Outcome of Tumor-Specific Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: The Impact of Laparoscopic Resection

Objective

The study aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic and open resection for rectal cancer in 1,063 consecutive cases in a single center.

Methods

We performed an analysis of 11 years of experience in rectal cancer surgery and compared the outcome of laparoscopic and open surgery. Multivariate and subgroup analysis was performed to look at the effect of the level of tumor and stage of disease on short-term outcomes like conversion rate, anastomotic leak rate, length of stay, complication rate, 30-day mortality, and long-term outcomes like local recurrence and survival.

Results

A total of 1,063 patients underwent rectal resection with 470 (44.2 %) patients undergoing the laparoscopic approach. Groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, or co-morbidities, and the operating time was longer in the laparoscopic group (210 vs. 150 min; p value < 0.001). A conversion rate of 6.8 % was noted, with an anastomotic leak rate of 3.87 % in the open group and 2.97 % in the laparoscopic group. The laparoscopic group had a lower blood loss (100 vs. 350 ml; p < 0.001), lower complication rates, and shorter length of stay (6 vs. 9 days). The local recurrence rate was comparable, and the laparoscopic approach had better overall and cancer-specific survival, even after adjusting for stages. The laparoscopic approach was an independent factor associated with better overall and cancer-specific survival on multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

We confirmed the oncological safety of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Laparoscopic surgery also showed superiority in the short-term and long-term outcomes of rectal cancer.     

Influence of conversion on the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer compared with primarily open resection

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the influence of conversion on perioperative and short- and long-term oncologic outcomes in laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer and to compare these with those for an open control group.

Methods

The data of 276 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for rectal cancer between 2006 and 2010 at a single institution were prospectively collected. Of the 276 patients, 114 underwent primarily open surgery, and 162 underwent laparoscopic surgery (on an intention-to-treat basis). Of the 162 laparoscopic patients, 38 (23.5 %) underwent conversion to open surgery. The three groups of patients were compared: the conversion surgery group, the open surgery group, and the completed laparoscopy surgery group.

Results

The converted patients had more wound infections (18.4 vs 4.8 %, p = 0.009), but the wound infection rate in the primarily open group also was significantly higher than in the laparoscopic resection group (p = 0.007). No further differences in perioperative morbidity, including anastomotic leakage, were found. The perioperative 30-day mortality rate was comparable between all the groups (0.6 vs 2.6 vs 2.6 %, nonsignificant difference). The oncologic parameters such as number of harvested lymph nodes and rate of R0 resection were equal in all the groups. The completed laparoscopy group had a shorter hospital stay [12 vs 16 days in the primarily open group (p = 0.02) vs 15 days in the converted group (p = 0.03)]. The rates for survival, local recurrence (4.5 vs 3 vs 3 %), and metachronous metastasis (10.1 vs 9.3 vs 9 %) did not differ significantly between the three groups after a period of 3 years.

Conclusion

Conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic rectal resection has no negative effect on perioperative or long-term oncologic outcome.     

Integration of open and laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer resection: oncologic and short-term outcomes

Background

Laparoscopy is increasingly used for rectal cancer surgery. Laparoscopic surgery is not attempted for some suitable patients because of concerns for conversion or technical difficulty. This study aimed to evaluate oncologic and short-term outcomes for patients undergoing curative resection for rectal cancer via laparoscopic and open approaches.

Methods

A prospective database was reviewed to identify rectal cancer resections from 2005 to 2011. Patients who had primary rectal cancer within 15 cm of the anal verge were included in the study. Those with recurrent or metastatic disease were excluded. Patients were assigned to laparoscopic or open approaches preoperatively based on clinical criteria and imaging. All patients underwent a standard total mesorectal excision and followed a standardized enhanced recovery pathway. The oncologic and clinical outcomes were evaluated by approach.

Results

The analysis included 81 patients. The preoperative assignments consisted of 62 laparoscopic (77 %) and 19 open (23 %) procedures. Nine laparoscopic procedures (14.5 %) were converted to open procedures. After a median follow-up period of 25 months, all oncologic outcomes were comparable. Three patients (two laparoscopic, one open) had a positive circumferential margin (≤1 mm). The laparoscopic and open groups were similar in terms of their 3-year disease-free periods (93.6 vs. 88.2 %; P = 0.450) and overall survival periods (93.5 vs. 90.9 %; P = 0.766). The local recurrence rate was 2.5 %.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer can be attempted for most patients. Conversion to open procedure does not compromise clinical or oncologic outcomes. In practice, combining laparoscopic and open surgery optimizes resource use and results in at least equivalent outcomes.     

Laparoscopic Salvage Surgery for Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer

Background

Surgical treatment for locally recurrent rectal cancer is challenging, and the value of laparoscopic surgery in such cases is unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare the feasibility of laparoscopic surgery with that of open surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer.

Methods

Thirty patients with local rectal cancer recurrence at the anastomotic site or lateral pelvic lymph nodes were evaluated. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the laparoscopic (n?=?13) and open (n?=?17) groups.

Results

The median operation time was significantly longer (381 vs. 241 min) but the median estimated blood loss tended to be smaller (110 vs. 450 mL) in the laparoscopic than in the open group. There was only one converted case (7.7 %). The R0 resection rate (100 vs. 94 %) and postoperative complications (31 vs. 24 %) were not significantly different between the two groups. The median times to flatus (1 vs. 2 days), first stool (2 vs. 5 days), and oral intake (2 vs. 5 days) were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic than in the open group.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgery for locally recurrent rectal cancer has short-term benefits over open surgery and has potential as a treatment option for locally recurrent rectal cancer.     

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer: results of a prospective multicentre analysis of 4,970 patients

Objective

To compare laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer and analyse the results of the multidisciplinary audited project on total mesorectal excision conducted in Spain.

Background

The safety and therapeutic efficiency of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer are controversial due to the technical difficulties it involves. A deviation from the oncological principles of mesorectal excision would mean a potential increase in local recurrence and shorter survival.

Methods

This prospective non-randomised multicentre study includes 4,970 patients with rectal cancer. The study compares perioperative, postoperative, anatomicopathological and survival variables.

Results

Five hundred and sixty five patients were excluded. Of the remaining 4,405, 3,018 (68.51 %) had open surgery (OS) and 1,387 (31.49 %) laparoscopic surgery (LS). The rate of anterior resections was higher in the LS group. The rate of intraoperative tumour perforation, number of red blood cell concentrates transfused and length of hospital stay were greater in the OS group, whereas surgical time was longer in the LS group. The incidence of complications was 45.6 % in the OS group and 38.3 % in the LS group. Involvement of the circumferential and distal margin, as well as unsatisfactory and partially satisfactory quality of the mesorectum, were greater in the OS group. There were no differences for local recurrence and survival rates.

Conclusions

According to these results, laparoscopic surgery is the best option for the surgical treatment of rectal cancer, with similar rates of local recurrence and survival, although there are oncological indicators in this study to suggest that these results can be improved with laparoscopic surgery.     

Laparoscopic-assisted anterior resection with double-stapling technique anastomosis: safe and feasible for lower rectal cancer?

Background

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been considered more demanding than laparoscopic colectomy due to its technical difficulties.

Objective

The aim of this study was to show safety and feasibility of laparoscopic low anterior resection for lower rectal cancer reconstructed by double-stapling technique (DST).

Methods

The present study reviewed 159 patients with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic anterior resection reconstructed by DST. They were subdivided into two groups: 98 patients with upper rectal cancer located between 75 and 150 mm from the anal verge (group A) and 61 with lower rectal cancer located within 75 mm from the anal verge (group B). Short-term results and pathological findings were compared between the two groups.

Results

There was no conversion in both groups. Operating time and intraoperative blood loss were similar in the two groups. No mortality occurred in either group. Overall morbidity rate was 10.2% in group A and 11.5% in group B (p = 0.798). Anastomotic leak rate was similar in the two groups (2.0% in group A versus 3.3% in group B; p = 0.638). Pathological examination of resected specimen showed no involvement of distal resection margin or circumferential resection margin in both groups.

Conclusions

The present study shows that laparoscopic surgery is safe and feasible for lower rectal cancer in a very select group of patients.     

Comparison of tumor recurrence between laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with sphincter preservation and laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer

Background

By traditional open surgery, the tumor recurrence rate of total mesorectal excision with sphincter-preserving procedure was lower than that of abdominoperineal resection (APR) for the treatment of low rectal cancer. The present study aimed to rescrutinize whether the same conclusion can be drawn when both surgical procedures are performed laparoscopically.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the prospectively recorded clinicopathologic data of 344 consecutive patients with low rectal cancer, in which 170 patients underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME), whereas 174 patients underwent laparoscopic TME directly without chemoradiotherapy. Such patients were further stratified according to the pathologic tumor, node, metastasis stage (stage II or III disease) and surgical strategy (APR or sphincter-preserving operation [SPO]). The surgical procedures are presented in supplemental videos. The disease-free survival, recurrence patterns, and functional recovery of patient groups stratified as appropriate were compared.

Results

In patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy, the estimated recurrence rate were similar between laparoscopic TME with SPO and laparoscopic APR with 10.6 %, 7 of 66, versus 18.5 %, 5 of 27, in stage II disease (p = 0.811, log-rank test); and 19.3 %, 11 of 57, versus 20 %, 4 of 20, in stage III disease (p = 0.980). In patients without preoperative chemoradiotherapy, the recurrence rate was significantly higher in laparoscopic APR than in the laparoscopic TME with SPO group of patients with stage III disease (45 %, 9 of 20, vs. 19.3 %, 16 of 83, p = 0.025), whereas the recurrence rate of the two procedures was similar (21.4 %, 3 of 14, vs. 17.5 %, 10 of 57, p = 0.702) in stage II disease.

Conclusions

When low rectal cancer was operated on by laparoscopic approach, the poorer prognosis of APR compared to SPO was only observed in stage III patients without preoperative chemoradiotherapy.     

Outcome of laparoscopic colectomy for cancer in elderly patients

Background

Resection for colon cancer in the elderly is a major undertaking. However, data on the outcome and survival of elderly patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for colon cancer are limited. This study of patients older than 75 years compared outcome and survival between those who underwent laparoscopic resection and those who had open resection for colorectal cancer.

Methods

From 2000 to 2009, 434 patients ages 75 years and older who underwent elective resection for colon cancer were included in the study. Patients who had rectal cancer or had undergone emergency operations were excluded. Preoperative diagnosis was determined by colonoscopy, and computed tomography scan was performed for preoperative staging. Data on the patients’ demographics, operative details, pathology results, postoperative results, and survival were collected prospectively. The patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were compared with those who had open surgery.

Results

The study included 434 patients (210 men) with a median age of 80 years (range 75–95 years). Of these 434 patients, 189 underwent laparoscopic resection. Nine patients (4.8 %) required conversion to open operation. The patients did not differ in terms of age, gender, incidence of medical comorbidities, or stage of disease. The median operating time was longer in the laparoscopic group, but the blood loss was significantly less. Laparoscopic resection was associated with a lower mortality rate and a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.05). The open resection group had significantly more cardiac complications (p < 0.05). The overall 5-year survival rates were similar between the patients who had laparoscopic resections and those who had open surgery.

Conclusions

For patients older than 75 years, laparoscopic resection of colon is associated with less intraoperative blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, fewer cardiac complication, and a lower mortality rate than open resection. Therefore, the authors recommend laparoscopic resection of colon cancer as the treatment of choice for elderly patients.     

Comparison of Peristomal Adhesion Formation Between Laparoscopic and Open Low Anterior Resection of Rectal Cancer

Background

Postoperative adhesions appear to be less common following laparoscopic surgery than after conventional open surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the impact of laparoscopic and conventional open rectal surgery on peristomal adhesion formation.

Methods

We enrolled 97 subjects who were participants in a trial comparing open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. These patients had undergone rectal cancer surgery with ileostomy formation. Peristomal adhesions were assessed during ileostomy takedown using an adhesion grading system: (1) no adhesions or fine, filmy adhesions separable by blunt dissection; (2) dense adhesions, separable by sharp dissection; (3) very dense adhesions, resulting in enterotomy and/or requiring extension of the abdominal wall incision.

Results

A total of 57 patients underwent laparoscopic resection (group A) and 40 underwent open resection (group B). Operating time for ileostomy dissection was shorter in group A than in group B (14.6 vs. 19.8 min, respectively; p = 0.047). Dense adhesions (grades 2 and 3) were more common in group B (22/40, 55 %) than in group A (12/57, 21 %; p < 0.001). In particular, grade 3 adhesions were present only in group B (6/40).

Conclusions

The present findings suggest that laparoscopic rectal surgery results in less peristomal adhesion formation than does conventional open surgery.     

Survival following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery

Background

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is known to provide increased benefits to patients during the postoperative recovery period. Initial scepticism over the oncological adequacy of resection has been dismissed by a number of major randomized trials. Emerging evidence indicates that laparoscopic surgery may provide a potential survival benefit in colorectal cancer.

Methods

Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic or open resection for colorectal cancer between October 2003 and December 2010 were analyzed. Data were collated and a database compiled. Survival analysis was calculated by using the Kaplan–Meier method.

Results

A total of 665 resections were performed with 457 laparoscopically and 208 open. The median length of stay was 4 days following laparoscopic resection and 7 days following open (p < 0.0005). There was no significant difference between the two groups apart from gender (p = 0.03), ASA (p = 0.03), and the number of patients with extranodal metastatic disease (p = 0.01). The 5-year overall survival (OS) in the completed laparoscopic group was 75.8 versus 72.5 % in the open group (p = 0.12). The 5-year OS in patients who were converted was 52 %. The 5-year OS for nonmetastatic disease in the completed laparoscopic group was significantly greater at 79.4 versus 74 % in the open group (p = 0.03). There was no difference between the groups in OS for rectal cancer (p = 0.66), but there was an OS advantage for laparoscopically resected colon cancer (p = 0.02).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic resection for nonmetastatic colon cancer may provide an overall survival advantage.     

Clinicopathological Features and Prognostic Factors of Rectal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors

Aim

Rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) was a rare disease. This study sought to summarize clinicopathological features and prognostic factors of rectal GISTs.

Methods

Clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic factors of rectal GISTs were investigated by reviewing patients undergoing curative resection at the Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center between 1986 and 2010.

Results

Twenty-one patients, 15 male and 6 female, were included. The mean age of onset was 51 years. The most common initial presentation was hematochezia (7 cases). Eleven patients underwent radical resection, and the other 10 received local resection. No lymph node metastases were identified. All cases were positive for CD117. Seventeen patients were classified as high National Institutes of Health (NIH) risk category. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival were 33 and 46 %, respectively. Fifteen cases had recurrence postoperatively. Both univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated the NIH risk category (p?=?0.028) and hematochezia symptom (p?=?0.014) were independent prognostic factors of the DFS of patients.

Conclusions

Hematochezia was the most common initial symptom. Over 50 % of patients received radical surgery. More than 80 % of patients were at high NIH risk of recurrence. Hematochezia symptom and high NIH risk category indicated poor prognosis of rectal GISTs.     

Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Stage I Rectal Cancer: Long-term Oncologic Outcomes

Background

Laparoscopic resection is increasingly being performed for rectal cancer. However, few data are available to compare long-term outcomes after open versus laparoscopic surgery for early-stage rectal cancer.

Methods

Included in this retrospective study were 160 patients who underwent surgery for stage I rectal cancer between 2001 and 2008. Perioperative outcomes, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared for open versus laparoscopic surgery.

Results

Altogether, 85 patients were treated using open surgery and 80 with laparoscopic surgery. Postoperative mortality (0 vs. 1.3 %; p = 1.00), morbidity (31.3 vs. 25.0 %; p = 0.38), and harvested lymph nodes (22.5 vs. 20.0; p = 0.84) were similar for the two groups. However, operating time was longer (183.8 vs. 221.0 min; p = 0.008), volume of intraoperative bleeding was less (200.0 vs. 150.0 ml; p = 0.03), time to first bowel movement was shorter (3.54 vs. 2.44 days; p < 0.001), rate of superficial surgical-site infection was lower (7.5 vs. 0 %; p = 0.03), and postoperative hospital stay was shorter (11.0 vs. 8.0 days; p < 0.001) in the laparoscopy group than in the open surgery group. At 5 years, there was no difference in OS (98.6 vs. 97.1 %; p = 0.41) or DFS (98.2 vs. 96.4 %; p = 0.30) between the open and laparoscopy groups.

Conclusions

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for stage I rectal cancer were comparable to those of open surgery. Laparoscopic surgery, however, produced more favourable short-term outcomes than open surgery.     

Does laparoscopic adrenalectomy jeopardize oncologic outcomes for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma?

Background

For patients with known or suspected adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC), considerable controversy exists over the use of laparoscopic adrenalectomy. The purpose of this study was to assess recurrence and survival patterns in patients with a pathologic diagnosis of ACC treated with laparoscopic versus open adrenalectomy.

Methods

All patients referred to our center with a diagnosis of ACC from April 1, 1993 to May 1, 2012 were reviewed. Three groups of patients were compared: patients referred after laparoscopic resection elsewhere, patients referred after open resection elsewhere, and patients treated primarily at our center (all resected by the open approach). Clinical factors and overall, recurrence-free, and peritoneal recurrence-free survivals were compared between groups.

Results

During the study period, 46 patients presented after laparoscopic resection at an outside institution, 210 patients after open resection at an outside institution, and 46 patients were treated at our institution with open resection. Despite a smaller tumor size, patients treated laparoscopically developed peritoneal carcinomatosis more frequently compared to those treated with an open approach (p = 0.006 for number with peritoneal recurrence). When controlling for tumor stage, open-approach patients experienced superior recurrence-free and overall survival.

Conclusion

Despite typically being performed in patients with smaller tumors, laparoscopic adrenalectomy for ACC is associated with higher rates of recurrence, particularly peritoneal recurrence. For patients with known or suspected ACC, the oncologic benefits of open resection outweigh the short-term benefits of minimally invasive surgery.     

Integration of transanal specimen extraction into laparoscopic anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a consecutive series of 179 patients

Background and objectives

This prospective study focused on patients with rectal cancer who underwent transanal specimen extraction after laparoscopic anterior resection with total mesorectal excision and specifically aims to investigate whether the transanal approach can be accepted as a safe and effective method for extracting the malignant specimen from the peritoneal cavity.

Patients and methods

A prospectively designed database of a consecutive series of patients undergoing laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal malignancy with various tumor–node–metastasis (TNM) classifications from April 1991 to May 2011 at the Texas Endosurgery Institute was analyzed. Patient selection for transanal specimen extraction and intracorporeal anastomosis was made on the basis of size of the pathology and distance of rectal lesions from the anal verge.

Results

179 anterior resections were completed laparoscopically with intracorporeal anastomosis and transanal specimen extraction. The operating time for the entire procedures including resection, anastomosis, and specimen extraction was 170.9 ± 51.2 min, blood loss during the procedures was 86.4 ± 37.7 ml, and distance of the lower edge of the lesion from the anal verge was measured to be 11.3 ± 7.3 cm. Postoperatively, three patients developed anastomotic leakage with a leak rate of 1.7 %, and the overall major complication rate after the procedures was 5.0 %. Length of hospital stay was 6.9 ± 2.8 days. Two-year follow-up showed development of anal stenosis in three patients (2.0 %) and erectile dysfunction in one patient (0.36 %) after surgery. Finally, 9 out of 179 patients who underwent laparoscopic anterior resection with transanal specimen extraction were confirmed to have cancer recurrence, with 2-year local recurrence rate of 5.0 %.

Conclusions

Transanal specimen extraction in laparoscopic rectal cancer resection is a safe and effective approach with comparable local cancer recurrence rate and postoperative complication rates, suggesting it can be integrated into laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer.     

Long-Term Survival and Recurrence Outcomes Following Surgery for Distal Rectal Cancer

Background

Treatment of distal rectal cancer remains clinically challenging and includes proctectomy and coloanal anastomosis (CAA) or abdominoperineal resection (APR). The purpose of this study is to evaluate operative and pathologic factors associated with long-term survival and local recurrence outcomes in patients treated for distal rectal cancer.

Methods

A retrospective consecutive cohort study of 304 patients treated for distal rectal cancer with radical resection from 1993 to 2003 was performed. Patients were grouped by procedure (CAA or APR). Demographic, pathologic, recurrence, and survival data were analyzed utilizing chi-square analysis for comparison of proportions. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test for univariate and Cox regression for multivariate comparison.

Results

The median tumor distance from the anal verge was 2 cm [interquartile range (IQR) 0.5–4 cm]. Margins were negative in all but four patients (one distal, 0.3%; three radial, 1%). The 5-year overall survival rate was 82% (88.6% stage pI, 80.5% stage pII, 67.9% stage pIII). Older age, advanced pathologic stage, presence of lymphovascular or perineural invasion, earlier treatment period, and APR surgery type were associated with worse survival on multivariate analysis. The 5-year local recurrence rate was 5.3% after CAA and 7.9% after APR (p = 0.33).

Conclusions

Low rates of local recurrence and good overall survival can be achieved after treatment of distal rectal cancer with stage-appropriate chemoradiation and proctectomy with CAA or APR. Sphincter preservation can be achieved even with distal margins less than 2 cm.     

Characteristics and Risk Factors Associated with Permanent Stomas After Sphincter-Saving Resection for Rectal Cancer

Background

The aim of the present study was to identify the risk factors and patient characteristics associated with permanent stomas after sphincter-saving resection for rectal cancer.

Method

Between 2000 and 2007, 2,362 patients underwent sphincter-saving surgery [low anterior resection or ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR)] for rectal cancer. These patients were divided into two groups: 71 patients with permanent stomas and 2,291 patients without permanent stomas after rectal cancer surgery.

Results

Of the 71 permanent stomas (3 % of the patients), 34 (48 %) were ileostomies, 11 (15 %) were loop colostomies, 10 (14 %) were treated by Hartmann’s operation, and 16 (23 %) were treated by abdominoperineal resection. Diverting stomas were created in 364 patients; 3 % (n = 11) of them could not be reversed due to anastomosis-related complications. Permanent stomas were constructed at a median of 20 months after sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer. The main causes of permanent stomas were local recurrence (n = 27), anastomotic leakage (n = 12), fistula (n = 9), and anastomosis site stricture (n = 7). The main causes of early permanent stomas (<1 year) were anastomosis-related complications, whereas for late permanent stomas (≥1 year), the main cause was local cancer recurrence. The independent risk factors for permanent stomas were local recurrence, postoperative pelvic sepsis, male gender of the patient, the uLAR operation type, and perioperative radiation therapy.

Conclusions

In a high-volume surgical center, sphincter-saving surgery for rectal cancer is associated with a low incidence of permanent stoma.     

Metastatic lymph node ratio as a prognostic factor after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for extraperitoneal rectal cancer

Background

The lymph node ratio (LNR; number of positive nodes divided by total nodes harvested) has been demonstrated to be a prognostic factor in colon cancer, but its role in extraperitoneal rectal cancer is still debated; furthermore, no data are available on laparoscopic rectal resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of LNR on long-term outcomes after laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) for extraperitoneal cancer in consecutive patients with a 5-year minimum follow-up.

Methods

This study is a prospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent LTME for adenocarcinoma of the extraperitoneal rectum.

Results

LTME was performed in 158 patients. The median number of LN harvested was 12 (range = 3–25). The proportion of specimens with fewer than 12 examined LN was significantly higher in patients who had neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (p < 0.001). During a median follow-up period of 122 months, the local recurrence rate was 8 %. At univariate analysis, disease-free survival and overall survival significantly decreased with increasing LNR (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the distal margin ≤1 cm was the only independent predictor of local recurrence (p = 0.028). LNR (cutoff value = 0.25) and lymphovascular invasion were significant prognostic factors for both disease-free (p = 0.015 and p = 0.046, respectively) and overall survival (p = 0.031 and p = 0.040, respectively). Even in the subgroup of patients in whom fewer than 12 LN were examined, LNR confirmed its prognostic role, with a statistical trend toward worse disease-free survival and overall survival.

Conclusion

Metastatic LNR is an independent prognostic factor for disease-free survival and overall survival after LTME for extraperitoneal rectal cancer.     

Laparoscopy for rectal cancer reduces short-term mortality and morbidity: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although definitive long-term results are not yet available, the global safety of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer treatment remains controversial. We evaluated differences in the safety of laparoscopic rectal resection versus open surgery for cancer.

Methods

A systematic review from 2000 to 2011 was performed searching the Medline and Embase databases (prospero registration CRD42012002406). We included randomized and prospective controlled clinical studies comparing laparoscopic and open resection for rectal cancer. Primary end points were 30-day mortality and overall morbidity. Then a meta-analysis was conducted by a fixed-effect model, performing a sensitivity analysis by a random-effect model. Relative risk (RR) was used as an indicator of treatment effect; a RR of less than 1.0 was in favor of laparoscopy. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot and heterogeneity by the I ² test and subgroup analysis on surgical and medical complications.

Results

Twenty-three studies, representing 4,539 patients, met the inclusion criteria; eight were randomized for a total of 1,746 patients. Mortality was observed in 1.0 % of patients in the laparoscopic group and in 2.4 % of patients in the open group. The overall RR was 0.46 (95 % confidence interval 0.21–0.99, p = 0.048). The raw incidence of overall complications was lower in the laparoscopic group (31.8 %) compared to the open group (35.4 %). The overall RR was 0.83 (95 % confidence interval 0.76–0.91, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

On the basis of evidence of both randomized and prospective controlled series, mortality and morbidity RR, including subgroup analysis, were significantly lower after laparoscopic compared to open surgery.     

Transvaginal specimen extraction versus conventional minilaparotomy after laparoscopic anterior resection for colorectal cancer: mid-term results of a case-matched study

Background

Although the vagina is considered a viable route during laparoscopic surgery, a number of concerns have led to a need to demonstrate the safety of a transvaginal approach in colorectal surgery. However, the data for transvaginal access in left-sided colorectal cancer are extremely limited, and no study has compared the clinical outcomes with a conventional laparoscopic procedure.

Objective

We compared the clinical outcomes of totally laparoscopic anterior resection with transvaginal specimen extraction (TVSE) with those of the conventional laparoscopic approach with minilaparotomy (LAP) for anastomosis construction and specimen retrieval in left-sided colorectal cancer.

Methods

Fifty-eight patients underwent TVSE between October 2006 and July 2011 and were matched by age, surgery date, tumor location, and tumor stage with patients who underwent conventional LAP for left-sided colorectal cancer.

Results

Operative time was significantly longer in the TVSE group (149.3 ± 39.8 vs. 131.9 ± 41.4 min; p = 0.023). Patients in the TVSE group experienced less pain (pain score 4.9 ± 1.6 vs. 5.8 ± 1.9; p = 0.008), shorter time to passage of flatus (2.2 ± 1.1 vs. 2.7 ± 1.2 days; p = 0.026), and higher satisfaction with the cosmetic results (cosmetic score 8.0 ± 1.4 vs. 6.3 ± 1.5; p = 0.001). More endolinear staplers for rectal transection were used in the LAP group (1.2 ± 0.5 vs. 1.1 ± 0.2; p = 0.021). Overall morbidities were similar in both groups; however, three wound infections only occurred in the LAP group. After a median follow-up of 34.4 (range 11–60) months, no transvaginal access-site recurrence occurred. The 3-year disease-free survival was similar between groups (91.5 vs. 90.8 %; p = 0.746).

Conclusions

Transvaginal access after totally laparoscopic anterior resection is safe and feasible for left-sided colorectal cancer in selected patients with better short-term outcomes.     

Recurrence Pattern Depends on the Location of Colon Cancer in the Patients with Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Background

The veins from the lower rectum drain into the systemic venous system, while those from other parts of the colon drain into the portal venous system. The aim of this study was to investigate recurrence pattern and survival according to the anatomical differences in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

Methods

From October 1994 to December 2009, synchronous CRLM patients who underwent surgery were identified from our prospectively collected database. The patients were excluded if there had been extrahepatic metastases. The patients were divided into two groups according to the location of the primary colorectal cancer: lower rectal cancer (group 1) and upper rectal or colon cancer (group 2). The recurrence patterns and survival were investigated.

Results

A total of 316 patients were included: 53 patients in group 1 and 263 patients in group 2. After a median follow-up of 37 months, the extrahepatic recurrence curve of group 1 was superior to that of group 2 (P < 0.001), although there was no difference between the hepatic recurrence curves (P = 0.93). The disease-free and overall survival curves of group 1 were inferior to those of group 2 (P = 0.004) (P < 0.001). Lower rectal cancer was a significant risk factor for extrahepatic recurrence in Cox proportional hazard model analysis (hazard ratio = 1.7, P = 0.04).

Conclusions

The extrahepatic recurrence rate is high in lower rectal cancer patients after surgical treatment for synchronous CRLM.