Clinical Outcomes of Complete Mesocolic Excision for Right-Sided Colon Cancer Using 3D Laparoscopy versus 2D Laparoscopy

Objective:To study the clinical outcomes of complete mesocolic excision(CME)for right-sided colon cancer using 3D(three-dimensional)laparoscopy compared to 2D(two-dimensional)laparoscopy.Methods:From January 2022 to December 2023,58 patients with right-sided colon cancer treated at the Affiliated Hospital of Hebei Engineering University were randomly divided into a 3D laparoscopy group(observation group)and a 2D laparoscopy group(control group),with 29 patients in each group.Intraoperative blood loss,postoperative time to first flatulence,length of hospital stay,and incidence of complications in both groups were recorded.Results:There was a statistically significant difference in intraoperative blood loss between the two groups(P<0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in the time to first flatulence between the groups(P>0.05).However,there was a statistically significant difference in the length of hospital stay(P<0.05)and the incidence of complications(P<0.05)between the two groups.Conclusion:3D laparoscopy for CME can reduce intraoperative blood loss,shorten hospital stay,and decrease postoperative complications,showing significant clinical advantages over traditional 2D laparoscopy.

Laparoscopy combined with hysteroscopy in the treatment of Robert’s uterus accompanied by adenomyosis:A case report

BACKGROUND Gynaecologists should be aware of a rare obstructive Mullerian duct abnormality like Robert’s uterus and perform further surgery when necessary.CASE SUMMARY We report a 41-year-old mother of two children with Robert’s uterus who was examined and treated by laparoscopy and hysteroscopy.Unlike the existing cases reported in the literature,this patient had a late onset of Robert’s uterus symptoms.Due to right tubal ectopic pregnancy 3 years previously,the patient was treated with right salpingectomy and left tubal ligation but suffered aggravated left lower abdominal pain.She was examined and treated by laparoscopy and hysteroscopy,and is completely asymptomatic at 5-year followup.CONCLUSION The typical obstructive Mullerian abnormality requires further surgery.Combined laparoscopy and hysteroscopy is an effective,minimally invasive technique with better recovery outcomes than traditional transabdominal procedures.

Unexpected right-sided sigmoid colon in laparoscopy: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND The presence of a right-sided sigmoid colon is a rare anatomical variation usually discovered incidentally during surgical interventions.This case report details an unexpected right-sided sigmoid colon identified during a laparoscopic appendectomy and examines the pertinent literature to explore its clinical importance.CASE SUMMARY A 71-year-old woman presented with acute appendicitis.A preoperative computed tomography(CT)scan showed peri-appendiceal inflammation but no significant anatomical abnormalities.During laparoscopic surgery,an unexpected finding was encountered:The sigmoid colon was situated on the right side and exhibited an abnormal relationship with the cecum and ascending colon.Postoperative pathological examination confirmed appendicitis with no additional pathological findings.The right-sided sigmoid colon anomaly was verified through intraoperative assessment and later re-evaluation with CT and colonographic imaging.The patient underwent a laparoscopic appendectomy and experienced a smooth postoperative recovery.CONCLUSION This case highlights the necessity of being attentive to anatomical variations during laparoscopic surgery,particularly when managing appendicitis.A review of the literature indicated that the occurrence of a right-sided sigmoid colon is infrequent and may be associated with anomalies in midgut rotation during embryonic development.Awareness of this variation can help prevent surgical complications and inform future clinical practice.

Benefits of laparoscopy-assisted ileostomy in colorectal cancer patients with bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND Ileostomies are commonly performed after colon and rectal surgeries.Laparoscopy-assisted ileostomy with adhesion lysis may have potential benefits over conventional open surgery.AIM To compare the outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted and conventional ileostomies.METHODS Data from 48 consecutive patients who underwent ileostomy at our institution between May 2021 and May 2022 were retrospectively analyzed.The groups comprised 26 and 22 patients who underwent laparoscopic ileostomy(laparoscopic group)and conventional ileostomy(conventional group),respectively,performed by a single surgeon.Patient demographics,operative characteristics,postoperative outcomes,and 30-d morbidities and mortality rates were analyzed.RESULTS The two groups had comparable mean ages,sex distributions,American Society of Anesthesiologists scores,and body mass indices.However,the laparoscopic group showed similar operative time,better visualization for adhesion lysis,and lower visual analog scale scores than the conventional group.CONCLUSION Laparoscopy-assisted ileostomy is a safe and efficient method that produces lower visual analog scale scores,better intraoperative visualization for effective adhesion lysis,and similar operative time compared with conventional ileostomy.

Systematic review of diagnostic tools for peritoneal metastasis in gastric cancer-staging laparoscopy and its alternatives

BACKGROUND Gastric cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer burden and mortality,often resulting in peritoneal metastasis in advanced stages with negative survival outcomes.Staging laparoscopy has become standard practice for suspected cases before a definitive gastrectomy or palliation.This systematic review aims to compare the efficacy of other diagnostic modalities instead of staging laparoscopy as the alternatives are able to reduce cost and invasive staging procedures.Recently,a radiomic model based on computed tomography and positron emission tomography(PET)has also emerged as another method to predict peritoneal metastasis.AIM To determine if the efficacy of computed tomography,magnetic resonance imaging and PET is comparable with staging laparoscopy.METHODS Articles comparing computed tomography,PET,magnetic resonance imaging,and radiomic models based on computed tomography and PET to staging laparoscopies were filtered out from the Cochrane Library,EMBASE,PubMed,Web of Science,and Reference Citations Analysis(https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/).In the search for studies comparing computed tomography(CT)to staging laparoscopy,five retrospective studies and three prospective studies were found.Similarly,five retrospective studies and two prospective studies were also included for papers comparing CT to PET scans.Only one retrospective study and one prospective study were found to be suitable for papers comparing CT to magnetic resonance imaging scans.RESULTS Staging laparoscopy outperformed computed tomography in all measured aspects,namely sensitivity,specificity,positive predictive value and negative predictive value.Magnetic resonance imaging and PET produced mixed results,with the former shown to be only marginally better than computed tomography.CT performed slightly better than PET in most measured domains,except in specificity and true negative rates.We speculate that this may be due to the limited F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in small peritoneal metastases and in linitis plastica.Radiomic modelling,in its current state,shows promise as an alternative for predicting peritoneal metastases.With further research,deep learning and radiomic modelling can be refined and potentially applied as a preoperative diagnostic tool to reduce the need for invasive staging laparoscopy.CONCLUSION Staging laparoscopy was superior in all measured aspects.However,associated risks and costs must be considered.Refinements in radiomic modelling are necessary to establish it as a reliable screening technique.

Diagnosis and management of choledocholithiasis in the golden age of imaging, endoscopy and laparoscopy

Biliary lithiasis is an endemic condition in both Western and Eastern countries, in some studies affecting 20% of the general population. In up to 20% of cases, gallbladder stones are associated with common bile duct stones (CBDS), which are asymptomatic in up to one half of cases. Despite the wide variety of examinations and techniques available nowadays, two main open issues remain without a clear answer: how to cost-effectively diagnose CBDS and, when they are finally found, how to deal with them. CBDS diagnosis and management has radically changed over the last 30 years, following the dramatic diffusion of imaging, including endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC), endoscopy and laparoscopy. Since accuracy, invasiveness, potential therapeutic use and cost-effectiveness of imaging techniques used to identify CBDS increase together in a parallel way, the concept of &#x0201c;risk of carrying CBDS&#x0201d; has become pivotal to identifying the most appropriate management of a specific patient in order to avoid the risk of &#x0201c;under-studying&#x0201d; by poor diagnostic work up or &#x0201c;over-studying&#x0201d; by excessively invasive examinations. The risk of carrying CBDS is deduced by symptoms, liver/pancreas serology and ultrasound. &#x0201c;Low risk&#x0201d; patients do not require further examination before laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Two main &#x0201c;philosophical approaches&#x0201d; face each other for patients with an &#x0201c;intermediate to high risk&#x0201d; of carrying CBDS: on one hand, the &#x0201c;laparoscopy-first&#x0201d; approach, which mainly relies on intraoperative cholangiography for diagnosis and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for treatment, and, on the other hand, the &#x0201c;endoscopy-first&#x0201d; attitude, variously referring to MRC, EUS and/or endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for diagnosis and endoscopic sphincterotomy for management. Concerning CBDS diagnosis, intraoperative cholangiography, EUS and MRC are reported to have similar results. Regarding management, the recent literature seems to show better short and long term outcome of surgery in terms of retained stones and need for further procedures. Nevertheless, open surgery is invasive, whereas the laparoscopic common bile duct clearance is time consuming, technically demanding and involves dedicated instruments. Thus, although no consensus has been achieved and CBDS management seems more conditioned by the availability of instrumentation, personnel and skills than cost-effectiveness, endoscopic treatment is largely preferred worldwide.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of laparoscopy-assisted and open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIM:To evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopy-assisted total gastrectomy(LATG)and open total gastrectomy(OTG)for gastric cancer.METHODS:A comprehensive search of PubMed,Cochrane Library,Web of Science and BIOSIS Previews was performed to identify studies that compared LATG and OTG.The following factors were checked:operating time,blood loss,harvested lymph nodes,flatus time,hospital stay,mortality and morbidity.Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.1 software.RESULTS:Nine studies with 1221 participants were included(436 LATG and 785 OTG).Compared to OTG,LATG involved a longer operating time[weighted mean difference(WMD)=57.68 min,95%CI:30.48-84.88;P<0.001];less blood loss[standard mean difference(SMD)=-1.71;95%CI:-2.48--0.49;P<0.001];earlier time to flatus(WMD=-0.76 d;95%CI:-1.22--0.30;P<0.001);shorter hospital stay(WMD=-2.67d;95%CI:-3.96--1.38,P<0.001);and a decrease in medical complications(RR=0.41,95%CI:0.19-0.90,P=0.03).The number of harvested lymph nodes,mortality,surgical complications,cancer recurrence rate and long-term survival rate of patients undergoing LATG were similar to those in patients undergoing OTG.CONCLUSION:Despite a longer operation,LATG can be performed safely in experienced surgical centers with a shorter hospital stay and fewer complications than open surgery.

Case-matched comparison of laparoscopy-assisted and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer

AIM: To compare shortand long-term outcomes of laparoscopy-assisted and open distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed by comparing the outcomes of 54 patients who underwent laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG) with those of 54 patients who underwent open distal gastrectomy (ODG) between October 2004 and October 2007. The patients' demographic data (age and gender), date of surgery, extent of lymphadenectomy, and differentiation and tumor-node-metastasis stage of the tumor were examined. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery, complications, pathological findings, and follow-up data were compared between the two groups.RESULTS: The mean operative time was significantly longer in the LADG group than in the ODG group (259.3 ± 46.2 min vs 199.8 ± 40.85 min; P < 0.05), whereas intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were significantly lower (160.2 ± 85.9 mL vs 257.8 ± 151.0 mL; 13.0% vs 24.1%, respectively, P < 0.05). In addition, the time to first flatus, time to initiate oral intake, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the LADG group than in the ODG group (3.9 ± 1.4 d vs 4.4 ± 1.5 d; 4.6 ± 1.2 d vs 5.6 ± 2.1 d; and 9.5 ± 2.7 d vs 11.1 ± 4.1 d, respectively; P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the LADG group and ODG group with regard to the number of harvested lymph nodes. The median followup was 60 mo (range, 5-97 mo). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 94.3%, 90.2%, and 76.7%, respectively, in the LADG group and 89.5%, 84.7%, and 82.3%, respectively, in the ODG group. The 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall survival rates were 98.0%, 91.9%, and 81.1%, respectively, in the LADG group and 91.5%, 86.9%, and 82.1%, respectively, in the ODG group. There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the survival rate. CONCLUSION: LADG is suitable and minimally invasive for treating distal gastric cancer and can achieve similar long-term results to ODG.

Systemic inflammation and immune response after laparotomy vs laparoscopy in patients with acute cholecystitis, complicated by peritonitis

AIM: To evaluate acute cholecystitis, complicated by peritonitis, acute phase response and immunological status in patients treated by laparoscopic or open approach. METHODS: From January 2002 to May 2012, we conducted a prospective randomized study on 45 consecutive patients (27 women, 18 men; mean age 58 years). These subjects were taken from a total of 681 patients who were hospitalised presenting similar preoperative findings: acute upper abdominal pain with tenderness, involuntary guarding under the right hypochondrium and/or in the flank; fever higher than 38 ℃, leukocytosis greater than 10 × 10 9 /L or both, and ultrasonographic evidence of calculous cholecystitis possibly complicated by peritonitis. These patients had undergone cholecystectomy for acute calculous cholecystitis,complicated by bile peritonitis. Randomly, 23 patients were assigned to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), and 22 patients to open cholecystectomy (OC). Blood samples were collected from all patients before operation and at days 1, 3 and 6 after surgery. Serum bacteraemia, endotoxaemia, white blood cells (WBCs), WBC subpopulations, human leukocyte antigen-DR (HLA-DR), neutrophil elastase, interleukin-1 (IL-1) and IL-6, and C-reactive protein (CRP) were measured at 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 and 180 min, at 4, 6, 12, 24 h, and then daily (8 A.M.) until post-operative day 6.RESULTS: The two groups were comparable in the severity of peritoneal contamination as indicated by the viable bacterial count (open group = 90% of positive cultures vs laparoscopic group = 87%) and endotoxin level (open group = 33.21 ± 6.32 pg/mL vs laparoscopic group = 35.02 ± 7.23 pg/mL). Four subjects in the OC group (18.1%) and 1 subject (4.3%) in the LC group (P < 0.05) developed intra-abdominal abscess. Severe leukocytosis (range 15.8-19.6/mL) was observed only after OC but not after LC, mostly due to an increase in neutrophils (days 1 and 3, P < 0.05). This value returned to the normal range within 3-4 d after LC and 5-7 d after OC. Other WBC types and lymphocyte subpopulations showed no significant variation. On the first day after surgery, a statistically significant difference was observed in HLA-DR expression between LC (13.0 ± 5.2) and OC (6.0 ± 4.2) (P < 0.05). A statistically significant change in plasma elastase concentration was recorded post-operatively at days 1, 3, and 6 in patients from the OC group when compared to the LC group (P < 0.05). In the OC group, the serum levels of IL-1 and IL-6 began to increase considerably from the first to the sixth hour after surgery. In the LC group, the increase of serum IL-1 and IL-6 levels was delayed and the peak values were notably lower than those in the OC group. Significant differences between the groups, for these two cytokines, were observed from the second to the twenty-fourth hour (P < 0.05) after surgery. The mean values of serum CRP in the LC group on post-operative days (1 and 3) were also lower than those in the OC group (P < 0.05). Systemic concentration of endotoxin was higher in the OC group at all intra-operative sampling times, but reached significance only when the gallbladder was removed (OC group = 36.81 ± 6.4 ρg/mLvs LC group = 16.74 ± 4.1 ρg/mL, P < 0.05). One hour after surgery, microbiological analysis of blood cultures detected 7 different bacterial species after laparotomy, and 4 species after laparoscopy (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: OC increased the incidence of bacteraemia, endotoxaemia and systemic inflammation compared with LC and caused lower transient immunological defense, leading to enhanced sepsis in the patients examined.

Staging laparoscopy improves treatment decision-makingfor advanced gastric cancer

AIM To evaluate the clinical value of staging laparoscopyin treatment decision-making for advancedgastric cancer （GC）.METHODS： Clinical data of 582 patients with advancedGC were retrospectively analyzed. All patientsunderwent staging laparoscopy. The strength ofagreement between computed tomography （CT） stage,endoscopic ultrasound （EUS） stage, laparoscopic stage,and final stage were determined by weighted Kappastatistic （Kw）. The number of patients with treatmentdecision-changes was counted. A χ 2 test was used toanalyze the correlation between peritoneal metastasisor positive cytology and clinical characteristics.RESULTS： Among the 582 patients, the distributions ofpathological T classifications were T2/3 （153, 26.3%）,T4a （262, 45.0%）, and T4b （167, 28.7%）. Treatmentplans for 211 （36.3%） patients were changed after staging laparoscopy was performed. Two （10.5%） of19 patients in M1 regained the opportunity for potentialradical resection by staging laparoscopy. Unnecessarylaparotomy was avoided in 71 （12.2%） patients. Thestrength of agreement between preoperative T stageand final T stage was in almost perfect agreement （Kw= 0.838; 95% confidence interval （CI）： 0.803-0.872;P 〈 0.05） for staging laparoscopy; compared with CTand EUS, which was in fair agreement. The strengthof agreement between preoperative M stage andfinal M stage was in almost perfect agreement （Kw= 0.990; 95% CI： 0.977-1.000; P 〈 0.05） for staginglaparoscopy; compared with CT, which was in slightagreement. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumorsize （≥ 40 mm）, depth of tumor invasion （T4b）, andBorrmann type （Ⅲ or Ⅳ） were significantly correlatedwith either peritoneal metastasis or positive cytology.The best performance in diagnosing P-positive wasobtained when two or three risk factors existed.CONCLUSION： Staging laparoscopy can improvetreatment decision-making for advanced GC anddecrease unnecessary exploratory laparotomy.

Laparoscopy in the management of hilar cholangiocarcinoma

The use of minimally invasive surgery has become widely accepted in many gastrointestinal fields,even in patients with malignancy.However,performing laparoscopic resection for the treatment of hilar cholangiocarcinoma is still not universally accepted as an alternative approach to open surgery,and only a limited number of such procedures have been reporteddue to the difficulty of performing oncologic resection and the lack of consensus regarding the adequacy of this approach.Laparoscopy was initially limited to staging,biopsy and palliation.Recent technological developments and improvements in endoscopic procedures have greatly expanded the applications of laparoscopic liver resection and lymphadenectomy,and some reports have described the use of laparoscopic or robot-assisted laparoscopic resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma as being feasible and safe in highly selected cases,with the ability to obtain an adequate surgical margin.However,the benefits of major laparoscopic surgery have yet to be conclusively proven,and carefully selecting patients is essential for successfully performing this procedure.

Self-expandable metallic stent placement plus laparoscopy for acute malignant colorectal obstruction

AIM:To investigate the clinical advantages of the stent-laparoscopy approach to treat colorectal cancer(CRC)patients with acute colorectal obstruction(ACO).METHODS:From April 2008 to April 2012,surgeryrelated parameters,complications,overall survival(OS),and disease-free survival(DFS)of 74 consecutive patients with left-sided CRC presented with ACO who underwent self-expandable metallic stent(SEMS)placement followed by one-stage open(n=58)or laparoscopic resection(n=16)were evaluated retrospectively.The stent-laparoscopy group was also compared with a control group of 96 CRC patients who underwent regular laparoscopy without ACO between January 2010 and December 2011 to explore whether SEMS placement influenced the laparoscopic procedure or reduced long-term survival by influencing CRC oncological characteristics.RESULTS:The characteristics of patients among these groups were comparable.The rate of conversion to open surgery was 12.5%in the stent-laparoscopy group.Bowel function recovery and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter(3.3±0.9 d vs 4.2±1.5 d and 6.7±1.1 d vs 9.5±6.7 d,P=0.016 and P=0.005),and surgical time was significantly longer(152.1±44.4 min vs 127.4±38.4 min,P=0.045)in the stent-laparoscopy group than in the stent-open group.Surgery-related complications and the rate of admission to the intensive care unit were lower in the stent-laparoscopy group.There were no significant differences in the interval between stenting and surgery,intraoperative blood loss,OS,and DFS between the two stent groups.Compared with those in the stentlaparoscopy group,all surgery-related parameters,complications,OS,and DFS in the control group were comparable.CONCLUSION:The stent-laparoscopy approach is a feasible,rapid,and minimally invasive option for patients with ACO caused by left-sided CRC and can achieve a favorable long-term prognosis.

Current status of laparoscopy for the treatment of rectal cancer

Surgery for rectal cancer in complex and entails many challenges.While the laparoscopic approach in general and specific to colon cancer has been long proven to have short term benefits and to be oncologically safe,it is still a debatable topic for rectal cancer.The attempt to benefit rectal cancer patients with the known advantages of the laparoscopic approach while not compromising their oncologic outcome has led to the conduction of many studies during the past decade.Herein we describe our technique for laparoscopic proctectomy and assess the current literature dealing with short term outcomes,immediate oncologic measures(such as lymph node yield and specimen quality) and long term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.We also briefly evaluate the evolving issues of robotic assisted rectal cancer surgery and the current innovations and trends in the minimally invasive approach to rectal cancer surgery.

Large bowel injuries during gynecological laparoscopy

Laparoscopy is one of the most frequently preferred surgical options in gynecological surgery and has advantages over laparotomy, including smaller surgical scars, faster recovery, less pain and earlier return of bowel functions. Generally, it is also accepted as safe and effective and patients tolerate it well. However, it is still an intra-abdominal procedure and has the similar potential risks of laparotomy, including injury of a vital structure, bleeding and infection. Besides the wellknown risks of open surgery, laparoscopy also has its own unique risks related to abdominal access methods,pneumoperitoneum created to provide adequate operative space and the energy modalities used during the procedures. Bowel, bladder or major blood vessel injuries and passage of gas into the intravascular space may result from laparoscopic surgical technique. In addition, the risks of aspiration, respiratory dysfunction and cardiovascular dysfunction increase during laparoscopy. Large bowel injuries during laparoscopy are serious complications because 50% of bowel injuries and60% of visceral injuries are undiagnosed at the time of primary surgery. A missed or delayed diagnosis increases the risk of bowel perforation and consequently sepsis and even death. In this paper, we aim to focus on large bowel injuries that happen during gynecological laparoscopy and review their diagnostic and management options.

Surgery for inflammatory bowel disease in the era of laparoscopy

During the course of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), surgery may be needed. Approximately 20% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) will require surgery, whereas up to 80% of Crohn's disease (CD) patients will undergo an operation during their lifetime. For UC patients requiring surgery, total proctocolectomy and ileoanal pouch anastomosis (IPAA) is the operation of choice as it provides a permanent cure and good quality of life. Nevertheless a permanent stoma is a good option in selected patients, especially the elderly. Minimally invasive surgery has replaced the conventional open approach in many specialized centres worldwide. Laparoscopic colectomy and restorative IPAA is rapidly becoming the standard of care in the treatment of UC requiring surgery, whilst laparoscopic ileo-cecal resection is already the new gold standard in the treatment of complicated CD of terminal ileum. Short term advantages of laparoscopic surgery includes faster recovery time and reduced requirement for analgesics. It is, however, in the long term that minimally invasive surgery has demonstrated its superiority over the open approach. A better cosmesis, a reduced number of incisional hernias and fewer adhesions are the long term advantages of laparoscopy in IBD surgery. A reduction in abdominal adhesions is of great benefit when a second operation is needed in CD and this influences positively the pregnancy rate in young women undergoing restorative IPAA. In developing the therapeutic plan for IBD patients it should be recognized that the surgical approach to the abdomen has changed and that surgical treatment of complicated IBD can be safely performed with a true minimally invasive approach with great patient satisfaction.

Role of laparoscopy in rectal cancer:A review

Despite established evidence on the advantages of laparoscopy in colon cancer resection,the use of laparoscopy for rectal cancer resection is still controversial.The initial concern was mainly regarding the feasibility of laparoscopy to achieve an adequate total mesorectal excision specimen.These concerns have been raised following early studies demonstrating higher rates of circumferential margins positivity following laparoscopic resection,as compared to open surgery.Similar to colon resection,patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal cancer resection are expected to benefit from a shorter length of hospital stay,less analgesic requirements,and a faster recovery of bowel function.In the past decade there have been an increasing number of large scale clinical trials investigating the oncological and perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic rectal cancer resection.In this review we summarize the current literature available on laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

Advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma

The greatest advantages of laparoscopy when compared to open surgery include the faster recovery times, shorter hospital stays, decreased postoperative pain, earlier return to work and resumption of normal daily activity as well as cosmetic benefits. Laparoscopy today is considered the gold standard of care in the treatment of cholecystitis and appendicitis worldwide. Laparoscopy has even been adopted in colorectal surgery with good results. The technological improvements in this surgical field along with the development of modern techniques and the acquisition of specific laparoscopic skills have allowed for its utilization in operations with fully intracorporeal anastomoses. Further progress in laparoscopy has included single-incision laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice trans-luminal endoscopic surgery. Nevertheless, laparoscopy for emergency surgery is still considered challenging and is usually not recommended due to the lack of adequate experience in this area. The technical difficulties of operating in the presence of diffuse peritonitis or large purulent collections and diffuse adhesions are also given as reasons. However, the potential advantages of laparoscopy, both in terms of diagnosis and therapy, are clear. Major advantages may be observed in cases with diffuse peritonitis secondary to perforated peptic ulcers,for example, where laparoscopy allows the confirmation of the diagnosis, the identification of the position of the ulcer and a laparoscopic repair with effective peritoneal washout. Laparoscopy has also revolutionized the approach to complicated diverticulitis even when intestinal perforation is present. Many other emergency conditions can be effectively managed laparoscopically, including trauma in select hemodynamically-stable patients. We have therefore reviewed the most recent scientific literature on advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma in order to demonstrate the current indications and outcomes associated with a laparoscopic approach to the treatment of the most common emergency surgical conditions.

Role of staging laparoscopy in peri-pancreatic and hepatobiliary malignancy

Even after extensive preoperative assessment,staging laparoscopy may allow avoidance of non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with radiographically occult metastatic or locally unresectable disease.Staging laparoscopy is associated with decreased postoperative pain,a shorter hospital stay and a higher likelihood of receiving systemic therapy compared to laparotomy but its yield has decreased with improvements in imaging techniques.Current uses of staging laparoscopy include the following:(1) In the staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma,laparoscopic staging allows for the identif ication of sub-radiographic metastatic disease in locally advanced cancer in approximately 30% of patients and,in radiographically resectable cancer,may identify metastatic disease in 10%-15% of cases;(2) In colorectal liver metastases,selective use of laparoscopic staging in patients with a clinical risk score of over 2 identifies unresectable disease in approximately 20% of patients;(3) In hepatocellular carcinoma,laparoscopic staging could be selectively used in high-risk patients such as those with clinically apparent liver cirrhosis and in patients with major vascular invasion or bilobar tumors;and(4) In biliary tract malignancy,staging laparoscopy may be used in all patients with potentially resectable primary gallbladder cancer and in selected patients with T2/T3 hilar cholangiocarcinoma.Because of the decreasing yield of SL secondary to improvements in imaging techniques,staging laparoscopy should be used selectively for patients with pancreatic and hepatobiliary malignancy to avoid unnecessary non-therapeutic laparotomy and to improve resource utilization.Each individual surgeon should apply his or her threshold as to whether staging laparoscopy is indicated according to the quality of preoperative imaging studies and the availability of resources at their own institution.

Advancing frontiers in anaesthesiology with laparoscopy

The introduction of laparoscopy in the surgeon&#x02019;s armamentarium was in fact a &#x0201c;revolution in the history of surgery&#x0201d;. Since this technique involves insufflation of carbon dioxide it produces several pathophysiological changes which have to be understood by the anaesthesiologist who can modify the anaesthesia technique accordingly. Advantages of laparoscopy include reduced pain, small scars and early return to work. Certain complications specific to laparoscopic surgery are due to carboperitoneum and increased intra-abdominal pressure. Venous air embolism, although very rare, can be lethal if not managed promptly. Other complications include subcutaneous emphysema, haemodynamic compromise and arrhythmias. Although associated with minimal postoperative morbidity, postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting can be quite problematic. The limitations of laparoscopy have been overcome by the introduction of robotic surgery. There are important implications for the anaesthesiologist during robotic surgeries which have to be practiced accordingly. Robotic surgery has a learning curve for both the surgeon and the anaesthesiologist. The robot is bulky, and cannot be disengaged after docking. Therefore it is important that the anaesthetized patient remains immobile throughout surgery and anaesthesia is reversed only after the robot has been disengaged at the end of surgery. Advances in laparoscopy and robotic surgery have modified anaesthetic techniques too.

New strategy during complicated open appendectomy: Convert open operation to laparoscopy

AIM: To introduce a new strategy during complicated open appendectomy - converting open operation to laparoscopy.