Robotic beyond total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancers: Perioperative and oncological outcomes from a multicentre case series.

BACKGROUND: Around 20% of rectal tumors are locally advanced with invasion into adjacent structures at presentation. These may require surgical resections beyond boundaries of total mesorectal excision (bTME) for radicality. Robotic bTME is under investigation. This study reports perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic bTME for locally advanced rectal cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicentre, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected robotic bTME resections (July 2015-November 2020). Demographics, clinicopathological features, short-term outcomes, recurrences, and survival were investigated. RESULTS: One-hundred-sixty-eight patients (eight centres) were included. Median age and BMI were 60.0 (50.0-68.7) years and 24.0 (24.4-27.7) kg/m2. Female sex was prevalent (n = 95, 56.8%). Fifty patients (29.6%) were ASA III-IV. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was given to 125 (74.4%) patients. Median operative time was 314.0 (260.0-450.0) minutes. Median estimated blood loss was 150.0 (27.5-500.0) ml. Conversion to laparotomy was seen in 4.8%. Postoperative complications occurred in 77 (45.8%) patients; 27.3% and 3.9% were Clavien-Dindo III and IV, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 1.2% (n = 2). R0 rate was 92.9%. Adjuvant chemotherapy was offered to 72 (42.9%) patients. Median follow-up was 34.0 (10.0-65.7) months. Distant and local recurrences were seen in 35 (20.8%) and 15 patients (8.9%), respectively. Overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 91.7, 82.1, and 76.8%. Disease-free survival (DFS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 84.0, 74.5, and 69.2%. CONCLUSION: Robotic bTME is technically safe with relatively low conversion rate, good OS, and acceptable DFS in the hands of experienced surgeons in high volume centres. In selected cases robotic approach allows for high R0 rates during bTME.

Optimizing the Personalized Care for the Management of Rectal Cancer: A Consensus Statement.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in Turkey. The current guidelines do not provide sufficient information to cover all aspects of the management of rectal cancer. Although treatment has been standardized in terms of the basic principles of neoadjuvant, surgical, and adjuvant therapy, uncertainties in the management of rectal cancer may lead to significant differences in clinical practice. In order to clarify these uncertainties, a consensus program was constructed with the participation of the physicians from the Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar and Koç Universities. This program included the physicians from the departments of general surgery, gastroenterology, pathology, radiology, nuclear medicine, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and medical genetics. The gray zones in the management of rectal cancer were determined by reviewing the evidence-based data and current guidelines before the meeting. Topics to be discussed consisted of diagnosis, staging, surgical treatment for the primary disease, use of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment, management of recurrent disease, screening, follow-up, and genetic counseling. All those topics were discussed under supervision of a presenter and a chair with active participation of related physicians. The consensus text was structured by centralizing the decisions based on the existing data.

An international multi-institutional analysis of operative morbidity in patients undergoing elective diverticulitis surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated surgical complications of elective surgery for diverticulitis in international multi-institution to identify a prediction model for potential opportunities of quality improvement. METHODS: We identified 1225 patients who underwent elective surgery for diverticulitis between January 2010 and January 2018. The data were obtained from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and the Turkish Diverticulitis Study Group Collaborative, retrospectively. RESULTS: We observed that the presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 3.2, 95%CI 1.8-5.9, p<0.001) or abscess at the time of surgery (OR: 1.4, 95%CI 1.2-1.7, p£0.001) is associated with a higher rate of minor complications, while comorbidities such as dyspnea (OR: 2.8, 95%CI 1.6-4.9, p£0.001) and preoperative sepsis (OR: 4.1, 95%CI 2.3-7.3, p£0.001) are associated with major complications. The centers had similar findings in minor and major complications (OR: 0.8, 95%CI 0.5-1.4, p=0.395). The major independent predictors for complications were malnutrition (low albumin) (OR: 0.5, 95%CI 0.4-0.6, p<0.001) and the American Society of Anesthesiology score (OR: 1.7, 95%CI 1.2-2.4, p=0.002). CONCLUSION: Regarding the major and minor complications of diverticulitis of elective surgery, the malnutrition and higher American Society of Anesthesiology score showed higher impact among the quality improvement initiatives.

An international multi-institutional analysis of operative morbidity in patients undergoing elective diverticulitis surgery

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: We investigated surgical complications of elective surgery for diverticulitis in international multi-institution to identify a prediction model for potential opportunities of quality improvement. METHODS: We identified 1225 patients who underwent elective surgery for diverticulitis between January 2010 and January 2018. The data were obtained from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and the Turkish Diverticulitis Study Group Collaborative, retrospectively. RESULTS: We observed that the presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR: 3.2, 95%CI 1.8-5.9, p<0.001) or abscess at the time of surgery (OR: 1.4, 95%CI 1.2-1.7, p£0.001) is associated with a higher rate of minor complications, while comorbidities such as dyspnea (OR: 2.8, 95%CI 1.6-4.9, p£0.001) and preoperative sepsis (OR: 4.1, 95%CI 2.3-7.3, p£0.001) are associated with major complications. The centers had similar findings in minor and major complications (OR: 0.8, 95%CI 0.5-1.4, p=0.395). The major independent predictors for complications were malnutrition (low albumin) (OR: 0.5, 95%CI 0.4-0.6, p<0.001) and the American Society of Anesthesiology score (OR: 1.7, 95%CI 1.2-2.4, p=0.002). CONCLUSION: Regarding the major and minor complications of diverticulitis of elective surgery, the malnutrition and higher American Society of Anesthesiology score showed higher impact among the quality improvement initiatives.

Does Obesity Impact Surgical and Pathological Outcomes in Robotic Complete Mesocolic Excision for Colon Cancer?

Background: Obesity is one of the contributing factors to technical difficulties in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. However, there are no data regarding the outcomes for obese patients undergoing robotic complete mesocolic excision (CME) for colon cancer. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether robotic CME in obese patients can be performed with similar morbidity and pathological results compared with nonobese patients. Methods: Patients who underwent robotic CME between 2014 and 2019 were classified into obese and nonobese groups. Obesity was defined as body mass index ≥30 kg/m2. Demographic data, perioperative outcomes and pathological results were compared between the groups. Results: There were 42 and 105 patients in the obese and nonobese group, respectively. The groups were comparable regarding preoperative characteristics. There were no significant differences with respect to operative times (244 ± 64 versus 304 ± 75 minutes, P = .29), blood loss (median, 50 versus 80 mL, P = .20), intraoperative complications (0% versus 3.8%, P > .99), and conversions (0% versus 1.9%, P > .99). No differences were detected in length of hospital stay (6 ± 1 versus 6 ± 2 days, P = .73), anastomotic leak (2.4% versus 1.9%, P > .99), septic complications, reoperations (2.4% versus 3.8%), and readmissions (2.4% versus 2.9%) (P > .05). The mean number of harvested lymph nodes (33 ± 11 versus 34 ± 13, P = .79), resection margin status, and mesocolic fascia grading were similar. Conclusion: Robotic CME in obese patients can be performed with a similar morbidity and pathological profile compared with nonobese patients. The Clinical Trial Registration number is not applicable for this study.

Metastasis to lymph nodes around the vascular tie worsens long-term oncological outcomes following complete mesocolic excision and conventional colectomy for right-sided colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Oncologic outcomes after complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer are under investigation. The aim of our study was to compare CME and conventional colectomy (CC) in terms of pathological and oncological outcomes for right colon cancer and to evaluate the impact of lymph node metastasis around the vascular tie on survival. METHODS: Consecutive patients with right colon cancer who had CME or CC between January 2011 and August 2018 at two specialized centers in Turkey were included. Statistical analyses were performed with respect to demographic characteristics, operative and pathologic outcomes, harvested and metastatic lymph nodes around the vascular tie (LNVT), recurrences, and survival. RESULTS: There were 91 patients in the CME group (58 males, mean age 64 ± 16 years) and 192 patients in the CC group (96 males, mean age 66 ± 14 years). The mean number of harvested lymph nodes (CME: 42 ± 15 vs CC: 34 ± 13, p = 0.01) and LNVT were higher in the CME group (CME: 3.2 ± 2.2 vs CC: 2.4 ± 1.6, p = 0.001). LNVT metastases were 7.7% and 8.3% in the CME and CC groups, respectively (p = 0.85). Three-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 96.4% and 90.9% in the CME group and 90.4% and 87.6% in the CC group in stage I-III patients (p > 0.05). In stage III patients, the 3-year overall survival (92.5% vs 63.5%, p = 0.03) and disease-free survival (85.6% vs 52.1%, p = 0.008) were significantly better in LNVT-negative patients than in LNVT-positive patients. CONCLUSION: LNVT metastasis seems to be the key factor associated with poor disease-free and overall survival in right colon cancer regardless of the radicality of surgery.

Minimally invasive versus open surgery for gastric cancer in Turkish population.

Objectives: In this study, it was aimed to compare short-term outcomes of minimally invasive and open surgery for gastric cancer in the Turkish population carrying both European and Asian characteristics. Material and Methods: Short-term (30-day) outcomes of the patients undergoing minimally invasive and open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenec- tomy for gastric adenocarcinoma between January 2013 and December 2017 were compared. Patient demographics, history of previous abdominal surgery, comorbidities, short-term perioperative outcomes and histopathological results were evaluated between the study groups. Results: There were a total of 179 patients. Fifty (28%) patients underwent minimally invasive [laparoscopic (n= 19) and robotic (n= 31)] and 129 (72%) patients underwent open surgery. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of age, sex, body mass index and ASA scores. While operative time was significantly longer in the minimally invasive surgery group (p <0.0001), length of hospital stay and operative morbidity were com- parable between the groups. Conclusion: While both laparoscopic and robotic surgery is safe and feasible in terms of short-term outcomes in selected patients, long operating time and increased cost are the major drawbacks of the robotic technique preventing its widespread use.

Operative and long-term oncological outcomes in patients undergoing robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes after robotic versus laparoscopic approach in patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective robotic and laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer were included. Perioperative clinical characteristics, postoperative short- and long-term outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: There were 72 and 44 patients in robotic (RG) and laparoscopic (LG) groups respectively. No differences were detected regarding patients' demographics, histopathologic outcomes, conversion rates and 30-day overall postoperative complication rates. Operative time was longer in the RG (341 ± 111.7 vs. 263 ± 97.5 min, p = 0.001) and length of stay was longer in the LG (4.4 ± 1.9 vs. 6.4 ± 2.9 days, p = 0.001). The 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were similar (97.1% and 94.9%, p = 0.78; 86.2% and 82.7%, p = 0.72) between the groups. CONCLUSION: This study showed both short and long-term outcomes of a limited number of included patients between the robotic and laparoscopic surgery were similar. However, future studies and randomized trials are necessary to establish these findings.

Totally minimally invasive radical gastrectomy with the da Vinci Xi® robotic system versus straight laparoscopy for gastric adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding the outcomes of pure minimally invasive techniques of radical gastrectomy are scarce. We aimed to compare short-term post-operative outcomes in patients undergoing totally minimally invasive radical gastrectomy with the da Vinci Xi® robotic system versus straight laparoscopy for gastric adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Between December 2013 and March 2018, robotic and laparoscopic radical gastrectomy performed in two centres were included. Both groups were compared with respect to perioperative short-term outcomes. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included in the study. Anticoagulant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy use were higher in the robotic group (p = 0.02, p = 0.02). There were conversions in the laparoscopy group whereas no conversions occurred in the robotic group (p = 0.052). Operating time in the robotic group was longer (p = 0.001). The number of harvested lymph nodes in the laparoscopic group was higher (p = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Totally robotic technique with the da Vinci Xi® robotic system provides similar short-term results compared to laparoscopic surgery in radical gastrectomy.

Impact of Prolonged Neoadjuvant Treatment-surgery Interval on Histopathologic and Operative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Total Mesorectal Excision for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study primarily aimed to assess the impact of prolonged neoadjuvant treatment-surgery interval (PNSI) on histopathologic and postoperative outcomes. Impacts of the mode of neoadjuvant treatment (NT) and surgery on the outcomes were also evaluated in the same patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 2011 and December 2017, patients who underwent NT and total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancer were included. PNSI was defined as >4 and >8 weeks after short-course and long-course NT modalities, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 44 (27%) patients received short-course NT (standard interval: n=28; PNSI: n=16) and 122 (73%) patients received long-course NT (standard interval: n=39; PNSI: n=83). Postoperative morbidity was similar between the standard interval and PNSI in patients undergoing short-course [n=3 (11%) vs. n=3 (19%), P=0.455] and long-course [n=6 (15%) vs. n=16 (19%), P=0.602] NT. PNSI was associated with increased complete pathologic response in patients receiving short-course NT [0 vs. n=5 (31%), P=0.002]. Compared with short-course NT, long-course NT was superior in terms of tumor response based on the Mandard [Mandard 1 to 2: n=6 (21%) vs. 6 (38%), P=0.012] and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) [CAP 0 to 1: n=13 (46%) vs. n=8 (50%), P=0.009] scores. Postoperative morbidity was similar after open, laparoscopic, and robotic total mesorectal excision [n=1 (14.2%) vs. n=21 (21%) vs. n=6 (12.5%), P=0.455] irrespective of the interval time to surgery and the type of NT. CONCLUSIONS: PNSI can be considered in patients undergoing short-course NT due to its potential oncological benefits. The mode of surgery performed at tertiary centers has no impact on postoperative morbidity after both NT modalities.

Live surgical demonstrations for minimally invasive colorectal training.

PURPOSE: Live surgical demonstrations are considered an effective educational tool providing a chance for trainees to observe a real-time decision-making process of expert surgeons. No data exists evaluating the impact of live surgical demonstrations on the outcomes of minimally invasive colorectal surgery. This study evaluates perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery in the setting of live surgical demonstrations. METHODS: Patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery which was performed as live surgical demonstrations (the study group) performed between 2006 and 2018 were reviewed. These patients were case-matched with those undergoing operations in routine practice (the control group). The study and control group were compared for intraoperative and short-term postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-nine live surgery cases in the study group were case-matched with its thirty-nine counterparts as the control group. Operating time was longer (200 vs 165 min; p = 0.002) and estimated intraoperative blood loss was higher in the study group (100 vs 55 ml; p = 0.008). Patients in the study group stayed longer in the hospital (6 vs 5 days; p = 0.001). While conversion (n = 4 vs n = 1, p = 0.358) and intraoperative complications (n = 6 vs n = 2, p = 0.2) were more frequent in the study group, these outcomes did not reach statistical significance. Overall complications were higher in the study group (n = 22 vs n = 9, p = 0.003). One patient underwent a reoperation due to postoperative bleeding, and one mortality occurred in the live surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: Live surgical demonstrations in minimally invasive colorectal surgery seem to be associated with increased risk of operative morbidity.

Management of Complicated Ostomy Dehiscence: A Case Study.

BACKGROUND: Stoma creation is a common procedure in colorectal surgery. Despite improved surgical techniques, ostomy-related wound complications may prolong the recovery period and impair health-related quality of life. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), autolytic debridement agents, and silver dressings are often used for managing complex wound infection and dehiscence. These applications have the potential to increase patient comfort and accelerate recovery. CASE: We report our experience in a 66 year old female who had a wound dehiscence involving the ostomy after robotic abdominoperineal resection. Her medical history was significant for a rectovaginal fistula which occurred after a low anterior resection for rectal cancer 5 years ago. Interventions for treatment of the dehiscence were use of NPWT, autolytic debriding agent, and silver dressing. CONCLUSION: Combined use of these interventions for dehiscence of an ostomy can minimize patient discomfort and accelerate wound healing.

Short-term Results After Totally Robotic Restorative Total Proctocolectomy With Ileal Pouch Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis.

In this study, we aimed to present our initial experience on totally robotic total restorative proctocolectomy in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. Patients undergoing a totally robotic restorative total proctocolectomy with ileal J-pouch anal anastomosis for UC between January 2015 and November 2017 were included. The da Vinci Xi was used for the operations. Patient demographics, perioperative and short-term operative outcomes were evaluated. Ten patients were included. The median operative time was 380 minutes(range, 300 to 480 min). The median blood loss was 65 mL (range, 5 to 400 mL). No conversion to open surgery was needed. The median time to flatus was 1 day (range, 1 to 2) and length of stay was 6 (4 to 12) days. Short-term complications (≤30 d) were superficial wound infection (n=3), anal bleeding (n=1), pouchitis (n=1). No mortality was observed during the study period. Our study, which is the largest series so far, reveals that totally robotic restorative proctocolectomy is a safe and feasible option for the surgical treatment of UC.

Totally laparoscopic and totally robotic surgery in patients with left-sided colonic diverticulitis.

BACKGROUND: Introduction of the da Vinci Xi system has facilitated the use of robotics in colorectal surgery. Nevertheless, data on the outcomes of robotic surgery for the treatment of colonic diverticulitis have remained scarce. METHODS: Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and perioperative outcomes of the patients undergoing totally robotic with the da Vinci Xi system or laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colonic diverticulitis (LCD) were compared. RESULTS: Laparoscopic and robotic groups included 22 and 20 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of patient demographics, clinical characteristics, operative time, and postoperative complications. There were three conversions in the laparoscopy group and no conversion in the robotic group (P = 0.23). Conversion to open surgery was associated with postoperative morbidity (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery is an applicable alternative for the treatment of LCD. Robotic approach may potentially lower the risk of operative morbidity by reducing the requirement of conversion.

Robotic Complete Mesocolic Excision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Hemicolectomy for Right-Sided Colon Cancer.

Background: Robotic technique has been proposed to overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery. In this study, we aimed at determining whether robotic complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right-sided colon cancer can be safe and effective as conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (CLRH). Materials and Methods: Between February 2015 and September 2017, patients undergoing robotic right CME and CLRH with curative intent for right-sided colon cancer were included. Patient characteristics, short-term and histopathological outcomes were compared between the groups. Results: Ninety-six patients (robotic, n = 35) were included in this study. The operative time (286 ± 77 versus 132 ± 40 minutes, P = .0001) was significantly longer in the robotic group. There were no conversions in either group. No significant differences existed between the groups regarding the mean estimated blood loss, time to first flatus, length of hospital stay (6 ± 3 versus 6 ± 3 days, P = .64), and follow-up times (robotic 15 ± 8 versus laparoscopic 16 ± 10 months P = .11). Overall complication rates (n = 10 [29%] versus n = 15 [25%], P = .67) were similar. In the robotic group, vascular injury occurred in 2 patients, and both were repaired robotically. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was significantly higher (41 ± 12 versus 33 ± 10, P = .04) and length between the vascular tie and colonic wall was longer (13 ± 3.5 versus 11 ± 3, P = .02) in the robotic group. Conclusion: Although robotic right CME seems equally safe to CLRH in terms of short-term morbidity, future prospective randomized trials are needed to define its role for treatment of right colectomy.

Totally robotic complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer.

Complexity and operative risks of complete mesocolic excision (CME) seem to be important drawbacks to generalize this procedure in the surgical treatment of right colon cancer. Robotic systems have been developed to improve quality and outcomes of minimal invasive surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of robotic right-sided CME and present our initial experience. A retrospective review of 37 patients undergoing totally robotic right-sided CME between February 2015 and November 2017 was performed. All the operations were carried out using the key principles of both CME with intracorporeal anastomosis and no-touch technique. Data on perioperative clinical findings and short-term outcomes were analyzed. There were 20 men and 17 women with a mean age of 64.4 ± 13.5 years and a body mass index of 26.8 ± 5.7 kg/m2. The mean operative time and estimated blood loss were 289.8 ± 85.3 min and 77.4 ± 70.5 ml, respectively. Conversion to laparoscopy occurred in one patient (2.7%). All the surgical margins were clear and the mesocolic plane surgery was achieved in 27 (72.9%) of the cases. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 41.8 ± 11.9 (median, 40; range 22-65). The mean length of hospital stay was 6.6 ± 3.7 days. The intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were 5.4 and 21.6%, respectively. We believe that use of robot for right-sided CME is feasible and appears to provide remarkably a high number of harvested lymph nodes with good specimen quality.

Adoption of robotic technology in Turkey: A nationwide analysis on caseload and platform used.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist regarding adoption of evolving robotic technology in surgery. This study evaluated trends and the current condition of robotic platforms in surgical specialties and general surgical subspecialties. METHODS: Between January 2013 and December 2017, all robotic operations performed in Turkey were included. RESULTS: In the study period, 13 760 robotic operations were performed at 32 hospitals. The median numbers of general surgical procedures were 43and eight cases per hospital and per general surgeon, respectively. The high-volume general surgeons performed 1734 (81%) of the cases. Forty-five percent and 55% of the general surgical operations were performed with the Xi and S/Si robots, respectively. CONCLUSION: Use of the Xi platform seems to increase caseload in general surgery operations possibly by facilitating robotic colorectal surgery. Targeting the high-volume centres and surgeons for further training and implantation of upcoming robotic technology can be more effective in terms of increasing case volume and improving outcomes.

Dealing with the gray zones in the management of gastric cancer: The consensus statement of the Istanbul Group.

The geographical location and differences in tumor biology significantly change the management of gastric cancer. The prevalence of gastric cancer ranks fifth and sixth among men and women, respectively, in Turkey. The international guidelines from the Eastern and Western countries fail to manage a considerable amount of inconclusive issues in the management of gastric cancer. The uncertainties lead to significant heterogeneities in clinical practice, lack of homogeneous data collection, and subsequently, diverse outcomes. The physicians who are professionally involved in the management of gastric cancer at two institutions in Istanbul, Turkey, organized a consensus meeting to address current problems and plan feasible, logical, measurable, and collective solutions in their clinical practice for this challenging disease. The evidence-based data and current guidelines were reviewed. The gray zones in the management of gastric cancer were determined in the first session of this consensus meeting. The second session was constructed to discuss, vote, and ratify the ultimate decisions. The identification of the T stage, the esophagogastric area, imaging algorithm for proper staging and follow-up, timing and patient selection for neoadjuvant treatment, and management of advanced and metastatic disease have been accepted as the major issues in the management of gastric cancer. The recommendations are presented with the percentage of supporting votes in the results section with related data.