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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Barriers to adopting intracorporeal anastomosis in colorectal procedures amongst Australian general surgeons.

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive colonic anastomosis can be performed intracorporeally or extracorporeally with laparoscopic or robotic assistance. In colorectal surgery, choosing the optimal approach is still controversial. Mainly, the debate involves balancing the potential benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) with increased technical difficultly with the more straightforward and widely accepted extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). Both techniques require different skill sets, and this study aims to identify barriers that prevent adoption of ICA. METHODS: A 31-point questionnaire survey was distributed through the General Surgeons Australia (GSA) platform of active general surgeon in Australia. It was open for 2 months between July and August 2023. Statistical analysis was completed using descriptive analysis and logistic regression. RESULTS: Forty-three general surgeons completed the survey. ECA was the most performed and preferred surgical technique. It was identified that increased operative time is the biggest barrier to completing ICA followed by lack of training and no perceived benefit with ICA. Patient comorbidities did not result in choosing ICA over ECA; however, surgeons with less experience and volume in colorectal surgery were more likely complete ECA in operations with increased technical difficulty. CONCLUSION: Although ECA is the go-to technique for many Australian general surgeons, it is evident that they may be overlooking the benefits offered by ICA. Further training is required to improve operative times and confidence in the technique. Ongoing research, audits of existing techniques, and updated training will assist surgeons becoming acquainted with the latest evidence and to offer the best care to their patients.

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.

Clinical outcomes and perioperative morbidity and mortality following segmental resections of the colon for Crohn's colitis.

INTRODUCTION: Crohn's disease (CD) is a chronic inflammatory bowel disease of a multifactorial pathogenesis. Recently numerous genetic variants linked to an aggressive phenotype were identified, leading to a progress in therapeutic options, resulting in a decreased necessity for surgery. Nevertheless, surgery is often inevitable. The aim of the study was to evaluate possible risk factors for postoperative complications and disease recurrence specifically after colonic resections for CD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 241 patients who underwent colonic and ileocaecal resections for CD at our instiution between 2008 and 2018 were included. All data was extracted from clinical charts. RESULTS: Major complications occurred in 23.8% of all patients. Patients after colonic resections showed a significantly higher rate of major postoperative complications compared to patients after ICR (p = < 0.0001). The most common complications after colonic resections were postoperative bleeding (22.2%), the need for revision surgery (27.4%) and ICU (17.2%) or hospital readmission (15%). As risk factors for the latter, we identified time interval between admission and surgery (p = 0.015) and the duration of the surgery (p = 0.001). Isolated distal resections had a higher risk for revision surgery and a secondary stoma (p = 0.019). Within the total study population, previous bowel resections (p = 0.037) were identified as independent risk factors for major perioperative complications. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that both a complex surgical site and a complex surgical procedure lead to a higher perioperative morbidity in colonic resections for Crohn's colitis.

Developing a phantom for simulating robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision using 3D printing and medical imaging.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision is an advanced procedure mainly because of the great variability in anatomy. Phantoms can be used for simulation-based training and assessment of competency when learning new surgical procedures. However, no phantoms for robotic complete mesocolic excision have previously been described. This study aimed to develop an anatomically true-to-life phantom, which can be used for training with a robotic system situated in the clinical setting and can be used for the assessment of surgical competency. METHODS: Established pathology and surgical assessment tools for complete mesocolic excision and specimens were used for the phantom development. Each assessment item was translated into an engineering development task and evaluated for relevance. Anatomical realism was obtained by extracting relevant organs from preoperative patient scans and 3D printing casting moulds for each organ. Each element of the phantom was evaluated by two experienced complete mesocolic excision surgeons without influencing each other's answers and their feedback was used in an iterative process of prototype development and testing. RESULTS: It was possible to integrate 35 out of 48 procedure-specific items from the surgical assessment tool and all elements from the pathological evaluation tool. By adding fluorophores to the mesocolic tissue, we developed an easy way to assess the integrity of the mesocolon using ultraviolet light. The phantom was built using silicone, is easy to store, and can be used in robotic systems designated for patient procedures as it does not contain animal-derived parts. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed phantom could be used for training and competency assessment for robotic-assisted complete mesocolic excision surgery in a simulated setting.

Impact of institutional volume on short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic colectomy.

INTRODUCTION: The impact of institutional volume on postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic colectomy is still being debated. This study aimed to investigate whether differences in postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic colon resection exist between high- and low-volume centers. METHODS: Data were reviewed for 1360 patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer between 2016 and 2022. Patients were divided according to whether they were treated at a high-volume center (≥100 colorectal surgeries annually; n = 947) or a low-volume center (<100 colorectal surgeries annually; n = 413). Propensity score matching was applied to balance covariates and minimize selection biases that could affect outcomes. Finally, 406 patients from each group were matched. RESULTS: After matching, patients from high-volume centers showed a higher number of retrieved lymph nodes (19 vs. 17, p < .001) and more frequent involvement of expert surgeons (98.3% vs. 88.4%, p < .001). Postoperative complication rates were similar between groups (p = .488). No significant differences between high- and low-volume centers were seen in relapse-free survival (88.8% each, p = .716) or overall survival (85.7% vs. 82.8%, p = .480). CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that in appropriately educated organizations, relatively safe procedures and good prognosis may be obtained for laparoscopic colectomy cases, regardless of institutional volume.

Continuous monitoring of adverse effects improves surgical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: There has been significant debate about the advantages and disadvantages of using administrative databases or clinical registry in healthcare improvement programs. The aim of this study was to review the implementation and outcomes of an accountability policy through a registry maintained by professionals of the surgical department. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients admitted to the department between 2003 and 2022 were prospectively included. All adverse events (AEs) occurring during the admission, convalescent care in facilities, or at home for a minimum period of 30 days after discharge were recorded. RESULTS: Out of 60,125 records, 24,846 AEs were documented in 16,802 cases (27.9%). There was a progressive increase in the number of AEs recorded per admission (1.17 in 2003 vs. 1.93 in 2022) with a 26% decrease in entries with AEs (from 35.0% in 2003 to 25.8% in 2022), a 57.5% decrease in reoperations (from 8.0% to 3.4%, respectively), and an 80% decrease in mortality (from 1.8% to 1.0%, respectively). It is noteworthy that a significant reduction in severe AEs was observed between 2011 and 2022 (56% vs. 15.6%). CONCLUSION: A prospective registry of AEs created and maintained by health professionals, along with transparent presentation and discussion of the results, leads to sustained improvement in outcomes in a surgical department of a university hospital.

Comparing the short-term clinical outcomes and therapeutic effects of different colectomies in patients with refractory slow-transit constipation in eastern countries: a network meta-analysis.

Surgical treatment has been widely used in patients with refractory slow transit constipation (RSTC). The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the effects of different colectomies on short-term postoperative complications and quality of life in patients with RSTC. Electronic literature searches were performed in the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, WANFANG DATA, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials databases and were searched up to December 2022. Selected to compare the short-term clinical outcomes and quality of life of the treatment of RSTC. A random-effects Bayesian NMA was conducted to assess and rank the effectiveness of different surgical modalities. This study included a total of six non-randomized controlled trials involving 336 subjects. It was found that subtotal colectomy with cecorectal anastomosis (CRA) demonstrated superior effectiveness in several aspects, including reduced hospital stay (MD 0.06; 95% CI [0.02, 1.96]), shorter operative time (MD 4.75; 95% CI [0.28, 14.07]), lower constipation index (MD 0.61; 95% CI [0.04, 1.71]), improved quality of life (MD 4.42; 95% CI [0.48, 4.42]). Additionally, in terms of short-term clinical outcomes, subtotal colectomy with ileosigmoidal anastomosis (SC-ISA) procedure ranked the highest in reducing small bowel obstruction (OR 0.24; 95% CI [0.02, 0.49]), alleviating abdominal pain (OR 0.53; 95% CI [0.05, 1.14]), minimizing abdominal distension (OR 0.33; 95% CI [0.02, 0.65]), and reducing incision infection rates (OR 0.17; 95% CI [0.01, 0.33]). Furthermore, SC-ISA ranked as the best approach in terms of patient satisfaction (OR 0.66; 95% CI [0.02, 1.46]). Based on our research findings, we recommend that CRA be considered as the preferred treatment approach for patients diagnosed with RSTC.

Patient Experiences after Intracorporeal Right Hemicolectomy: Evaluating Patient Reported Outcome Measures via Short Form-36.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after intracorporal anastomosis (ICA) during laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. STUDY DESIGN: An observational study. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of General Surgery, Griffith Base Hospital, New South Wales, Australia, from August 2022 till February 2023. METHODOLOGY: Participants who underwent laparoscopic intracorporeal right hemicolectomy were included in this study. Patients requiring emergency procedures or with a history of psychiatric illness were excluded. The Short Form-36 (SF-36); a quality of life (QoL) questionnaire employed focusing on physical health-related domains post laparoscopic intracorporeal hemicolectomy. The relationship between QoL domains and operative outcomes specific to this anastomotic technique was also assessed. RESULTS: The SF-36 scores at six weeks and six months postoperation revealed shifts in the overall QoL following ICA. Notably, physical function showed significant improvement, while bodily pain remained a significant concern. The correlation analysis found operative blood loss and the length of the extraction site to be significantly correlated with postoperative physical role. CONCLUSION: The study determined that decreased operative blood loss and a shorter extraction site were associated with improved postoperative physical role. It showed the overall QoL improved within six months of the procedure, with the bodily pain domain still an area requiring attention. Understanding the impact of laparoscopic ICA on patient-reported outcomes may help in tailoring patient-cantred approaches and enhancing the overall quality of care. KEY WORDS: Intracorporeal, Right hemicolectomy, Patient-reported outcome measures, Colorectal anastomosis.

The Patient Perspective on Colectomy for Recurrent Diverticulitis: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Understand the patient's decision-making process regarding colectomy for recurrent diverticulitis. BACKGROUND: The decision to pursue elective colectomy for recurrent diverticulitis is highly preference-sensitive. Little is known about the patient's perspective in this decision-making process. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study utilizing focus groups of patients with recurrent diverticulitis at 3 centers across the United States. Using an iterative inductive/deductive approach, we developed a conceptual framework to capture the major themes identified in the coded data. RESULTS: From March 2019 to July 2020, 39 patients were enrolled across 3 sites and participated in 6 focus groups. After coding the transcripts using a hierarchical coding system, a conceptual framework was developed. Major themes identified included participants' beliefs about surgery, such as normative beliefs (eg, subjective, value placed on surgery), control beliefs (eg, self-efficacy, stage of change), and anticipated outcomes (eg, expectations, anticipated regret); the role of behavioral management strategies (eg, fiber, eliminate bad habits); emotional experiences (eg, depression, embarrassment); current symptoms (eg, severity, timing); and quality of life (eg, cognitive load, psychosocial factors). Three sets of moderating factors influencing patient choice were identified: clinical history (eg, source of diagnosis, multiple surgeries), clinical protocols (eg, pre-op and post-op education), and provider-specific factors (eg, specialty, choice of surgeon). CONCLUSIONS: Patients view the decision to undergo colectomy through 3 major themes: their beliefs about surgery, their psychosocial context, and moderating factors that influence participant choice to undergo surgery. This knowledge is essential both for clinicians counseling patients who are considering colectomy and for researchers studying the process to optimize care for recurrent diverticulitis.

LAPAROSCOPIC RIGHT AND LEFT COLECTOMY: WHICH PROVIDES BETTER POSTOPERATIVE RESULTS FOR ONCOLOGY PATIENTS?

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic approach considerably reduced the morbidity of colorectal surgery when compared to the open approach. Among its benefits, we can highlight less intraoperative bleeding, early oral intake, lower rates of surgical site infection, incisional hernia, and postoperative pain, and earlier hospital discharge. AIMS: To compare the perioperative morbidity of right versus left colectomy for cancer and the quality of laparoscopic oncologic resection. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients submitted to laparoscopic right and left colctomy between 2006 and 2016. Postoperative complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo scale, 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 293 patients were analyzed, 97 right colectomies (33.1%) and 196 left colectomies (66.9%). The averageage was 62.8 years. The groups were comparable in terms of age, comorbidities, body mass index, and the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification. Preoperative transfusion was higher in the right colectomy group (5.1% versus 0.4%, p=0.004, p<0.05). Overall, 233 patients (79.5%) had no complications. Complications found were grade I and II in 62 patients (21.1%) and grade III to V in 37 (12.6%). Twenty-three patients (7.8%) underwent reoperation. The comparison between left and right colectomy was not statistically different for operative time, conversion, reoperation, severe postoperative complications, and length of stay. The anastomotic leak rate was comparable in both groups(5.6% versus 2.1%, p=0.232, p>0.05). The oncological results were similar in both surgeries. In multiple logistic regression, ASA statistically influenced the worst results (≥ III; p=0.029, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The surgical and oncological results of laparoscopic right and left colectomies are similar, making this the preferred approach for both procedures.

Collagen patch cover facilitates recovery of bowel function after laparoscopic colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Numerous factors can influence bowel movement recovery and anastomotic healing in colorectal surgery, and poor healing can lead to severe complications and increased medical expenses. Collagen patch cover (CPC) is a promising biomaterial that has been demonstrated to be safe in animal models and has been successfully applied in various surgical procedures in humans. This study. METHODS: A retrospective review of medical records from July 2020 to June 2022 was conducted to identify consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy. Patients who received CPC at the anastomotic site were assigned to the collagen group, whereas those who did not receive CPC were assigned to the control group. RESULTS: Data from 241 patients (collagen group, 109; control group, 132) were analyzed. Relative to the control group, the collagen group exhibited a faster recovery of bowel function, including an earlier onset of first flatus (2.93 days vs. 3.43 days, p < 0.01), first defecation (3.73 days vs. 4.18 days, p = 0.01), and oral intake (4.30 days vs. 4.68 days, p = 0.04). CPC use was also associated with lower use of postoperative intravenous analgesics. The complication rates in the two groups did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: CPCs can be safely and easily applied to the anastomotic site during laparoscopic colectomy, and can accelerate bowel movement recovery. Further studies on the effectiveness of CPCs in colorectal surgery involving larger sample sizes are required. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT05831956 (26/04/2023).

Robotic True D3 Lymph Node Dissection With Superior Mesenteric Vein-Taping Technique for Right-Sided Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: D3 is unaffected by anatomic factors even when the ileocolic artery runs along the dorsal side of the superior mesenteric vein. Complete "true D3" lymph node dissection in minimally invasive surgery for right-sided colon cancer could be beneficial for certain patients with lymph node metastases. IMPACT OF INNOVATION: The study aimed to determine the safety and feasibility of robotic true D3 lymph node dissection for right-sided colon cancer using a superior mesenteric vein-taping technique. TECHNOLOGY, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: The superior mesenteric vein was slowly and gently separated from the surrounding tissues and taped. Lifting the tape with the robotic third arm and fixing it in place using rock-stable tractions provides a good surgical view, which cannot otherwise be obtained. As a result, the ileocolic artery that branches from the superior mesenteric artery can be accurately exposed. Handling of the taping then enables expansion to a different surgical view. As the lymph nodes are originally concealed on the dorsal side of the superior mesenteric vein, this technique provides a good view for lymph node dissection. The root of the ileocolic artery was clipped and separated, and true D3 was thus completed. PRELIMINARY RESULTS: Fourteen patients underwent robotic true D3 lymph node dissection for right-sided colon cancer. No Clavien-Dindo classification grade II or higher intraoperative or postoperative complications were observed. The 30-day mortality rate was 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Our robotic true D3 lymph node dissection with superior mesenteric vein-taping technique is considered safe and feasible; it might be a promising surgical procedure for treating advanced right-sided colon cancer. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Even when the ileocolic artery runs along the dorsal aspect of the superior mesenteric vein, the technique seems promising for facilitating robotic D3 lymph node dissection.