Single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer: state of art

A number of clinical trials have demonstrated that the laparoscopic approach for colorectal cancer resection provides the same oncologic results as open surgery along with all clinical benefits of minimally invasive surgery. During the last years, a great effort has been made to research for minimizing parietal trauma, yet for cosmetic reasons and in order to further reduce surgery-related pain and morbidity. New techniques, such as natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) have been developed in order to reach the goal of “scarless” surgery. Although NOTES may seem not fully suitable or safe for advanced procedures, such as colectomies, SIL is currently regarded as the next major advance in the progress of minimally invasive surgical approaches to colorectal disease that is more feasible in generalized use. The small incision through the umbilicus allows surgeons to use familiar standard laparoscopic instruments and thus, perform even complex procedures which require extraction of large surgical specimens or intestinal anastomosis. The cosmetic result from SIL is also better because the only incision is made through the umbilicus which can hide the wound effectively after operation. However, SIL raises a number of specific new challenges compared with the laparoscopic conventional approach. A reduced capacity for triangulation, the repeated conflicts between the shafts of the instruments and the difficulties to achieve a correct exposure of the operative field are the most claimed issues. The use therefore of this new approach for complex colorectal procedures might understandingly be viewed as difficult to implement, especially for oncologic cases

Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes after Robotic Surgery for Gastric Cancer in Elderly and Younger Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Robot-assisted surgery has recently been introduced to overcome some drawbacks and technical limitations in performing laparoscopic gastrectomy. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic gastrectomy in elderly patients. The study enrolled 143 patients who underwent robotic gastrectomy in a single high-volume centre. All patients were divided into two groups based on age: elderly group ≥ 75 years old (EG; n = 64) and non-elderly group < 75 years old (NEG; n = 79). Comorbidities were significantly more frequent in the EG (95.3%) than in the NEG (81%) (p = 0.011). Similarly, the percentage of ASA 3 patients was significantly higher in the EG than in the NEG (43.8% vs. 24.0%, respectively; p = 0.048). Nevertheless, the incidence of Clavien–Dindo grade III and IV complications did not differ significantly between the two groups (10.9% in the EG and 6.3% in the NEG; p = 0.852). Moreover, operative time, re-operation rate, mean number of harvested lymph nodes, 30-day mortality, and median hospital stay were similar within the two groups. Our study suggests that robotic gastrectomy can be performed safely for elderly patients. In particular, chronological age does not seem to affect either the clinical or oncological short-term outcomes after robotic gastrectomy