open surgery (78 vs 68 vs 70%, respectively, p < 0.007). An open approach (HR 1.55, 95%CI 1.16-2.06, p = 0.002) and delayed hospital discharge (> 7 days, HR 1.5, 95%CI 1.13-1.9, p = 0.003) were the only modifiable risk factors associated with poor survival. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a laparoscopic approach with enhanced recovery after surgery management appears to have long-term survival benefits following colorectal cancer resection.

The use of artificial neural networks to predict delayed discharge and readmission in enhanced recovery following laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Artificial neural networks (ANNs) can be used to develop predictive tools to enable the clinical decision-making process. This study aimed to investigate the use of an ANN in predicting the outcomes from enhanced recovery after colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: Data were obtained from consecutive colorectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery within the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program between 2002 and 2009 in a single center. The primary outcomes assessed were delayed discharge and readmission within a 30-day period. The data were analyzed using a multilayered perceptron neural network (MLPNN), and a prediction tools were created for each outcome. The results were compared with a conventional statistical method using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 275 cancer patients were included in the study. The median length of stay was 6 days (range 2-49 days) with 67 patients (24.4 %) staying longer than 7 days. Thirty-four patients (12.5 %) were readmitted within 30 days. Important factors predicting delayed discharge were related to failure in compliance with ERAS, particularly with the postoperative elements in the first 48 h. The MLPNN for delayed discharge had an area under a receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.817, compared with an AUROC of 0.807 for the predictive tool developed from logistic regression analysis. Factors predicting 30-day readmission included overall compliance with the ERAS pathway and receiving neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer. The MLPNN for readmission had an AUROC of 0.68. CONCLUSIONS: These results may plausibly suggest that ANN can be used to develop reliable outcome predictive tools in multifactorial intervention such as ERAS. Compliance with ERAS can reliably predict both delayed discharge and 30-day readmission following laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.

Factors predicting 30-day readmission after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery within an enhanced recovery programme.

AIM: Hospital readmission within 30 days of surgery has become a marker of poor quality patient care. This study aimed to investigate factors predictive of 30-day readmission after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programme. METHOD: Consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within an ERAS programme between 2002 and 2009 were included. Data were collected relating to patient demographics, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, ERAS compliance, and operative and postoperative outcomes. A logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with readmissions after adjusting for the potential effect of covariables simultaneously. RESULTS: In all, 268 cancer patients underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery (108 rectal resections), of whom 34 (12.7%) were readmitted due most commonly to bowel obstruction (29%) and surgical site infection (18%). The use of neoadjuvant therapy (odds ratio 4.49, 95% CI 1.41-14.35; P = 0.011) and ERAS compliance above 93% (odds ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.18-0.84; P = 0.016) were independent predictors of readmission. CONCLUSION: Poor ERAS compliance and preoperative chemoradiotherapy were significant predictors of readmission following laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. Further research is required to expand the scope of ERAS beyond hospital discharge.

Deviation and failure of enhanced recovery after surgery following laparoscopic colorectal surgery: early prediction model.

AIM: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes are well established, but deviation from the postoperative elements may result in delayed discharge. Early identification of such patients may allow remedial action to be taken. The aims of this study were to investigate factors associated with delayed discharge and to produce a predictive scoring system for ERAS failure. METHOD: A retrospective review was carried out of case notes of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resection and ERAS at Yeovil District Hospital between 2002 and 2009. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed and binary logistic regression was used to model a predictive scoring system. RESULTS: In all, 385 patient records were reviewed with a median length of stay of 6 days; 122 (31%) patients stayed longer than 1 week (delayed discharge) and 159 (41%) deviated in up to two postoperative ERAS factors. Patient demographic factors were not predictive of delayed discharge. Deviation from ERAS factors at the end of the first postoperative day, including continued intravenous fluid infusion, lack of functioning epidural, inability to mobilize, vomiting requiring nasogastric tube insertion and re-insertion of urinary catheter, were strongly associated with delayed discharge. A five-element predictive scoring system for ERAS failure and delayed discharge was formulated. CONCLUSION: Enhanced recovery failure and delayed discharge after laparoscopic colorectal surgery can be predicted by the early deviation from postoperative factors of an ERAS programme.