Recent advances in minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery

Laparoscopy has improved surgical treatment of various diseases due to its limited surgical trauma and has developed as an interesting therapeutic alternative for the resection of colorectal cancer. Despite numerous clinical advantages (faster recovery, less pain, fewer wound and systemic complications, faster return to work) the laparoscopic approach to colorectal cancer therapy has also resulted in unusual complications, i.e. ureteral and bladder injury which are rarely observed with open laparotomy. Moreover, pneumothorax, cardiac arrhythmia, impaired venous return, venous thrombosis as well as peripheral nerve injury have been associated with the increased intraabdominal pressure as well as patient's positioning during surgery. Furthermore, undetected small bowel injury caused by the grasping or cauterizing instruments may occur with laparoscopic surgery. In contrast to procedures performed for nonmalignant conditions, the benefits of laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer must be weighed against the potential for poorer long-term outcomes of cancer patients that still has not been completely ruled out. In laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery, several important cancer control issues still are being evaluated, i.e. the extent of lymph node dissection, tumor implantation at port sites, adequacy of intraperitoneal staging as well as the distance between tumor site and resection margins. For the time being it can be assumed that there is no significant difference in lymph node harvest between laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer surgery if oncological principles of resection are followed. As far as the issue of port site recurrence is concerned, it appears to be less prevalent than first thought (range 0-2.5%), and the incidence apparently corresponds with wound recurrence rates observed after open procedures. Short-term (3-5 years) survival rates have been published by a number of investigators, and survival rates after laparoscopic surgery appears to compare well with data collected after conventional surgery for colorectal cancer. However, long-term results of prospective randomized trials are not available. The data published so far indicate that the oncological results of laparoscopic surgery compare well with the results of the conventional open approach. Nonetheless, the limited information available from prospective studies leads us to propose that minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer surgery should only be performed within prospective trials

The Improvement of Laparoscopic Surgical Skills Obtained by Gynecologists after Ten Years of Clinical Training Can Reduce Peritoneal Adhesion Formation during Laparoscopic Myomectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Objective. To evaluate if improvement of laparoscopic skills can reduce postoperative peritoneal adhesion formation in a clinical setting. Study Design. We retrospectively evaluated 25 women who underwent laparoscopic myomectomy from January 1993 to June 1994 and 22 women who underwent laparoscopic myomectomy from March 2002 to November 2004. Women had one to four subserous/intramural myomas and received surgery without antiadhesive agents or barriers. Women underwent second-look laparoscopy for assessment of peritoneal adhesion formation 12 to 14 weeks after myomectomy. Adhesions were graded according to the Operative Laparoscopy Study Group scoring system. The main variable to be compared between the two cohorts was the proportion that showed no adhesions at second-look laparoscopy. Results. Demographic and surgical characteristics were similar between the two cohorts. No complications were observed during surgery. No adverse events were recorded during postoperative course. At second-look laparoscopy, a higher proportion of adhesion-free patients was observed in women who underwent laparoscopic myomectomy from March 2002 to November 2004 (9 out of 22) compared with women who underwent the same surgery from January 1993 to June 1994 (3 out of 25). Conclusion. The improvement of surgeons' skills obtained after ten years of surgery can reduce postoperative adhesion formatio

Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage. Our experience and review of the literature

NTRODUCTION: Over the years various therapeutic techniques for diverticulitis have been developed. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage (LPL) appears to be a safe and useful treatment, and it could be an effective alternative to colonic resection in emergency surgery. AIM: This prospective observational study aims to assess the safety and benefits of laparoscopic peritoneal lavage in perforated sigmoid diverticulitis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We surgically treated 70 patients urgently for complicated sigmoid diverticulitis. Thirty-two (45.7%) patients underwent resection of the sigmoid colon and creation of a colostomy (Hartmann technique); 21 (30%) patients underwent peritoneal laparoscopic lavage; 4 (5.7%) patients underwent colostomy by the Mikulicz technique; and the remaining 13 (18.6%) patients underwent resection of the sigmoid colon and creation of a colorectal anastomosis with a protective ileostomy. RESULTS: The 66 patients examined were divided into 3 groups: 32 patients were treated with urgent surgery according to the Hartmann procedure; 13 patients were treated with resection and colorectal anastomosis; 21 patients were treated urgently with laparoscopic peritoneal lavage. We had no intraoperative complications. The overall mortality was 4.3% (3 patients). In the LPL group the morbidity rate was 33.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Currently it cannot be said that LPL is better in terms of mortality and morbidity than colonic resection. These data may, however, be proven wrong by greater attention in the selection of patients to undergo laparoscopic peritoneal lavage

Economic evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer

Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared with open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer. Methods: A Markov model was developed to model cost-effectiveness over 25 years. Data on the clinical effectiveness of laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Data on costs came from a systematic review of economic evaluations and from published sources. The outcomes of the model were presented as the incremental cost per life year gained and using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) to illustrate the likelihood that a treatment was cost-effective at various threshold values for society’s willingness to pay for an additional life year. Results: Laparoscopic surgery was on average £300 more costly and slightly less effective than open surgery and had a 30% chance of being cost-effective if society is willing to pay £30,000 for a life year. One interpretation of the available data suggests equal survival and disease-free survival. Making this assumption, laparoscopic surgery had a greater chance of being considered cost-effective. Presenting the results as incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) made no difference to the results, as utility data were poor. Evidence suggests short-term benefits following laparoscopic repair. This benefit would have to be at least 0.01 of a QALY for laparoscopic surgery to be considered cost-effective. Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery is likely to be associated with short-term quality of life benefits, similar long-term outcomes and an additional £300 per patient. A judgement is required as to whether the short-term benefits are worth this extra cost.Peer reviewedAuthor versio

Objective Assessment of Surgical Operative Performance by Observational Clinical Human Reliability Analysis (OC-HRA):A Systematic Review

Background: Both morbidity and mortality data (MMD) and learning curves (LCs) do not provide information on the nature of intraoperative errors and their mechanisms when these adversely impact on patient outcome. OCHRA was developed specifically to address the unmet surgical need for an objective assessment technique of the quality of technical execution of operations at individual operator level. The aim of this systematic review was to review of OCHRA as a method of objective assessment of surgical operative performance.Methods: Systematic review based on searching 4 databases for articles published from January 1998 to January 2019. The review complies with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and includes original publications on surgical task performance based on technical errors during operations across several surgical specialties.Results: Only 26 published studies met the search criteria, indicating that the uptake of OCHRA during the study period has been low. In 31% of reported studies, the operations were performed by fully qualified consultant/attending surgeons and by surgical trainees in 69% in approved training programs. OCHRA identified 7869 consequential errors (CE) during the conduct of 719 clinical operations (mean = 11 CEs). It also identified ‘hazard zones’ of operations and proficiency–gain curves (P-GCs) that confirm attainment of persistent competent execution of specific operations by individual trainee surgeons. P-GCs are both surgeon and operation specific.Conclusions: Increased OCHRA use has the potential to improve patient outcome after surgery, but this is a contingent progress towards automatic assessment of unedited videos of operations. The low uptake of OCHRA is attributed to its labor-intensive nature involving human factors (cognitive engineering) expertise. Aside from faster and more objective peer-based assessment, this development should accelerate increased clinical uptake and use of the technique in both routine surgical practice and surgical training.</p

Laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection for cancer and polyps: A cost-effectiveness study

Methods: Participants were recruited in 2006-2007 in a district general hospital in the south of England; those with a diagnosis of cancer or polyps were included in the analysis. Quality of life data were collected using EQ-5D, on alternate days after surgery for 4 weeks. Costs per patient, from a National Health Service perspective (in British pounds, 2006) comprised the sum of operative, hospital, and community costs. Missing data were filled using multiple imputation methods. The difference in mean quality adjusted life years and costs between surgery groups were estimated simultaneously using a multivariate regression model applied to 20 imputed datasets. The probability that laparoscopic surgery is cost-effective compared to open surgery for a given societal willingness-to-pay threshold is illustrated using a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve

Titanium versus absorbable tacks comparative study (TACS): a multicenter, non-inferiority prospective evaluation during laparoscopic repair of ventral and incisional hernia: study protocol for randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic repair of ventral and incisional hernias has gained popularity since many studies have reported encouraging results in terms of outcomee and recurrence. Choice of mesh and fixation methods are considered crucial issues in preventing recurrences and complications. Lightweight meshes are considered the first choice due to their biomechanical properties and the ability to integrate into the abdominal wall. Titanium helicoidal tacks still represent the "gold standard" for mesh fixation, even if they have been suggested to be involved in the genesis of post-operative pain and complications. Recently, absorbable tacks have been introduced, under the hypothesis that there will be no need to maintain a permanent fixation device after mesh integration. Nevertheless, there is no evidence that absorbable tacks may guarantee the same results as titanium tacks in terms of strength of fixation and recurrence rates. The primary end point of the present trial is to test the hypothesis that absorbable tacks are non-inferior to titanium tacks in laparoscopic incisional and ventral hernia repair (LIVHR) by lightweight polypropylene mesh, in terms of recurrence rates at 3-year follow-up. Surgical complications, post-operative stay, comfort and pain are secondary end points to be assessed. METHODS/DESIGN: Two hundred and twenty patients with ventral hernia will be randomized into 2 groups: Group A (110) patients will be submitted to LIVHR by lightweight polypropylene mesh fixed by titanium tacks; Group B (110) patients will be submitted to LIVHR by lightweight polypropylene mesh fixed by absorbable tacks. DISCUSSION: A few retrospective studies have reported similar results when comparing absorbable versus non-absorbable tacks in terms of intraoperative and early post-operative outcomes. These studies have the pitfalls to be retrospective evaluation of small series of patients, and the reported results still need to be validated by larger series and prospective studies. The aim of the present trial is to investigate and test the non-inferiority of absorbable versus non-absorbable tacks in terms of hernia recurrence rates, in order to assess whether the use of absorbable tacks may achieve the same results as non-absorbable tacks in mid-term and long-term settings

CT diagnosis of small bowel obstruction caused by internal hernia from persistent attachment of a Meckel's diverticulum to the umbilicus by the obliterated omphalomesenteric duct

We report a case of small bowel obstruction (SBO) caused by internal hernia from persistent attachment of a Meckel's diverticulum (MD) to the umbilicus by the obliterated omphalomesenteric duct that was diagnosed by multidetector CT and confirmed during laparoscopic surgery. Although clinical, pathological and radiological features of MD and its complications are well known, the diagnosis of MD is difficult to establish preoperatively. CT findings that allow the diagnosis of this very unusual cause of SBO are presented here with laparoscopic surgery correlation

COLOR III: a multicentre randomised clinical trial comparing transanal TME versus laparoscopic TME for mid and low rectal cancer

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is an essential component of surgical management of rectal cancer. Both open and laparoscopic TME have been proven to be oncologically safe. However, it remains a challenge to achieve complete TME with clear circumferential resections margin (CRM) with the conventional transabdominal approach, particularly in mid and low rectal tumours. Transanal TME (TaTME) was developed to improve oncological and functional outcomes of patients with mid and low rectal cancer.An international, multicentre, superiority, randomised trial was designed to compare TaTME and conventional laparoscopic TME as the surgical treatment of mid and low rectal carcinomas. The primary endpoint is involved CRM. Secondary endpoints include completeness of mesorectum, residual mesorectum, morbidity and mortality, local recurrence, disease-free and overall survival, percentage of sphincter-saving procedures, functional outcome and quality of life. A Quality Assurance Protocol including centralised MRI review, histopathology re-evaluation, standardisation of surgical techniques, and monitoring and assessment of surgical quality will be conducted.The difference in involvement of CRM between the two treatment strategies is thought to be in favour of the TaTME. TaTME is therefore expected to be superior to laparoscopic TME in terms of oncological outcomes in case of mid and low rectal carcinomas

3D Laparoscopy. A potential cutting edge in minimal invasive digestive surgery

Laparoscopic surgery has changed surgical landscape, providing reduced surgical trauma, shorter hospital stays, less postoperative pain and better outcomes than open surgery. Since its first development in the 90’s, 3D technology applied to laparoscopic surgery has had several technical improvements and now it represents, together with high definition technology, the best option in minimal invasive digestive surgery, providing shorter operative times and lower blood loss, making easier to perform surgical tasks both for trainees than for skilled surgeons. It remains a little bit more expensive than standard 2D laparoscopic devices but even cheaper than robotic equipment