Optimizing outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery with robotic platforms

Advanced robotic technology may make it easier to perform total mesorectal excision procedures in the narrow pelvis for rectal cancer while maintaining the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer has been claimed to lower conversion rates and faster recovery of urogenital function than conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, longer operative time and high cost are major weaknesses of robotic surgery. To date, short-term surgical outcomes, pathologic outcomes, and long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery have not shown significant advantages over laparoscopic surgery. However, robotic surgery is still a valid and highly anticipated surgical approach for rectal cancer because it greatly reduces the surgeon's workload and learning curve. There are also potential advantages when robotic techniques are applied to technically demanding procedures such as lateral pelvic lymph node dissection or intersphincteric resection. The introduction of new surgical robotic systems, including the da Vinci® SP system, is expected to expand the applications of robotic surgery and provide new advantages.     

Simultaneous,single-docking robotic resection for right colon cancer with synchronous liver metastases

BackgroundHow best to manage colorectal cancer patients presenting resectable synchronous liver metastasis is still a matter of debate. A number of different available therapeutic strategies exist, with significant differences in terms of optimal timing and/or sequence of resection of the primary tumor and liver disease [1]. Over the last years, simultaneous resections are increasingly adopted for properly selected patients [[1], [2], [3]]. However, the application of minimally invasive surgery to combined colorectal and liver surgery is still controversial, especially in the case of liver disease requiring technically demanding resections [2,3].VideoThe presented video illustrates the details of a single-docking robotic right colectomy combined with ultrasound-guided, parenchymal-sparing resection of liver segments 6 and 7, as performed to treat a patient with locally advanced colorectal cancer and metastatic disease isolated to the right liver. Port placement strategy and main instrumentation employed are illustrated in Fig. 1, and Fig. 2, respectively. The total duration of surgery was 380 minutes. The hepatic hilum was encircled to allow extracorporeal Pringle maneuver during liver resection, though no clamping was eventually required. Right colectomy with central vascular ligation was thus carried out and an intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis performed. The patient had an uneventful postoperative course.ConclusionsWhen feasible, minimally invasive simultaneous resection may offer distinct advantages over conventional surgery while respecting the tenets of appropriate oncological resection [2,3]. The well-known benefits of minimally invasive surgery, including shorter overall hospital length of stay, reduced morbidity, and lower blood loss, are combined with the need to recover from a single major surgery. Robotic resection may be particularly suited for technically challenging procedures, such as colectomy combined with liver metastasectomies with unfavorable anatomical accessibility [3,4].     

Uptake of minimally invasive surgery for early stage colorectal cancer and its effect on survival: A population-based study

PurposeThe uptake of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) varies between jurisdictions. We aimed to identify the factors associated with the uptake of MIS for early-stage CRC and its oncologic outcomes in the Canadian province of Ontario.MethodsThis study includes all patients with CRC in Ontario from 2007 to 2017. A logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictors of MIS and a flexible parametric survival model to estimate survival rates based on MIS versus open surgery.ResultsIn total, 14,675 patients with CRC were identified of which 29.5% had MIS resections. The likelihood of undergoing MIS decreased with age, disease stage, and distance to the regional cancer center, and increased with year of diagnosis. The likelihood of mortality for MIS was significantly lower compared to open surgery (p < 0.001). In terms of survival, MIS was most beneficial to older patients with stage II disease, despite their lower likelihood of receiving MIS.ConclusionsDespite the lower uptake of MIS among older patients and patients with stage II disease, these patients had the greatest long-term survival benefit from MIS. This suggests further use of laparoscopy to patient populations that are often excluded.     

Robot-assisted surgery for gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is a relatively new research field, with convincing results mostly stemming from Asian countries. The use of the robotic surgery platform, thus far assessed as a safe procedure, which is also easier to learn, sets the background for a wider spread of minimally invasive technique in the treatment of gastric cancer. This review will cover the literature published so far, analyzing the pros and cons of robotic surgery and highlighting the remaining study questions.     

Increased oxidative stress with substantial dysregulation of genes related to oxidative stress and DNA repair after laparoscopic colon cancer surgery

Surgical stress is followed by oxidative stress, where reactive oxygene species may act as regulators of pathways related to cancer cell survival and metastatic ability. Furthermore, reactive oxygene species may cause DNA and RNA damage.The aim of this study was to examine whether laparoscopic colon cancer surgery causes oxidative stress and dysregulation of related pathways.MethodsPatients undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer were included. Blood and urine samples were drawn on the day prior to surgery and on day 1 and 10 after surgery.ResultsTwenty-six patients were included.Out of 140 genes previously identified as sensitive to regulation by reactive oxygene species, 46 were significantly differentially expressed on day 1 after surgery (FDR < 0.05). Upregulated genes were related to cellular immune suppression, proliferation, migration and epithelial to mesenchymal transition. Downregulated genes were related to IFN pathways and cytotoxic immunological reactions.Genes related to DNA repair were primarily downregulated on day one after surgery, and urinary excretion of 8oxdG was decreased on day two after (p = 0.004), and increased on day 10 after surgery (p = 0.01).ConclusionLaparoscopic colon cancer surgery causes oxidative stress, and impaired DNA repair. Gene expression profiling indicates that reactive oxygen species may act as regulators of pathways related to increased risk of metastasis and cellular immune suppression after surgery. Measures of intracellular oxidative stress, indicates impaired DNA repair on day two after surgery, and sustained oxidative stress on day 10 after surgery.     

Open, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: Optimizing the surgical approach

As advances in the understanding of prostatic anatomy led to improvements in functional and oncologic outcomes after prostatectomy of the past few decades, advances in technology and surgical technique have made minimally-invasive prostate surgery a reality. Today patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer have more surgical treatment options than in the past including open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Advantages and disadvantages exist for each modality and lead to subtle differences in the technical execution of the procedure. Evidence from centers of excellence and from experienced surgeons demonstrates that both laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy appear to be comparable to outcomes achieved with open radical retropubic prostatectomy series. Individual surgeon skill, experience and clinical judgment are likely the stronger predictors of outcome rather than the technique chosen. However, learning curves, oncologic outcomes and cost-efficacy remain important considerations in the dissemination of minimally-invasive prostate surgery. A greater appreciation of the periprostatic anatomy and further modification of surgical technique will result in continued improvement in functional outcomes and oncological control for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy, whether by open or minimally-invasive surgery.     

Minimizing the impact of colorectal surgery in the older patient: The role of minimally invasive surgery in the geriatric population

With an aging population comes a greater incidence of colorectal cancer and a corresponding need for surgical resection in the geriatric population. This heterogeneous group of patients may benefit from multidisciplinary pre-operative evaluation and optimization, prehabilitation, enhanced recovery protocols, and a minimally invasive approach to resection. Concerns regarding the ability of the older patient to tolerate the physiologic demands of pneumoperitoneum have not been validated. Conversely, these vulnerable patients may experience a greater reduction in morbidity than their younger counterparts through the use of minimally invasive techniques.     

结直肠癌并发急性肠梗阻手术方式的选择

目的探讨结直肠癌并发急性肠梗阻的外科治疗方法.方法分析1992年1月～2002年12月收治的108例结直肠癌并发急性肠梗阻的外科治疗情况.结果Ⅰ期切除吻合59例,切除肿瘤、双结肠造口6例,Hartmann手术20例,单纯结肠造口18例,肠捷径手术5例.全组切口感染8例(7.4%),肺部感染6例(5.5%),术后死亡2例(1.9%).无吻合口瘘发生.结论结直肠癌并发急性肠梗阻的手术方式应首选Ⅰ期切除吻合,对不宜Ⅰ期吻合者可采用双结肠造口或Hartmann手术以策安全.     

Present laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in Japan

In many clinical studies, laparoscopic surgery (LS) for colon cancer has been shown to be less invasive than open surgery (OS) while maintaining similar safety. Furthermore, there are no significant differences between LS and OS in long-term outcomes. Thus, LS has been accepted as one of the standard treatments for colon cancer. In the treatments of rectal cancer as well, LS has achieved favorable outcomes, with many reports showing long-term outcomes comparable to those of OS. Furthermore, the magnification in laparoscopy improves visualization in the pelvic cavity and facilitates precise manipulation, as well as providing excellent educational effects. For these reasons, rectal cancer has seemed to be well indicated for LS, as has been colon cancer. The indication for LS in the treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer, which is relatively unresectable (e.g., cancer invading other organs), remains an open issue. In recent years, new techniques such as single-port and robotic surgery have begun to be introduced for LS. Presently, various clinical studies in our country as well as in most Western countries have demonstrated that LS, with these new techniques, are gradually showing long-term outcomes.     

Safety and feasibility of robotic major hepatectomy for novice surgeons in robotic liver surgery: A prospective multicenter pilot study

BackgroundRobotic liver resection has not yet been widely implemented. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic major liver resection by performing a prospective multicenter study.MethodsFrom July 2017 to December 2018, five surgeons from five tertiary hospitals who were novices in robotic liver resection but experienced in open and laparoscopic liver resection performed 46 cases of robotic major anatomical liver resections. Perioperative clinical data and surgical data, including detailed procedure times were prospectively collected. All operations were performed according to a protocol for unify surgical techniques and instruments.ResultsTwenty-two cases of left hemihepatectomy, one case of extended left hemihepatectomy, 14 cases of right hemihepatectomy, two cases of right anterior sectionectomy, six cases of right posterior sectionectomy, and one case of central bisectionectomy were performed. The most common indications were hepatocellular carcinoma (21 cases) followed by intrahepatic duct stones (10 cases), intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma (7 cases), liver metastases (3 cases), intraductal papillary neoplasms (2 cases), sarcoma (1 case), mucinous cystic neoplasm (1 case), and hemangioma (1 case). Surgical resection margins for all tumor cases were negative. The mean operation time was 378.58 ± 124.31 (190–696) minutes and the estimated intraoperative blood loss was 276.67 ± 397.41 mL (range, 10–2600 mL). Overall complications developed in 16 cases (34.8%). There were three cases of severe surgical complications (Clavien-Dindo classification of III or more). Only one of 46 cases was converted to conventional open left hemihepatectomy because of bleeding. The mean hospital stay was 7.3 ± 2.5 (4–18) days.ConclusionsThe results of this study indicate that robotic anatomic major liver resection can be safely performed by robotic beginners who are advanced open and laparoscopic liver surgeons.     

腹腔镜手术治疗结直肠癌：外科的方向

 腹腔镜下结直肠癌手术是否能达到与开腹手术相同的肿瘤根治疗效曾存在争议。近年来，国际上主要的前瞻性大规模随机对照研究及大规模回顾性研究均揭示，腹腔镜下结直肠癌手术不仅具有损伤小、术后疼痛轻、肠道功能恢复快、住院时间短、不增加围手术期并发症等短期疗效，而且在肿瘤局部复发、远处转移、切口复发及长期生存率等方面，均可获得至少与开腹手术相同的远期疗效。相信随着循证医学研究的深入，腹腔镜手术在结直肠癌治疗中的地位将更加明确。     

Robotic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: Comparative study of short and long-term outcomes

Background

Despite the several series in which the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery were investigated, data concerning the long-term outcomes are still scarce.

Methods

The prospectively collected records of 65 consecutive patients with extraperitoneal rectal cancer who underwent robotic total mesorectal excision (RTME) were compared with those of 109 consecutive patients treated with open surgery (OTME). Patient characteristics, pathological findings, local and systemic recurrence rates and 5-year survival rates were compared.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative complications, reoperation and 30-day mortality. There were significant differences comparing groups: number of lymph nodes harvested (RTME: 20.1 vs. OTME: 14.1, P < 0.001), estimated blood loss (RTME: 0 vs. OTME: 150 ml, P = 0.003), operation time (RTME: 299.0 vs. OTME: 207.5 min, P < 0.001) and length of postoperative stay (RTME: 6 vs. OTME: 9 days, P < 0.001). The rate of circumferential resection margin involvement and distal resection margin were not statistically different between groups. There were no statistically significant differences at the 5-year follow-up: overall survival, disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival. The cumulative local recurrence rate was statistically lower in the robotic group (RTME: 3.4% vs. OTME: 16.1%, P = 0.024).

Conclusion

RTME showed a significant reduction in local recurrence rate and a higher, although not statistically significant, long-term cancer-specific survival with respect to OTME. Prospective randomized studies are needed to confirm or deny significantly better local control rates with robotic surgery.     

The impact of robotic surgery on gynecologic oncology

The objective of this article was to review the published scientific literature pertaining to robotic surgery and its applications in gynecologic malignancies and to summarize the impact of robotic surgery on the field of gynecologic oncology. Summarizing data from different gynecologic disease-sites, robotic-assisted surgery is safe, feasible, and demonstrates equivalent histopathologic and oncologic outcomes. In general, benefits to robotic surgery include decreased blood loss, fewer perioperative complications and decreased length of hospital stay. Disadvantages include accessibility to robot surgical systems, decreased haptic sensation and fixed cost as well as cost of disposable equipment. As robotic surgery becomes readily available it will be imperative to develop standardized training modalities. Further research is needed to validate the role of robotic surgery in the treatment of gynecologic malignancies.     

Comparative short- and long-term outcomes of three techniques of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery for rectal cancer

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) and to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of three techniques of NOSES for rectal cancer (RC).Materials and methodsA consecutive series of RC patients in stage I-III who underwent laparoscopic NOSES were enrolled. Three main techniques of NOSES included specimen eversion and extra-abdominal resection (EVER), specimen extraction and extra-abdominal resection (EXER) and intra-abdominal resection and specimen extraction (IREX). The postoperative complications, 5-year disease free survival (DFS), 5-year local recurrence rate (LRR) and 5-year distant metastasis rate (DMR) were compared in three techniques.Results268 RC patients met inclusion criteria, including 83 patients treated with EVER, 75 patients treated with EXER and 110 patients treated with IREX. Tumor location was the most critical factor associated with technique selection, with P < 0.001. Postoperative complication rate was 12.3% for all patients, and it was 18.1% for EVER, 13.3% for EXER and 7.3% for IREX. There were no significant differences for anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding and intraabdominal abscess among three technique groups, with P > 0.05. For long-term outcomes, the 5-year DFS, 5-year LRR and 5-year DMR were 85.03%, 4.22% and 11.00% for all patients. Patients in advanced tumor stage have worse long-term survival compared with patients in early stage, but no significant survival differences were observed among three technique groups.ConclusionThree techniques of NOSES for RC had acceptable short- and long-term outcomes, and tumor location was a determinant of technique selection.     

Anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer surgery

The safety of colorectal surgery for oncological disease is steadily improving, but anastomotic leakage is still the most feared and devastating complication from both a surgical and oncological point of view. Anastomotic leakage affects the outcome of the surgery, increases the times and costs of hospitalization, and worsens the prognosis in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. Anastomotic leakage has a wide range of clinical features ranging from radiological only finding to peritonitis and sepsis with multi-organ failure. C-reactive protein and procalcitonin have been identified as early predictors of anastomotic leakage starting from postoperative day 2–3, but abdominal-pelvic computed tomography scan is still the gold standard for the diagnosis. Several treatments can be adopted for anastomotic leakage. However, there is not a universally accepted flowchart for the management, which should be individualized based on patient's general condition, anastomotic defect size and location, indication for primary resection and presence of the proximal stoma. Non‐operative management is usually preferred in patients who underwent proximal faecal diversion at the initial operation. Laparoscopy can be attempted after minimal invasive surgery and can reduce surgical stress in patients allowing a definitive treatment. Reoperation for sepsis control is rarely necessary in those patients who already have a diverting stoma at the time of the leak, especially in extraperitoneal anastomoses. In patients without a stoma who do not require abdominal reoperation for a contained pelvic leak, there are several treatment options, including laparoscopic diverting ileostomy combined with trans-anal anastomotic tube drainage, percutaneous drainage or recently developed endoscopic procedures, such as stent or clip placement or endoluminal vacuum‐assisted therapy. We describe the current approaches to treat this complication, as well as the clinical tests necessary to diagnose and provide an effective therapy.     

Short and long-term outcomes of cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal and appendiceal cancer peritoneal metastasis: Propensity score-matched comparison between laparoscopy vs. open approaches

BackgroundIn light of today's role of minimally access surgery in colorectal oncologic treatment, we analyzed the impact of laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) in selected patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) originating from colorectal and appendiceal cancer (CRAC).MethodsPostoperative and oncologic outcomes were compared between patients with CRAC-PM treated by CRS/HIPEC undergoing laparoscopic (L-CRS/HIPEC) or open (O-CRS/HIPEC) procedures according to data collected from our tertiary referral hospital prospective database from April 2016 to April 2021. We excluded patients who did not undergo operation with curative intent. L-CRS was performed in patients who had no multifocal mesenteric lesions, no large abdominal mass, nor massive adhesions. Patients were matched by propensity scores 1:1 for peritoneal cancer index, completeness of cytoreduction score, concomitant resectable distal metastasis, primary tumor location, RAS mutation status and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification.ResultsOf 106 eligible patients, 68 were matched (34 L-CRS/HIPEC; 34 O-CRS/HIPEC) by propensity scores. Compared with the open approach, L-CRS/HIPEC was associated with less overall surgical morbidities (14.7% vs. 38.2%; p = 0.028), shorter median hospital stay (10 [5-15] vs. 12 [8–33] days; p < 0.001) and reduced median waiting time before adjuvant chemotherapy (4.7 [3.0–13.2] vs. 5.7 [4.1–24.1] weeks; p = 0.047). No statistically significant difference was found in operative time or major morbidity rates between the two groups. After a median follow-up of 33.2 months, the rate of early peritoneal loco-regional recurrence, location of initial recurrence or 3-year survival outcomes were not statistically significantly related to the type of access (L-CRS/HIPEC vs. O-CRS/HIPEC).ConclusionsLaparoscopy for CRS/HIPEC is technically feasible and oncologically safe to treat selected patients with CRAC-PM. Further randomized control trials are required to confirm the benefits of minimal access surgery for the management of PM.     

MRI-guided laparoscopic and robotic surgery for malignancies

Endoscopic surgery has some clear benefits, but it also has some disadvantages in reducing surgeons' normal dexterity and limiting their ability to deal with difficult situations. Computer-aided surgery has been proposed to overcome some of the drawbacks of traditional minimally invasive surgery. The proposed systems make possible a secure, precise procedure with no limitations on the operator's freedom of movement. Image-guided surgery is a new technical tool in surgical oncology. Interventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has entered a new stage in which computer-based techniques play an expanding role in planning, monitoring, and controlling procedures. MRI-guided surgery not only represents a technical challenge but is a transformation from conventional hand–eye coordination to interactive navigational operations. We have recently developed an MRI-guided robot-assisted interventional surgical system as well as an MRI-compatible endoscope. They allow the performance of precise image-guided interventional therapy and endoscopic surgery. MRI-guided laparoscopic surgery is now feasible for malignancies and will play an important part in the development of minimally invasive therapy.