Feasibility and safety of minimally invasive multivisceral resection for T4b rectal cancer:A 9-year review

BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second highest cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide.About 5%-10%of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer(LARC)on presentation.For LARC invading into other structures(i.e.T4b),multivisceral resection(MVR)and/or pelvic ex-enteration(PE)remains the only potential curative surgical treatment.MVR and/or PE is a major and complex surgery with high post-operative morbidity.Minimally invasive surgery(MIS)has been shown to improve short-term post-operative outcomes in other gastrointestinal malignancies,but there is little evi-dence on its use in MVR,especially so for robotic MVR.This is a single-center retrospective cohort study from 1st January 2015 to 31st March 2023.Inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with cT4b rectal cancer and underwent MVR,or stage 4 disease with resectable systemic metastases.Pa-tients who underwent curative MVR for locally recurrent rectal cancer,or me-tachronous rectal cancer were also included.Exclusion criteria were patients with systemic metastases with non-resectable disease.All patients planned for elective surgery were enrolled into the standard enhanced recovery after surgery pathway with standard peri-operative management for colorectal surgery.Complex sur-gery was defined based on technical difficulty of surgery(i.e.total PE,bladder-sparing prostatectomy,pelvic lymph node dissection or need for flap creation).Our primary outcomes were the margin status,and complication rates.Cate-gorical values were described as percentages and analysed by the chi-square test.Continuous variables were expressed as median(range)and analysed by Mann-Whitney U test.Cumulative overall survival(OS)and recurrence-free survival(RFS)were analysed using Kaplan-Meier estimates with life table analysis.Log-rank test was performed to determine statistical significance between cumulative estimates.Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.Meier estimates with life table analysis.Log-rank test was performed to determine statistical significance between cumulative estimates.Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.RESULTS A total of 46 patients were included in this study[open MVR(oMVR):12(26.1%),miMVR:36(73.9%)].Patients’American Society of Anesthesiologists score,body mass index and co-morbidities were comparable between oMVR and miMVR.There is an increasing trend towards robotic MVR from 2015 to 2023.MiMVR was associated with lower estimated blood loss(EBL)(median 450 vs 1200 mL,P=0.008),major morbidity(14.7%vs 50.0%,P=0.014),post-operative intra-abdominal collections(11.8%vs 50.0%,P=0.006),post-operative ileus(32.4%vs 66.7%,P=0.04)and surgical site infection(11.8%vs 50.0%,P=0.006)compared with oMVR.Length of stay was also shorter for miMVR compared with oMVR(median 10 vs 30 d,P=0.001).Oncological outcomes-R0 resection,recurrence,OS and RFS were comparable between miMVR and oMVR.There was no 30-d mortality.More patients underwent robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR for complex cases(robotic 57.1%vs laparoscopic 7.7%,P=0.004).The operating time was longer for robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR[robotic:602(400-900)min,laparoscopic:Median 455(275-675)min,P<0.001].Incidence of R0 resection was similar(laparoscopic:84.6%vs robotic:76.2%,P=0.555).Overall complication rates,major morbidity rates and 30-d readmission rates were similar between la-paroscopic and robotic MVR.Interestingly,3-year OS(robotic 83.1%vs 58.6%,P=0.008)and RFS(robotic 72.9%vs 34.3%,P=0.002)was superior for robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR.CONCLUSION MiMVR had lower post-operative complications compared to oMVR.Robotic MVR was also safe,with acceptable post-operative complication rates.Prospective studies should be conducted to compare short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic vs laparoscopic MVR.

Beyond total mesorectal excision: The emerging role of minimally invasive surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer

Multivisceral resection and/or pelvic exenteration represents the only potential curative treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer(LARC);however,it poses significant technical challenges,which account for the high risk of morbidity and mortality associated with the procedure.As complete histopathologic resection is the most important determinant of patient outcomes,LARC often requires an extended resection beyond the total mesorectal excision plane to obtain clear re-section margins.In an era when laparoscopic surgery and robot-assisted surgery are becoming commonplace,the optimal approach to extensive pelvic inter-ventions remains controversial.However,acceptance of the suitability of mini-mally invasive surgery is slowly gaining traction.Nonetheless,there is still a lack of evidence in the literature about minimally invasive approaches in multiple and extensive surgical resections,highlighting the need for research studies to explore,validate,and develop this issue.This editorial aims to provide a critical overview of the currently available applications and challenges of minimally invasive abdo-minopelvic surgery for LARC.Furthermore,we discuss recent developments in the field of robotic surgery for LARC,with a specific focus on new innovations and emerging frontiers.

Minimally invasive pelvic exenteration for primary or recurrent locally advanced rectal cancer:A glimpse into the future

Surgeons have grappled with the treatment of recurrent and T4b locally advanced rectal cancer(LARC)for many years.Their main objectives are to increase the overall survival and quality of life of the patients and to mitigate postoperative complications.Currently,pelvic exenteration(PE)with or without neoadjuvant treatment is a curative treatment when negative resection margins are achieved.The traditional open approach has been favored by many surgeons.However,the technological advancements in minimally invasive surgery have radically changed the surgical options.Recent studies have demonstrated promising results in postoperative complications and oncological outcomes after robotic or laparoscopic PE.A recent retrospective study entitled“Feasibility and safety of minimally invasive multivisceral resection for T4b rectal cancer:A 9-year review”was published in the World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.As we read this article with great interest,we decided to delve into the latest data regarding the benefits and risks of minimally invasive PE for LARC.Currently,the small number of suitable patients,limited surgeon experience,and steep learning curve are hindering the establishment of minimally invasive PE.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy for gastric cancer

Pancreaticoduodenectomy(PD)is performed to achieve an R0 resection for gastric cancer with pancreatic and/or duodenal invasion.Several retrospective case series have been published,but the sample cohorts in each study were heterogeneous and small.Moreover,the absence of prospective studies results in a lack of solid evidence that will help determine who can benefit from this procedure.Although the morbidity and mortality of PD have been reported by most studies to be acceptable and that the procedure is feasible,these remained to be much higher than those of standard gastrectomy.Therefore,careful selection of patients should be considered.Based on a review of previous case series and our own experience,PD appears to be beneficial to patients with gastric cancer with pancreatic invasion when R0 resection is possible.In addition,multidisciplinary treatment such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy,is anticipated to improve survival.Nevertheless,considering that prospective randomized studies are difficult to perform,a large-scale multicenter retrospective cohort study is required to evaluate this highly invasive procedure.