Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia for ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND Ovarian cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in female reproductive system in the world,and the choice of its treatment is very important for the survival rate and prognosis of patients.Traditional open surgery is the main treatment for ovarian cancer,but it has the disadvantages of big trauma and slow recovery.With the continuous development of minimally invasive technology,minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia has been gradually applied to the treatment of ovarian cancer because of its advantages of less trauma and quick recovery.However,the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia in the treatment of ovarian cancer are still controversial.AIM To explore the efficacy and safety of general anesthesia minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of ovarian cancer.METHODS The clinical data of 90 patients with early ovarian cancer in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively.According to the different surgical treatment methods,patients were divided into study group and control group(45 cases in each group).The study group received minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia for ovarian cancer,while the control group received traditional open surgery for ovarian cancer.The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire(EORTC QLQ-C30),clinical efficacy and safety of the two groups were compared.RESULTS The intraoperative blood loss,length of hospital stay,postoperative gas evacuation time,and postoperative EORTC QLQ-C30 score of the study group were significantly better than those of the control group(P<0.05).The incidence of postoperative complications in the study group was significantly lower than in the control group(P<0.05).The two groups had no significant differences in the preoperative adrenocorticotropic hormone(ACTH),androstenedione(AD),cortisol(Cor),cluster of differentiation 3 positive(CD3+),and cluster of differentiation 4 positive(CD4+)indexes(P>0.05).In contrast,postoperatively,the study group's ACTH,AD,and Cor indexes were lower,and the CD3+and CD4+indexes were higher than those in the control group(P<0.05).CONCLUSION Minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia in patients with early ovarian cancer can significantly improve the efficacy and safety,improve the short-term prognosis and quality of life of patients,and is worth popularizing.

Present situation of minimally invasive surgical treatment for early gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery is a kind of surgical operation,which is performed by using professional surgical instruments and equipment to inactivate,resect,repair or reconstruct the pathological changes,deformities and wounds in human body through micro-trauma or micro-approach,in order to achieve the goal of treatment,its surgical effect is equivalent to the traditional open surgery,while avoiding the morbidity of conventional surgical wounds.In addition,it also has the advantages of less trauma,less blood loss during operation,less psychological burden and quick recovery on patients,and these minimally invasive techniques provide unique value for the examination and treatment of gastric cancer patients.Surgical minimally invasive surgical techniques have developed rapidly and offer numerous options for the treatment of early gastric cancer(EGC):endoscopic mucosal resection(EMR),underwater EMR(UEMR),endoscopic submucosal dissection(ESD),endoscopic full-thickness resection(EFTR),endoscopic submu-cosal excavation(ESE),submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection,laparoscopic and endoscopic cooperative surgery(LECS);Among them,EMR,EFTR and LECS technologies have a wide range of applications and different modific-ations have been derived from their respective surgical operations,such as band-assisted EMR(BA-EMR),conven-tional EMR(CEMR),over-the-scope clip-assisted EFTR,no-touch EFTR,the inverted LECS,closed LECS,and so on.These new and improved minimally invasive surgeries are more precise,specific and effective in treating different types of EGC.

Impact of minimally invasive surgery on immune function and stress response in gastric cancer patients

BACKGROUND Gastric cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally.Traditional open surgery for gastric cancer is often associated with significant morbidity and prolonged recovery.AIM To evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery as an alternative to traditional open surgery for gastric cancer,focusing on its potential to reduce trauma,accelerate recovery,and achieve comparable oncological out-comes.METHODS This study retrospectively analyzed 203 patients with gastric cancer who underwent surgery at the Shanghai Health Medical College Affiliated Chongming Hospital from January 2020 to December 2023.The patients were divided into two groups:Minimally invasive surgery group(n=102),who underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy,and open surgery group(n=101),who underwent traditional open gastrectomy.We compared surgical indicators(surgical incision size,intraop-erative blood loss,surgical duration,and number of lymph nodes dissected),recovery parameters(time to first flatus,time to start eating,time to ambulation,and length of hospital stay),immune function(levels of IgA,IgG,and IgM),intestinal barrier function(levels of D-lactic acid and diamine oxidase),and stress response(levels of C-reactive protein,interleukin-6,and procalcitonin).RESULTS The minimally invasive surgery group demonstrated significantly better outcomes in terms of surgical indicators,including smaller incisions,less blood loss,shorter surgery time,and more lymph nodes dissected(P<0.05 for all).Recovery was also faster in the minimally invasive surgery group,with earlier return of bowel function,earlier initiation of diet,quicker mobilization,and shorter hospital stays(P<0.05 for all).Furthermore,patients in the minimally invasive surgery group had better preserved immune function,superior intestinal barrier function,and a less pronounced stress response postoperatively(P<0.05 for all).CONCLUSION Laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer not only provides superior surgical indicators and faster recovery but also offers advantages in preserving immune function,protecting intestinal barrier function,and mitigating the stress response compared to traditional open surgery.These findings support the broader adoption of laparoscopic techniques in the management of gastric cancer.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery

AIM To investigate the role of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer and determine surgical, clinical, and oncological outcomes.METHODS This is a propensity score-matched case-control study, comparing three treatment arms: robotic gastrectomy(RG), laparoscopic gastrectomy(LG), open gastrectomy(OG). Data collection started after sharing a specific study protocol. Data were recorded through a tailored and protected web-based system. Primary outcomes: harvested lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, complications rate. Among the secondary outcomes, there are: operative time, R0 resections, POD of mobilization, POD of starting liquid diet and soft solid diet. The analysis includes the evaluation of type and grade of postoperative complications. Detailed information of anastomotic leakages is also provided.RESULTS The present analysis was carried out of 1026 gastrectomies. To guarantee homogenous distribution of cases, patients in the RG, LG and OG groups were 1:1:2 matched using a propensity score analysis with a caliper = 0.2. The successful matching resulted in a total sample of 604 patients(RG = 151; LG = 151; OG = 302). The three groups showed no differences in all baseline patients characteristics, type of surgery(P = 0.42) and stage of the disease(P = 0.16). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LG(95.93 ± 119.22) and RG(117.91 ± 68.11) groups compared to the OG(127.26 ± 79.50, P = 0.002). The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the RG(27.78 ± 11.45), LG(24.58 ± 13.56) and OG(25.82 ± 12.07) approach. A benefit in favor of the minimally invasive approaches was found in the length of hospital stay(P < 0.0001). A similar complications rate was found(P = 0.13). The leakage rate was not different(P = 0.78) between groups.CONCLUSION Laparoscopic and robotic surgery can be safely performed and proposed as possible alternative to open surgery. The main highlighted benefit is a faster postoperative functional recovery.

Surgical specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure: A minimally invasive technique for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery

AIM To retrospectively evaluate the safety and feasibility of surgical specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure in patient with rectal cancer. METHODS We systematically reviewed 331 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer and prophylactic ileostomy in our institution from June 2010 to October 2016, including 155 patients who underwent specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure(experimental group), and 176 patients who underwent specimen extraction via a small lower abdominal incision(control group). Clinical data were collected from both groups andstatistically analyzed. RESULTS The two groups were matched in clinical characteristics and pathological outcomes. However, mean operative time was significantly shorter in the experimental group compared to the control group(161.3 ± 21.5 min vs 168.8 ± 20.5 min; P = 0.001). Mean estimated blood loss was significantly less in the experimental group(77.4 ± 30.7 mL vs 85.9 ± 35.5 mL; P = 0.020). The pain reported by patients during the first two days after surgery was significantly less in the experimental group than in the control group. No wound infections occurred in the experimental group, but 4.0% of the controls developed wound infections(P = 0.016). The estimated 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival rate were similar between the two groups.CONCLUSION Surgical specimen extraction via a prophylactic ileostomy procedure represents a secure and feasible approach to laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, and embodies the principle of minimally invasive surgery.

Role of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer

Rectal cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide.Surgical resection for rectal cancer usually requires a proctectomy with respective lymphadenectomy(total mesorectal excision).This has traditionally been performed transabdominally through an open incision.Over the last thirty years,minimally invasive surgery platforms have rapidly evolved with the goal to accomplish the same quality rectal resection through a less invasive approach.There are currently three resective modalities that complement the traditional open operation:(1)Laparoscopic surgery;(2)Robotic surgery;and(3)Transanal total mesorectal excision.In addition,there are several platforms to carry out transluminal local excisions(without lymphadenectomy).Evidence on the various modalities is of mixed to moderate quality.It is unreasonable to expect a randomized comparison of all options in a single trial.This review aims at reviewing in detail the various techniques in regard to intra-/perioperative benchmarks,recovery and complications,oncological and functional outcomes.

Prognostic factors of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: Does robotic gastrectomy bring oncological benefit?

BACKGROUND Gastric cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide and surgical resection remains the sole curative treatment for gastric cancer.Minimally invasive gastrectomy including laparoscopic and robotic approaches has been increasingly used in a few decades.Thus far,only a few reports have investigated the oncological outcomes following minimally invasive gastrectomy.AIM To determine the 5-year survival following minimally invasive gastrectomy for gastric cancer and identify prognostic predictors.METHODS This retrospective cohort study identified 939 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer during the study period.After excluding 125 patients with non-curative surgery(n=77),other synchronous cancer(n=2),remnant gastric cancer(n=25),insufficient physical function(n=13),and open gastrectomy(n=8),a total of 814 consecutive patients with primary gastric cancer who underwent minimally invasive R0 gastrectomy at our institution between 2009 and 2014 were retrospectively examined.Accordingly,5-year overall and recurrence-free survival were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method with the log-rank test and Cox regression analyses,while factors associated with survival were determined using multivariate analysis.RESULTS Our analysis showed that age>65 years,American Society of Anesthesiologists(ASA)physical status 3,total or proximal gastrectomy,and pathological T4 and N positive status were independent predictors of both 5-year overall and recurrencefree survival.Accordingly,the included patients had a 5-year overall and recurrence-free survival of 80.3%and 78.2%,respectively.Among the 814 patients,157(19.3%)underwent robotic gastrectomy,while 308(37.2%)were diagnosed with pathological stage II or III disease.Notably,our findings showed that robotic gastrectomy was an independent positive predictor for recurrence-free survival in patients with pathological stage II/III[hazard ratio:0.56(0.33-0.96),P=0.035].Comparison of recurrence-free survival between the robotic and laparoscopic approach using propensity score matching analysis verified that the robotic group had less morbidity(P=0.005).CONCLUSION Age,ASA status,gastrectomy type,and pathological T and N status were prognostic factors of minimally invasive gastrectomy,with the robot approach possibly improving long-term outcomes of advanced gastric cancer.

Current status of minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer(PC)is the most lethal cancer among digestive system cancers.Although the only way to radically cure PC is surgical resection,complex surgical procedures and severe post-operative complications lead to high mortality.In recent years,minimally invasive surgery has become more common for PC.Minimally invasive pancreatic resection(MIPR)with the laparoscopic or robotic method has shown its superiority compared with traditional surgery.However,increasing evidence indicates that the long-term or even short-term outcomes of MIPR for PC patients remain controversial.Moreover,the indications and learning curve of MIPR require further assessment.This review aims to discuss the progress in current MIPR,analyze the specific problems and obstacles in the development of MIPR,and try to standardize MIPR procedures and improve the outcomes of MIPR.

Minimally invasive surgery in gastric cancer

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer has rapidly gained popularity due to the early detection of early gastric cancer. As advances in instruments and the accumulation of laparoscopic experience increase, laparoscopic techniques are being used for less invasive but highly technical procedures. Recent evidence suggests that the short- and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for early gastric cancer and advanced gastric cancer are comparable to those of conventional open surgery. However, these results should be confirmed by large-scale multicenter prospective randomized controlled clinical trials.

Recent advances in the management of rectal cancer: No surgery, minimal surgery or minimally invasive surgery

Over the last decade,with the acceptance of the need for improvements in the outcome of patients affected with rectal cancer,there has been a significant increase in the literature regarding treatment options available to patients affected by this disease.That treatment related decisions should be made at a high volume multidisciplinary tumor board,after pre-operative rectal magnetic resonance imaging and the importance of total mesorectal excision(TME)are accepted standard of care.More controversial is the emerging role for watchful waiting rather than radical surgery in complete pathologic responders,which may be appropriate in 20%of patients.Patients with early T1 rectal cancers and favorable pathologic features can be cured with local excision only,with transanal minimal invasive surgery(TAMIS)because of its versatility and almost universal availability of the necessary equipment and skillset in the average laparoscopic surgeon,emerging as the leading option.Recent trials have raised concerns about the oncologic outcomes of the standard"top-down"TME hence transanal TME(Ta TME"bottom-up")approach has gained popularity as an alternative.The challenges are many,with a dearth of evidence of the oncologic superiority in the long-term for any given option.However,this review highlights recent advances in the role of chemoradiation only for complete pathologic responders,TAMIS for highly selected early rectal cancer patients and Ta TME as options to improve cure rates whilst maintaining quality of life in these patients,while we await the results of further definitive trials being currently conducted.

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on esophagectomies in esophageal cancer:The superiority of minimally invasive surgery

BACKGROUND Previous meta-analyses,with many limitations,have described the beneficial nature of minimal invasive procedures.AIM To compare all modalities of esophagectomies to each other from the results of randomized controlled trials(RCTs)in a network meta-analysis(NMA).METHODS We conducted a systematic search of the MEDLINE,EMBASE,Reference Citation Analysis(https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/)and CENTRAL databases to identify RCTs according to the following population,intervention,control,outcome(commonly known as PICO):P:Patients with resectable esophageal cancer;I/C:Transthoracic,transhiatal,minimally invasive(thoracolaparoscopic),hybrid,and robot-assisted esophagectomy;O:Survival,total adverse events,adverse events in subgroups,length of hospital stay,and blood loss.We used the Bayesian approach and the random effects model.We presented the geometry of the network,results with probabilistic statements,estimated intervention effects and their 95% confidence interval(CI),and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank the interventions.RESULTS We included 11 studies in our analysis.We found a significant difference in postoperative pulmonary infection,which favored the minimally invasive intervention compared to transthoracic surgery(risk ratio 0.49;95%CI:0.23 to 0.99).The operation time was significantly shorter for the transhiatal approach compared to transthoracic surgery(mean difference-85 min;95%CI:-150 to-29),hybrid intervention(mean difference-98 min;95%CI:-190 to-9.4),minimally invasive technique(mean difference-130 min;95%CI:-210 to-50),and robot-assisted esophagectomy(mean difference-150 min;95%CI:-240 to-53).Other comparisons did not yield significant differences.CONCLUSION Based on our results,the implication of minimally invasive esophagectomy should be favored.

Survival after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer:Multicenter comparison between minimally invasive and open approaches

Objective:To investigate oncological outcomes in patients with bladder cancer who underwent minimally invasive radical cystectomy(MIRC)or open radical cystectomy(ORC).Methods:We identified patients with bladder cancer who underwent radical cystectomy(RC)in 13 centers of the Chinese Bladder Cancer Consortium(CBCC).Perioperative outcomes were compared between MIRC and ORC.The influence of surgical approaches on overall survival(OS)and cancer-specific survival(CSS)in the entire study group and subgroups classified according to pathologic stage or lymph node(LN)status was assessed with the log-rank test.Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate the association among OS,CSS and risk factors of interest.Results:Of 2098 patients who underwent RC,1243 patients underwent MIRC(1087 laparoscopic RC and 156 robotic-assisted RC,respectively),while 855 patients underwent ORC.No significant differences were noted in positive surgical margin rate and 90-day postoperative mortality rate.MIRC was associated with less estimated blood loss,more LN yield,higher rate of neobladder diversion,longer operative time,and longer length of hospital stay.There was no significant difference in OS and CSS according to surgical approaches(pZ0.653,and 0.816,respectively).Subgroup analysis revealed that OS and CSS were not significantly different regardless of the status of extravesical involvement or LN involvement.Multivariable Cox regression analyses showed that the surgical approach was not a significant predictor of OS and CSS.Conclusions:Our study showed that MIRC was comparable to conventional ORC in terms of OS and CSS.

Complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation in colorectal cancer in the era of minimally invasive surgery

Since the 19th century,appropriate lymphadenectomy has been considered a cornerstone of oncologic surgery and one of the most important prognostic factors.This approach can be applied to any surgery for gastrointestinal cancer.During surgery for colon and rectal cancer,an adequate portion of the mesentery is removed together with the segment of bowel affected by the disease.The adequate number of lymph nodes to be removed is standardized and reported by several guidelines.It is mandatory to determine the appropriate extent of lymphadenectomy and to balance its oncological benefits with the increased morbidity associated with its execution in cancer patients.Our review focuses on the concept of“complete mesenteric excision(CME)with central vascular ligation(CVL),”a radical lymphadenectomy for colorectal cancer that has gained increasing interest in recent years.The aim of this study was to evaluate the evolution of this approach over the years,its potential oncologic benefits and potential risks,and the improvements offered by laparoscopic techniques.Theoretical advantages of CME are improved local-relapse rates due to complete removal of the intact mesocolic fascia and improved distance recurrence rates due to ligation of vessels at their origin(CVL)which guarantees removal of a larger number of lymph nodes.The development and worldwide diffusion of laparoscopic techniques minimized postoperative trauma in oncologic surgery,providing the same oncologic results as open surgery.This has been widely applied to colorectal cancer surgery;however,CME entails a technical complexity that can limit its wide minimally-invasive application. This review analyzesresults of these procedures in terms of oncological outcomes, technical feasibilityand complexity, especially within the context of minimally invasive surgery.

Minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy in patients with colon cancer residing in high-altitude areas

BACKGROUND Colon cancer is associated with a higher incidence among residents in highaltitude areas.Hypoxic environment at high altitudes inhibits the phagocytic and oxygen-dependent killing function of phagocytes,thereby increasing the inflammatory factors,inhibiting the body’s innate immunity and increasing the risk of colon cancer.AIM To examine the effect of minimally invasive surgery vs laparotomy in patients with colon cancer residing in high-altitude areas.METHODS Ninety-two patients with colon cancer in our hospital from January 2019 to February 2021 were selected and divided into the minimally invasive surgery and laparotomy groups using the random number table method,with 46 patients in each group.Minimally invasive surgery was performed in the minimally invasive group and laparotomy in the laparotomy group.Operative conditions,inflammatory index pre-and post-surgery,immune function index and complication probability were measured.RESULTS Operative duration was significantly longer and intraoperative blood loss and recovery time of gastrointestinal function were significantly less(all P<0.05)in the minimally invasive group than in the laparotomy group.The number of lymph nodes dissected was not significantly different.Before surgery,there were no significant differences in serum C-reactive protein,interleukin-6 and tumor necrosis factor-αlevels between the groups,whereas after surgery,the levels were significantly higher in the minimally invasive group(26.98±6.91 mg/L,146.38±11.23 ng/mL and 83.51±8.69 pg/mL vs 41.15±8.39 mg/L,186.79±15.36 ng/mL and 110.65±12.84 pg/mL,respectively,P<0.05).Furthermore,before surgery,there were no significant differences in CD3+,CD4+and CD4+/CD8+levels between the groups,whereas after surgery,the levels decreased in both groups,being significantly higher in the minimally invasive group(55.61%±4.39%,35.45%±3.67%and 1.30±0.35 vs 49.68%±5.33%,31.21%±3.25%and 1.13±0.30,respectively,P<0.05).Complication probability was significantly lower in the minimally invasive group(4.35%vs 17.39%,P<0.05).CONCLUSION Laparoscopic minimally invasive procedures reduce surgical trauma and alleviate the inflammatory response and immune dysfunction caused by invasive operation.It also shortens recovery time and reduces complication probability.

Minimal Invasive Surgery for Esophageal Cancer

Thoracoscopic esophagectomy is only established in some centers and a?ords a cervical anasto- mosis because intrathoracic anastomosis as a routine is technically too di?cult. Laparoscopic mobilisation of the stomach (gastrolysis) is an important contribution for minimal invasive surgery of esophageal cancer. This procedure reduces the stress of the two cavity operation for the patient and allows the construction of a comparable gastric conduit like by open surgery. The technique of laparoscopic gastrolysis as prepa- ration for transthoracic en bloc esophagectomy is described in detail and preliminary results are brie?y mentioned.

Comparative Analysis of Safety and Effect of Minimally Invasive Esophageal Cancer Radical Resection and Conventional Thoracotomy for Esophageal Cancer

Objective:To compare the clinical effects of minimally invasive esophageal cancer radical resection and traditional esophageal cancer radical resection.Methods:200 cases of esophageal cancer radical resection were performed from July 2014 to July 2017 in our hospital.The cases were divided into experimental group and control group,82 cases in the experimental group and 118 cases in the control group.The experimental group was treated with minimally invasive esophageal cancer radical surgery,and the control group was treated with conventional thoracotomy.Record the comparison between the two groups:(1)surgical conditions,including the time of surgery,intraoperative blood loss,hospitalization time;(2)the number of lymph nodes cleaned;(3)the postoperative control group used conventional thoracotomy,including lung lesions,anastomotic fistula/narrow.Results:The parameters of operation time,intraoperative blood loss,hospitalization time,and number of lymph nodes cleaned in the experimental group were lower than those in the control group,and the difference was statistically significant(p<0.05).In addition to pulmonary infection(p<0.05),there was no significant difference in the incidence of other complications between the experimental group and the control group(p>0.05).Conclusion:Minimally invasive esophageal cancer radical resection and conventional thoracotomy have good clinical effects in the treatment of esophageal cancer.Minimally invasive esophageal cancer radical surgery can effectively reduce intraoperative trauma and postoperative reaction,which is worthy of popularization and application.

Total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: laparoscopic vs robotic surgery

AIM: To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for middle and low rectal cancer.METHODS: This is a retrospective study on a prospectively collected database containing 111 patients who underwent minimally invasive rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) with curative intent between January 2008 and December 2014 (robot, n = 53; laparoscopy, n = 58). The patients all had a diagnosis of middle and low rectal adenocarcinoma with stage&#x02005;I-III disease. The median follow-up period was 37.4 mo. Perioperative results, morbidity a pathological data were evaluated and compared. The 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were calculated and compared.RESULTS: Patients were comparable in terms of preoperative and demographic parameters. The median surgery time was 192 min for laparoscopic TME (L-TME) and 342 min for robotic TME (R-TME) (P &#x0003c; 0.001). There were no differences found in the rates of conversion to open surgery and morbidity. The patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery stayed in the hospital two days longer than the robotic group patients (8 d for L-TME and 6 d for R-TME, P &#x0003c; 0.001). The pathologic evaluation showed a higher number of harvested lymph nodes in the robotic group (18 for R-TME, 11 for L-TME, P &#x0003c; 0.001) and a shorter distal resection margin for laparoscopic patients (1.5 cm for L-TME, 2.5 cm for R-TME, P &#x0003c; 0.001). The three-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were similar between groups.CONCLUSION: Both L-TME and R-TME achieved acceptable clinical and oncologic outcomes. The robotic technique showed some advantages in rectal surgery that should be validated by further studies.

Lymph node dissection in esophageal carcinoma: Minimally invasive esophagectomy vs open surgery

AIM: To compare lymph node dissection results of minimally invasive esophagectomy(MIE) and open surgery for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients who underwent MIE or open surgery for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma from January 2011 to September 2014. Number of lymph nodes resected, positive lymph node(p N+) rate, lymph node sampling(LNS) rate and lymph node metastatic(LNM) rate were evaluated. R E S U LT S : A m o n g 4 4 7 p a t i e n t s i n c l u d e d, 1 2 3 underwent MIE and 324 underwent open surgery. The number of lymph nodes resected did not significantly differ between the MIE and open surgery groups(21.1 ± 4.3 vs 20.4 ± 3.8, respectively, P = 0.0944). The p N+ rate of stage T3 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the open surgery group was higher than that in the MIE group(16.3% vs 11.4%, P = 0.031), but no differences was observed for stages T1 and T2 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The LNS rate at left para-recurrent laryngeal nerve(RLN) site was significantly higher for open surgery than for MIE(80.2% vs 43.9%, P < 0.001), but no differences were noted at other sites. The LNM rate at left para-RLN site in the open surgery group was significantly higher than that in the MIE group, regardless of pathologic T stage. CONCLUSION: For stages T1 and T2 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, the lymph node dissection result after MIE was comparable to that achieved by open surgery. However, the efficacy of MIE in lymphadenectomy for stage T3 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, particularly at left para-RLN site, remains to be improved.

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review of current practice

AIM: To give a comprehensive review of current litera-ture on robotic rectal cancer surgery.METHODS: A systematic review of current literature via PubMed and Embase search engines was per-formed to identify relevant articles from january 2007 to november 2013. The keywords used were: "robotic surgery", "surgical robotics", "laparoscopic computer-assisted surgery", "colectomy" and "rectal resection". RESULTS: After the initial screen of 380 articles, 20 pa-pers were selected for review. A total of 1062 patients(male 64.0%) with a mean age of 61.1 years and body mass index of 24.9 kg/m2 were included in the review.Out of 1062 robotic-assisted operations, 831(78.2%) anterior and low anterior resections, 132(12.4%) in-tersphincteric resection with coloanal anastomosis, 98(9.3%) abdominoperineal resections and 1(0.1%) Hart-mann's operation were included in the review. Robotic rectal surgery was associated with longer operative time but with comparable oncological results and anastomotic leak rate when compared with laparoscopic rectal surgery. CONCLUSION: Robotic colorectal surgery has con-tinued to evolve to its current state with promising re-sults; feasible surgical option with low conversion rate and comparable short-term oncological results. The challenges faced with robotic surgery are for more high quality studies to justify its cost.

Current status and challenges in sentinel node navigation surgery for early gastric cancer

As an optimal surgical procedure to accurately evaluate lymph node(LN)metastasis during surgery with minimal surgical resection,we have been developing sentinel node(SN)biopsy for early gastric cancer since the 1990s.Twelve institutions from the Japanese Society of Sentinel Node Navigation Surgery(SNNS),including Keio University Hospital,conducted a multicenter prospective trial to validate the SN concept using the dual-tracer method with blue dye and a radioisotope.According to the results,397 patients were included in the final analysis,and the overall accuracy in detecting LN metastasis using SN biopsy was 99%(383 of 387).Based on the validation study,we are targeting cT1N0 with a primary tumor of≤4 cm in diameter as an indication for SN biopsy for gastric cancer.We are currently running a multicenter nonrandomized phaseⅢtrial to assess the safety and efficacy of SN navigation surgery.The Korean group has reported the result of a multicenter randomized phaseⅢtrial.Since meticulous gastric cancer in the remnant stomach was rescued by subsequent gastrectomy,the disease-specific survival was comparable between the two techniques,implying that SN navigation surgery can be an alternative to standard gastrectomy.With the development of SN biopsy procedure and treatment modalities,the application of SN biopsy will be expanded to achieve an individualized minimally invasive surgery.