Laparoscopy-assisted surgery, fast-track perioperative treatment are both increasingly used in colorectal cancer treatment, for their short-time benefits of enhanced recovery and short hospital stays. However, the benefits of the integration of the Laparoscopy-assisted surgery, fast-track perioperative treatment, and even with the Xelox chemotherapy, are still unknown. In this study, the three treatments integration is defined as "Fast Track Multi-Discipline Treatment Model" for colorectal cancer and this model extends the benefits to the whole treatment process of colorectal cancer. The main purpose of the study is to explore the feasibility of "Fast Track Multi-Discipline Treatment" model in treatment of colorectal cancer.
The trial is a prospective randomized controlled study with 2 × 2 balanced factorial design. Patients eligible for the study will be randomized to 4 groups: (I) Laparoscopic surgery with fast track perioperative treatment and Xelox chemotherapy; (II) Open surgery with fast track perioperative treatment and Xelox chemotherapy; (III) Laparoscopic surgery with conventional perioperative treatment and mFolfox6 chemotherapy; (IV) Open surgery with conventional perioperative treatment and mFolfox6 chemotherapy. The primary endpoint of this study is the hospital stays. The secondary endpoints are the quality of life, chemotherapy related adverse events, surgical complications and hospitalization costs. Totally, 340 patients will be enrolled with 85 patients in each group.
The study initiates a new treatment model "Fast Track Multi-Discipline Treatment" for colorectal cancer, and will provide feasibility evidence on the new model "Fast Track Multi-Discipline Treatment" for patients with colorectal cancer.
Colorectal surgery; Rehabilitation; Colorectal neoplasms; Hospitalization; Randomized controlled trial
During the last two decades the use of laparoscopic resection and a multimodal approach known as an enhanced recovery programme, have been major changes in colorectal perioperative care. Clinical outcome improves using laparoscopic surgery to resect colorectal cancer but until recently no multicentre trial evidence had been reported regarding whether the benefits of laparoscopy still exist when open surgery is optimized within an enhanced recovery programme. The EnROL trial (Enhanced Recovery Open versus Laparoscopic) examines the hypothesis that laparoscopic surgery within an enhanced recovery programme will provide superior postoperative outcomes when compared to conventional open resection of colorectal cancer within the same programme.
EnROL is a phase III, multicentre, randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open resection of colon and rectal cancer with blinding of patients and outcome observers to the treatment allocation for the first 7 days post-operatively, or until discharge if earlier. 202 patients will be recruited at approximately 12 UK hospitals and randomised using minimization at a central computer system in a 1:1 ratio. Recruiting surgeons will previously have performed >100 laparoscopic colorectal resections and >50 open total mesorectal excisions to minimize conversion. Eligible patients are those suitable for elective resection using either technique. Excluded patients include: those with acute intestinal obstruction and patients in whom conversion from laparoscopic to open procedure is likely. The primary outcome is physical fatigue as measured by the physical fatigue domain of the multidimensional fatigue inventory 20 (MFI-20) with secondary outcomes including postoperative hospital stay; complications; reoperation and readmission; quality of life indicators; cosmetic assessments; standardized performance indicators; health economic analysis; the other four domains of the MFI-20. Pathological assessment of surgical quality will also be undertaken and compliance with the enhanced recovery programme will be recorded for all patients.
Should this trial demonstrate that laparoscopic surgery confers a significant clinical and/or health economic benefit this will further support the transition to this type of surgery, with implications for the training of surgeons and resource allocation.
Laparoscopy; Colon cancer; Rectal cancer; Enhanced recovery programme; Fast track surgery; Health economics; Cosmetic assessment; Fatigue; Randomised controlled trial; EnROL
A fast-track perioperative procedure may achieve the same low-risk, low-morbidity results for laparoscopic colectomy patients as seen with more conventional lengths of hospital stay.
A short hospital stay is one of the main advantages of the laparoscopic surgical technique. The process of developing and studying the “fast-track” process has contributed to a better understanding of the elements of perioperative care and has resulted in the reduction in length of stay (LOS) after colectomies. As we follow and refine this well-recognized multimodal approach, further decreases in the LOS can be expected. We present 2 octogenarian patients who, after receiving laparoscopic hemicolectomies for malignant disease, were discharged home <24 hours after their operations. Postoperative follow-ups did not show any adverse reaction to the early discharge. Modifying the multimodal perioperative technique with further refinement to the surgical technique appears to allow patients to be discharged home in the first 24 hours following laparoscopic colectomy.
Length of stay; Colectomy; Multimodal rehabilitation; Fast-tracking
Postoperative ileus (POI) is a transient loss of coordinated peristalsis precipitated by surgery and exacerbated by opioid pain medication. Ileus causes a variety of symptoms including bloating, pain, nausea, and vomiting, but particularly delays tolerance of oral diet and liquids. Thus POI is a primary determinant of hospital stay after surgery. ‘Fast-track’ recovery protocols, opioid sparing analgesia, and laparoscopic surgery reduce but do not eliminate postoperative ileus. Alvimopan is a mu opioid receptor antagonist that blocks the effects of opioids on the intestine, while not interfering with their centrally mediated analgesic effect. Several large randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that alvimopan accelerates the return of gastrointestinal function after surgery and subsequent hospital discharge by approximately 20 hours after elective open segmental colectomy. However, it has not been tested in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and is less effective in patients receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents in a narcotic sparing postoperative pain control regimen. Safety concerns seen with chronic low dose administration of alvimopan for opioid bowel dysfunction have not been noted with its acute use for POI.
alvimopan; postoperative ileus; gastrointestinal surgery
Laparoscopic colon surgery that incorporates multimodal perioperative care may allow patients to be discharged within the first 24 hours.
Background and Objectives:
A short hospital stay is one of the main advantages of laparoscopic surgery. Previous studies have shown that after a multimodal fast-track process, the hospital length of stay can be shortened to between 2 and 5 days. The objective of this review is to show that the hospital length of stay can, in some cases, be reduced to <24 hours.
This study retrospectively reviews a surgeon's experience with laparoscopic surgery over a 12-month period. Seven patients were discharged home within 24 hours after minimally invasive laparoscopic surgical treatment, following a modified fast-track protocol that was adopted for perioperative care.
Of the 7 patients, 4 received laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for malignant disease and 3 underwent sigmoid colectomies for recurrent diverticulitis. The mean hospital stay was 21 hours, 47 minutes; the mean volume of intraoperative fluid (lactated Ringer) was 1850 mL; the mean surgical blood loss was only 74.3 mL; the mean duration of surgery was 118 minutes; and the patients were ambulated and fed a liquid diet after recovery from anesthesia. The reviewed patients had functional gastrointestinal tracts and were agreeable to the timing of discharge. On the follow-up visit, they showed no adverse consequences such as bleeding, infection, or anastomotic leak.
Laparoscopic colon surgery that incorporated multimodal perioperative care allowed patients to be discharged within the first 24 hours. Careful postoperative outpatient follow-up is important in monitoring complications such as anastomotic leak, which may not present until postoperative day 5.
Length of stay; Fast track; Laparoscopic colectomy
Data from this report supports the view that standardization of the operative steps in laparoscopic rectal surgery seems to limit the risk of anastomotic complications and provides clear indications for early and safe conversion to open surgery.
Background and Objectives:
The purpose of this study was to audit our results after implementation of a standardized operative approach to laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer within a fast-track recovery program.
From January 2009 to February 2011, 100 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic surgery on an intention-to-treat basis for rectal cancer. The results were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively collected database. Operative steps and instrumentation for the procedure were standardized. A standard perioperative care plan was used.
The following procedures were performed: low anterior resection (n=26), low anterior resection with loop-ileostomy (n=39), Hartmann's operation (n=14), and abdominoperineal resection (n=21). The median length of hospital stay was 7 days; 9 patients were readmitted. There were 9 cases of conversion to open surgery. The overall complication rate was 35%, including 6 cases (9%) of anastomotic leakages requiring reoperation. The 30-day mortality was 5%. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was 15 (range, 2 to 48). There were 6 cases of positive circumferential resection margins. The median follow-up was 9 (range, 1 to 27) months. One patient with disseminated cancer developed port-site metastasis.
The results confirm the safety of a standardized approach, and the oncological outcomes are comparable to those of similar studies.
Laparoscopic colorectal surgery; Rectal cancer; Low anterior resection; Fast-track surgery
The present developments in colon surgery are characterized by two innovations: the introduction of the laparoscopic operation technique and fast recovery programs such as the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) recovery program. The Tapas-study was conceived to determine which of the three treatment programs: open conventional surgery, open 'ERAS' surgery or laparoscopic 'ERAS' surgery for patients with colon carcinomas is most cost minimizing?
The Tapas-study is a three-arm multicenter prospective cohort study.
All patients with colon carcinoma, eligible for surgical treatment within the study period in four general teaching hospitals and one university hospital will be included. This design produces three cohorts: Conventional open surgery is the control exposure (cohort 1). Open surgery with ERAS recovery (cohort 2) and laparoscopic surgery with ERAS recovery (cohort 3) are the alternative exposures. Three separate time periods are used in order to prevent attrition bias.
Primary outcome parameters are the two main cost factors: direct medical costs (real cost price calculation) and the indirect non medical costs (friction method). Secondary outcome parameters are mortality, complications, surgical-oncological resection margins, hospital stay, readmission rates, time back to work/recovery, health status and quality of life.
Based on an estimated difference in direct medical costs (highest cost factor) of 38% between open and laparoscopic surgery (alfa = 0.01, beta = 0.05), a group size of 3×40 = 120 patients is calculated.
The Tapas-study is three-arm multicenter cohort study that will provide a cost evaluation of three treatment programs for patients with colon carcinoma, which may serve as a guideline for choice of treatment and investment strategies in hospitals.
Laparoscopic colectomy has become the standard of care for elective resections; however, there are few data regarding laparoscopy in the emergency setting.
Using a prospectively collected database, we identified 94 patients who underwent an emergency colectomy between August 2005 and July 2008. Laparoscopic operations were performed in 42 patients and were compared to 25 who were suitable for laparoscopy but received open colectomy.
The groups had similar demographics with no difference in age, gender or surgical indications. Blood loss was lower (118ml vs. 205ml, p <0.01) and postoperative stay shorter (8 vs. 11 days, p = 0.02) in the laparoscopic patients, and perioperative mortality rates were similar between the two groups (1 vs. 3, p = 0.29).
With increasing experience, laparoscopic colectomy is a feasible option in certain emergency situations and is associated with shorter hospital stay, less morbidity, and similar mortality to that of open operation.
Laparoscopic colectomy has become the standard of care for elective resections; however, there are few data regarding laparoscopy in the emergency setting. We demonstrate that increasing experience, laparoscopic colectomy is a feasible option in certain emergency situations and is associated with shorter hospital stay, less morbidity, and similar mortality to that of open operation.
laparoscopic emergency colectomy; emergent colectomy; urgent colectomy laparoscopy; colectomy
Background and aim: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer mortality worldwide and laparoscopic colectomy has been established as equivalent to the open approach in terms of oncological results and patients’ safety. Survival benefits have been reported in favor of laparoscopic colectomy (LC) in stage III CRC patients. Different immune responses after surgery, in terms of innate and cellular immunity, may potentially explain some of the reported differences. This review summarizes the literature on differences in immune response after the laparoscopic and the open approach for CRC.
Materials and Methods: A literature search of electronic databases was conducted and all studies published on ‘colorectal cancer’, ‘laparoscopic and open colectomy’ ‘immune response’ and ‘surgical stress laparoscopy versus open’ were collected. Among these, the ones referring to CRC and those that had any clinical relevance offering information on perioperative parameters were used.
Results: Despite the heterogeneity of studies, they support the view that innate immune response is activated to a greater degree in open colectomy (OC), which may be related to the more extensive trauma and surgical stress. On the other hand, cellular immunity is better preserved after LC. These differences are more pronounced in the immediate postoperative period.
Conclusions: LC has been related to decreased up-regulation of innate immunity and better-preserved cellular immunity. The latter may be related to better anti-tumor activity and may be beneficial in terms of oncological survival in a subgroup of LC patients.
colorectal cancer; laparoscopic colectomy; immune response; innate immunity; cellular immunity
Compared to the open approach, randomized trials have shown that laparoscopic colectomy is associated with a shorter hospitalization without increases in morbidity or mortality rates. With broader adoption of laparoscopic colectomy for cancer in the United States, it is unclear if laparoscopic colectomy continues to be associated with shorter hospitalization and comparable morbidity.
To determine if hospitals where a greater proportion of colon resections for cancer are approached laparoscopically (laparoscopy rate) achieve improved short-term outcomes compared to hospitals with lower laparoscopy rates.
From the 2008–2009 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we identified hospitals where ≤12 colon resections for cancer where reported with ≥1 approached laparoscopically. We assessed the correlation between a hospital’s laparoscopy rate and risk-standardized outcomes (intra- and post-operative morbidity, in-hospital mortality rates, and average length of stay).
Overall, 6,806 colon resections were performed at 276 hospitals. Variation was noted in hospital laparoscopy rates (median=52.0%, range=3.8–100%) and risk-standardized intra- (2.7%, 1.8–8.6%) and post-operative morbidity (27.8%, 16.4–53.4%), in-hospital mortality (0.7%, 0.3–42.0%), and average length of stay (7.0 days, 4.9–10.3 days). While no association was noted with in-hospital mortality, higher laparoscopy rates were correlated with lower post-operative morbidity (correlation coefficient [r]=−0.12, p=0.04) and shorter hospital stays (r=−0.23, p<0.001), but higher intra-operative morbidity (r=0.19, p<0.001) rates. This was not observed among hospitals with high procedure volumes.
Higher laparoscopy rates were associated with only slightly lower post-operative morbidity rates and modestly shorter hospitalizations.
Laparoscopic colectomy; surgical outcomes
In this account, addition of alvimopan to a standard perioperative recovery pathway decreased length of stay and incidence of postoperative ileus for elective laparoscopic colectomy.
Background and Objectives:
Alvimopan, a peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist, decreased time to gastrointestinal recovery and hospital length of stay in open bowel resection patients in Phase 3 trials. However, the benefit in laparoscopic colectomy patients remains unclear.
A retrospective case series review was performed to study addition of alvimopan to a well-established standard perioperative recovery pathway for elective laparoscopic colectomy. The main outcome measures were length of stay and incidence of charted postoperative ileus. Wilcoxon and chi-square tests were used to calculate P values for length of stay and postoperative ileus endpoints, respectively.
Demographic/baseline characteristics from the 101 alvimopan and 64 pre-alvimopan control patients were generally comparable. Mean length of stay in the alvimopan group was 1.55 days shorter (alvimopan, 2.81±0.95 days; control, 4.36±2.4 days; P<.0001). The proportion of patients with postoperative ileus was lower in the alvimopan group (alvimopan, 2%; control, 20%; P<.0001).
In this case series, addition of alvimopan to a standard perioperative recovery pathway decreased length of stay and incidence of postoperative ileus for elective uncomplicated laparoscopic colectomy. The improvement in the mean length of stay for patients who receive alvimopan is a step forward in achieving a fast-track surgery model for elective laparoscopic colectomies.
Alvimopan; Colectomy; Laparoscopic; Pathway
Purpose. Short hospital stay and equal or reduced complication rates have been demonstrated after fast track open colonic surgery. However, fast track principles of perioperative care can be difficult to implement and often require increased nursing staff because of more concentrated nursing tasks during the shorter hospital stay. Specific data on nursing requirements after laparoscopic surgery are lacking. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effect of operative technique (open versus laparoscopic operation), but without changing nurse staffing or principles for peri- or postoperative care, that is, without implementing fast track principles, on length of stay after colorectal resection for cancer. Methods. Records of all patients operated for colorectal cancer from November 2004 to December 2008 in our department were reviewed. No specific patients were selected for laparoscopic repair, which was solely dependent on the presence of two specific surgeons at the same time. Thus, the patients were not selected for laparoscopic repair based on patient-related factors, but only on the simultaneous presence of two specific surgeons on the day of the operation. Results. Of a total of 540 included patients, 213 (39%) were operated by a laparoscopic approach. The median hospital stay for patients with a primary anastomosis was significantly shorter after laparoscopic than after conventional open surgery (5 versus 8 days, P < 0.001) while there was no difference in patients receiving a stoma (10 versus 10 days, ns), with no changes in the perioperative care regimens. Furthermore there were significant lower blood loss (50 versus 200 mL, P < 0.001) and lower complication rate (21% versus 32%, P = 0.006) in the laparoscopic group. Conclusion. Implementing laparoscopic colorectal surgery in our department resulted in shorter hospital stay without using fast track principles for peri- and postoperative care in patients not receiving a stoma during the operation. Consequently, we aimed to reduce hospitalisation without increasing cost in nursing staff per hospital bed. Length of stay was not reduced in patients receiving a stoma pointing at this group for specific intervention in the future. Furthermore, the complication rate was reduced in the laparoscopic group.
To investigate fast-track rehabilitation concept in terms of a measurable effect on the early recovery after total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
This was an open, randomized, prospective clinical study, comparing the fast-track rehabilitation—a pathway-controlled early recovery program (Joint Care®)—with standard postoperative rehabilitation care, after TKA. Overall, 147 patients had TKA (N = 74 fast-track rehabilitation,N = 73 standardrehabilitation). The fast-track rehabilitation patients received a group therapy, early mobilization (same day as surgery) and 1:1 physiotherapy (2 h/day). Patient monitoring occurred over 3 months (1 pre- and 4 post-operative visits). The standard rehabilitation group received individual postoperative care according to the existing protocol, with 1:1 physiotherapy (1 h/day). The cumulative American Knee Society Score (AKSS) was the primary evaluation variable, used to detect changes in joint function and perception of pain. The secondary evaluation variables were WOMAC index score, analgesic drug consumption, length of stay (LOS), and safety.
After TKA, patients in the fast-track rehabilitation group showed enhanced recovery compared with the standardrehabilitation group, as based on the differences between the groups for the cumulative AKSS (p = 0.0003), WOMAC index score (<0.0001), reduced intake of concomitant analgesic drugs, reduced LOS (6.75 vs. 13.20 days, p < 0001), and lower number of adverse events.
For TKA, implementation of pathway-controlled fast-track rehabilitation is achievable and beneficial as based on the AKSS and WOMAC score, reduced intake of analgesic drugs, and reduced LOS.
AKSS score; Fast-track rehabilitation; Controlled pathway; Total knee arthroplasty; TKA; WOMAC score
AIM: To systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of fast-track program vs traditional care in laparoscopic or open surgery for gastric cancer.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane library databases were electronically searched for published studies between January 1995 and April 2013, and only randomized trials were included. The references of relevant studies were manually searched for further studies that may have been missed. Search terms included “gastric cancer”, “fast track” and “enhanced recovery”. Five outcome variables were considered most suitable for analysis: postoperative hospital stay, medical cost, duration to first flatus, C-reactive protein (CRP) level and complications. Postoperative hospital stay was calculated from the date of operation to the date of discharge. Fixed effects model was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Compared with traditional care, fast-track program could significantly decrease the postoperative hospital stay [weighted mean difference (WMD) = -1.19, 95%CI: -1.79--0.60, P = 0.0001, fixed model], duration to first flatus (WMD = -6.82, 95%CI: -11.51--2.13, P = 0.004), medical costs (WMD = -2590, 95%CI: -4054--1126, P = 0.001), and the level of CRP (WMD = -17.78, 95%CI: -32.22--3.35, P = 0.0001) in laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer. In open surgery for gastric cancer, fast-track program could also significantly decrease the postoperative hospital stay (WMD = -1.99, 95%CI: -2.09--1.89, P = 0.0001), duration to first flatus (WMD = -12.0, 95%CI: -18.89--5.11, P = 0.001), medical cost (WMD = -3674, 95%CI: -5025--2323, P = 0.0001), and the level of CRP (WMD = -27.34, 95%CI: -35.42--19.26, P = 0.0001). Furthermore, fast-track program did not significantly increase the incidence of complication (RR = 1.39, 95%CI: 0.77-2.51, P = 0.27, for laparoscopic surgery; and RR = 1.52, 95%CI: 0.90-2.56, P = 0.12, for open surgery).
CONCLUSION: Our overall results suggested that compared with traditional care, fast-track program could result in shorter postoperative hospital stay, less medical costs, and lower level of CRP, with no more complications occurring in both laparoscopic and open surgery for gastric cancer.
Fast-track program; Traditional care; Gastric cancer; Meta-analysis; Laparoscopic and open surgery
AIM: To analyze our results after the introduction of a fast-track (FT) program after laparoscopic liver surgery in our Hepatobiliarypancreatic Unit.
METHODS: All patients (43) undergoing laparoscopic liver surgery between March 2004 and March 2010 were included and divided into two consecutive groups: Control group (CG) from March 2004 until December 2006 with traditional perioperative cares (17 patients) and fast-track group (FTG) from January 2007 until March 2010 with FT program cares (26 patients). Primary endpoint was the influence of the program on the postoperative stay, the amount of re-admissions, morbidity and mortality. Secondarily we considered duration of surgery, use of drains, conversion to open surgery, intensive cares needs and transfusion.
RESULTS: Both groups were homogeneous in age and sex. No differences in technique, time of surgery or conversion to open surgery were found, but more malignant diseases were operated in the FTG, and then transfusions were higher in FTG. Readmissions and morbidity were similar in both groups, without mortality. Postoperative stay was similar, with a median of 3 for CG vs 2.5 for FTG. However, the 80.8% of patients from FTG left the hospital within the first 3 d after surgery (58.8% for CG).
CONCLUSION: The introduction of a FT program after laparoscopic liver surgery improves the recovery of patients without increasing complications or re-admissions, which leads to a reduction of the stay and costs.
Liver surgery; Laparoscopy; Fast-track
Laparoscopic procedure is a rapid developed technique in colorectal surgery. In this investigation we aim at assessing the diversities of short-term and medium-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer.
A total number of 519 patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer were enrolled for this study. The patients underwent either laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAP) (n = 254) or open surgery (OP) (n = 265). Surgical techniques, perioperative managements and clinical follow-ups were standardized. Short-term perioperative data and medium-term recurrence and survival were compared and analyzed between the two groups.
There were no differences in perioperative parameters between the two groups except in regards to a trend of faster recovery in laparoscopic procedures. There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative complications, reoperation rate, or perioperative mortality. Statistically significant differences in a faster return of gastrointestinal function and shorter hospital stay were identified in favor of laparoscopic-assisted resection. In colon and rectal cancer cases separately, the overall survival, cancer-free survival and recurrence rate were similar in two groups. There was also no tendency of significant differences in overall survival, cancer-free survival and recurrence in stage I-II and stage III patients in two cancer categories between the two groups, respectively. pT, lymph node metastasis, and clinical stage were independent predictors of overall death risk, while pT, pN, lymph node metastasis and clinical stage were found to be the independent predictors of recurrence risk in enrolled patients database.
Laparoscopic-assisted procedure has more benefits on postoperative recovery, while has the same effects on medium-term recurrence and survival compared with open surgery in the treatment of non-metastatic colorectal cancer.
A prospective case series of single incision multiport laparoscopic colorectal resections for malignancy using conventional laparoscopic trocars and instruments is described.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
Eleven patients (seven men and four women) with colonic or rectal pathology underwent single incision multiport laparoscopic colectomy/rectal resection from July till December 2010. Four trocars were placed in a single transumblical incision. The bowel was mobilized laparoscopically and vessels controlled intracorporeally with either intra or extracorporeal anastomosis.
Three patients had carcinoma in the caecum, one in the hepatic flexure, two in the rectosigmoid, one in the descending colon, two in the rectum and two had ulcerative pancolitis (one with high grade dysplasia and another with carcinoma rectum). There was no conversion to standard multiport laparoscopy or open surgery. The median age was 52 years (range 24-78 years). The average operating time was 130 min (range 90-210 min). The average incision length was 3.2 cm (2.5-4.0 cm). There were no postoperative complications. The average length of stay was 4.5 days (range 3-8 days). Histopathology showed adequate proximal and distal resection margins with an average lymph node yield of 25 nodes (range 16-30 nodes).
Single incision multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery for malignancy is feasible without extra cost or specialized ports/instrumentation. It does not compromise the oncological radicality of resection. Short-term results are encouraging. Long-term results are awaited.
Laparoscopic colectomy; single incision laparoscopic surgery; single incision
Fast-track surgery is a novel approach which uses a multimodal package of changes to traditional surgical care to reduce the stress response evoked by surgery allowing for enhanced recovery times. The depth of understanding and application of fast-track principles to general surgical practice by consultant surgeons is unknown.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
‘Core management features’ central to published fast-track general surgical studies were identified following a comprehensive Medline literature search. The knowledge and application of these features were examined in a postal questionnaire sent to 116 general surgeons in a single region.
Of respondents, 31% indicated they were currently using fast-track surgery (the ‘fast-trackers'). The number of fast-track compliant responses was calculated for each consultant (range, 1–12 of 14). Mean scores for ‘fast-trackers’ of 8.45 (± 2.188) and ‘non-fast-trackers’ of 6.16 (± 2.352) showed no significant differences (P > 0.6). The ‘fast-trackers’ median estimated length of stay (LOS) was 5 days (inter-quartile range [IQR], 4–7) which was significantly lower than the 7 day (IQR 6–8) LOS estimates given by the ‘non-fast-trackers’ (P < 0.01).
Despite estimating reduced LOS, no significant difference in total fast-track compliant responses was found between the ‘fast-tracker’ and ‘non-fast-tracker’ groups. The ‘fast-trackers’ estimated LOS of 5 days is 2.5 times the 2 day LOS reported in the published fast-track studies. A significant gap exists between the perception and realisation of fast-track methodology amongst general surgeons.
Fast-track; General surgery; Length of stay; Questionnaire
Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) employs a multimodal perioperative care pathway with the aim of attenuating the stress response to surgery and accelerating recovery. It has been difficult to determine the relative importance of some of the individual components of these pathways such as epidural analgesia and laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Some argue that only a rigid adherence to the published ERAS protocol can achieve the proposed benefits of fast-track surgery. In this article, we explore some of the areas where the evidence base may be changing and ask whether a more flexible and individualised approach should be considered.
Enhanced recovery; Fast-track; Laparoscopic; Intravenous fluid; Postoperative analgesia
Several multi-institutional prospective randomized trials have demonstrated short-term benefits using laparoscopy. Now the laparoscopic approach is accepted as an alternative to open surgery for colon cancer. However, in prior trials, the transverse colon was excluded. Therefore, it has not been determined whether laparoscopy can be used in the setting of transverse colon cancer. This study evaluated the peri-operative clinical outcomes and oncological quality by pathologic outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer.
Materials and methods
Analysis of the medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal resection from August 2004 to November 2007 was made. Computed tomography, barium enema, and colonoscopy were performed to localize the tumor preoperatively. Extended right hemicolectomy, transverse colectomy, and extended left hemicolectomy were performed for transverse colon cancer. Surgical outcomes and pathologic outcomes were compared between transverse colon cancer (TCC) and other site colon cancer (OSCC).
Of the 312 colorectal cancer patients, 94 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for OSCC, and 34 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for TCC. Patients with TCC were similar to patients with OSCC in age, gender, body mass index, operating time, blood loss, time to pass flatus, start of diet, hospital stay, tumor size, distal resection margin, proximal resection margin, number of lymph nodes, and radial margin. One case in TCC and three cases in OSCC were converted to open surgery.
Laparoscopic surgery for transverse colon cancer and OSCC had similar peri-operative clinical and acceptable pathological outcomes.
Laparoscopy; Transverse colon; Colon cancer
Colorectal resection was traditionally associated with significant morbidity and prolonged stay in hospital. Laparoscopic colorectal resection was first described in 1991 as a minimally invasive form of colorectal surgery. It was later on assessed by multiple randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis and was found to be associated with a faster recovery, lower complication rates and a shorter stay in hospital compared with open resection. To assess the effect of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program on postoperative length of stay after elective colorectal resections, a literature review was conducted, supplemented by the results of 111 ERAS colorectal resections at regional NWS Hospital using a protocol based on the Fast Track approach described by Kehlet in 1999. ERAS has been shown to improve postoperative recovery, reduce length of stay and enhance early return to normal function when compared with traditional colorectal surgical protocols. The role of laparoscopic surgery in colorectal resections within a fast-track (ERAS) program is controversial. The current evidence suggests that within such a program, there is no difference between laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in terms of postoperative recovery rates or length of hospital stay.
Enhanced recovery after surgery; Colorectal surgery; Laparoscopy
This study aims to investigate the role of fast-track surgery in preventing the development of postoperative delirium and other complications in elderly patients with colorectal carcinoma.
A total of 240 elderly patients with colorectal carcinoma (aged ≥70 years) undergoing open colorectal surgery was randomly assigned into two groups, in which the patients were managed perioperatively either with traditional or fast-track approaches. The length of hospital stay (LOS) and time to pass flatus were compared. The incidence of postoperative delirium and other complications were evaluated. Serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were determined before and after surgery.
The LOS was significantly shorter in the fast-track surgery (FTS) group than that in the traditional group. The recovery of bowel movement (as indicated by the time to pass flatus) was faster in the FTS group. The postoperative complications including pulmonary infection, urinary infection and heart failure were significantly less frequent in the FTS group. Notably, the incidence of postoperative delirium was significantly lower in patients with the fast track therapy (4/117, 3.4 %) than with the traditional therapy (15/116, 12.9 %; p = 0.008). The serum IL-6 levels on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3 in patients with the fast-track therapy were significantly lower than those with the traditional therapy (p < 0.001).
Compared to traditional perioperative management, fast-track surgery decreases the LOS, facilitates the recovery of bowel movement, and reduces occurrence of postoperative delirium and other complications in elderly patients with colorectal carcinoma. The lower incidence of delirium is at least partly attributable to the reduced systemic inflammatory response mediated by IL-6.
Delirium; Elderly; Colorectal carcinoma; Fast-track surgery; Interleukin-6
Examine effects of HMO penetration, hospital competition, and patient severity on the uptake of laparoscopic colectomy and its price relative to open surgery for colon cancer.
We used 2002-2007 the MarketScan Database to identify admissions for privately insured colorectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic or open partial colectomy (n=1,035 and n=6,389, respectively). Patient and health plan characteristics were retrieved from these data; HMO market penetration rates and an index of hospital market concentration, Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI), were derived from national databases. Logistic and logarithmic regressions were used to examine the odds of having laparoscopic colectomy, effect of covariates on colectomy prices, and the differential price of laparoscopy.
Adoption of laparoscopy was highly sensitive to market forces, with a 10% increase in HMO penetration leading to a 10.3% increase in the likelihood of undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR): 1.109, 95% Confidence Interval: 1.062, 1.158), and a 10% increase in HHI resulting in 6.6% lower likelihood (AOR: 0.936 (0.880, 0.996)). Price models indicated that the price of laparoscopy was 7.6% lower than for open surgery (transformed coefficient (Coeff): 0.927 (0.895, 0.960)). A 10% increase in HMO penetration was associated with 1.6% lower price (Coeff: 0.985 (0.977, 0.992)), while a 10% increase in HHI was associated with 1.6% higher price (Coeff: 1.016 (1.006, 1.027), p < 0.001 for all comparisons).
Laparoscopy was significantly associated with lower hospital prices. Moreover,
Laparoscopic surgery may result in cost savings, while market pressures contribute to its adoption.
Colon Cancer; Surgery; Laparoscopy, Medical Prices
Purpose: We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the short- and long-term results of laparoscopy-assisted colectomy (LAC) and open colectomy (OC) for colon cancer.
Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Controlled Trial Register for relevant papers published between January 1990 and October 2011 by using the search terms “laparoscopy,” “laparoscopy-assisted,” “surgery,” “colectomy,” “colon cancer,” and “randomized clinical trials (RCTs)”. We analyzed the outcomes of each type of surgery over short- and long-term periods.
Results: We selected 12 papers reporting RCTs that compared LAC with OC for colon cancer. Our meta-analysis included 4614 patients with colon cancer; of these, 2444 had undergone LAC and 2170 had undergone OC. In the short-term period, we found that the rates of overall postoperative complications and ileus in LAC were lower than in OC groups. LAC was associated with a reduction in intraoperative blood loss, a shorter duration of time to resumption and hospital stay, and lower rates of overall complication and ileus over the short-term, but with similar long-term oncologic outcomes such as overall and cancer-related mortality, overall recurrence, local recurrence, distant metastasis, and wound-site recurrence, compared to OC.
Conclusions: It is suggested that LAC may be preferred to OC for colon cancer.
meta-analysis; laparoscopy-assisted colectomy; colon cancer
Laparoscopic colectomy has been proven oncologically equivalent to conventional surgery and is now generally agreed to offer patients a reduced length of stay, shorter recovery times, and improved cosmesis. In contrast, acceptance of laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer has been much delayed and the enthusiasm of early studies has met considerable skepticism. For rectal cancer, it has been demonstrated that there is considerable variation between surgeons in disease-free survival and local pelvic recurrence after open proctectomy for rectal cancer. These differences are likely to be magnified when the technical challenge of laparoscopy is added to proctectomy. Minimally invasive approaches to rectal cancer need to demonstrate equivalent oncologic outcomes and maintenance or improvement in quality of life. This review will outline the current evidence for laparoscopy as a treatment option for patients with rectal cancer, emphasize the need for standardized approaches among multidisciplinary teams, and highlight the technical details of different laparoscopic operations for rectal cancer.
Laparoscopy; rectal cancer; techniques; approaches