Construction of a nomogram model to predict technical difficulty in performing laparoscopic sphincter-preserving radical resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND Colorectal surgeons are well aware that performing surgery for rectal cancer becomes more challenging in obese patients with narrow and deep pelvic cavities.Therefore,it is essential for colorectal surgeons to have a comprehensive understanding of pelvic structure prior to surgery and anticipate potential surgical difficulties.AIM To evaluate predictive parameters for technical challenges encountered during laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer.METHODS We retrospectively gathered data from 162 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic radical sphincterpreserving surgery for rectal cancer.Three-dimensional reconstruction of pelvic bone and soft tissue parameters was conducted using computed tomography(CT)scans.Operative difficulty was categorized as either high or low,and multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to identify predictors of operative difficulty,ultimately creating a nomogram.RESULTS Out of 162 patients,21(13.0%)were classified in the high surgical difficulty group,while 141(87.0%)were in the low surgical difficulty group.Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the surgical approach using laparoscopic intersphincteric dissection,intraoperative preventive ostomy,and the sacrococcygeal distance were independent risk factors for highly difficult laparoscopic radical sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer(P<0.05).Conversely,the anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic inlet/sacrococcygeal distance was identified as a protective factor(P<0.05).A nomogram was subsequently constructed,demonstrating good predictive accuracy(C-index=0.834).CONCLUSION The surgical approach,intraoperative preventive ostomy,the sacrococcygeal distance,and the anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic inlet/sacrococcygeal distance could help to predict the difficulty of laparoscopic radical sphincter-preserving surgery.

Onset and prognostic features of anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing radical surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND Anastomotic leakage(AL)is a significant complication of rectal cancer surgery,particularly in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.This study aimed to evaluate the onset and prognostic factors influencing AL in these patients and provide insights for better postoperative management.AIM To explore AL incidence in patients who underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy for rectal cancer and evaluate influencing factors and prognosis.METHODS We retrospectively analyzed data of patients with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy post-radical surgery admitted to our hospital from January 2020 to January 2023.Postoperative AL was recorded in all patients.Among 63 patients with AL initially enrolled,2 were lost to follow-up;thus,61 patients were included in the incident group.Another 59 patients without AL were included in the non-incident group.Clinical characteristics of both groups were analyzed to identify factors affecting postoperative AL and determine prognosis.RESULTS Multivariate analysis revealed that sex,operative time,bleeding,pelvic radiation injury,and intraoperative blood transfusion were independent risk factors for postoperative AL(P<0.05).The Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research(ISREC)grades for patients with postoperative AL were mainly A(49.18%)and B(40.98%),and most leakages occurred in the posterior wall(65.57%).Clinical manifestations included anal sacrococaudal pain(29.51%),anal pus(26.23%),and other symptoms.Invasive interventions were performed<2 times in 80.33%of patients.Poor prognoses were mainly associated with chronic pressacral sinus formation(24.59%),anastomotic stenosis(29.51%),and long-term stoma(19.67%).Multivariate analysis revealed distance from the anal margin and ISREC grade as independent risk factors for poor prognosis following AL(P<0.05).CONCLUSION Sex,operative time,bleeding loss,pelvic radiation damage,and intraoperative blood transfusion are independent risk factors for AL and the distance between tumor and ISREC grade potentially affect prognosis.

Clinical Efficacy of Laparoscopic Radical Colorectal Cancer Treatment for Colorectal Cancer and Its Effect on Immune Function

Objective:To explore the therapeutic effect of laparoscopic radical colorectal cancer treatment in colorectal cancer patients.Methods:A total of 50 colorectal cancer patients treated between August 2018 and August 2023 were randomly divided into two groups:Group A underwent laparoscopic radical colorectal cancer surgery,while Group B received open surgery.Clinical indicators,inflammatory factors,immune function indicators,and complications were compared between the two groups.Results:Group A showed significantly shorter operation times,faster recovery times,and reduced hospital stays compared to Group B.Additionally,Group A had less abdominal drainage and intraoperative bleeding(P<0.05).Levels of interleukin(IL)-4,IL-6,ultrasensitive C-reactive protein(hs-CRP),and tumor necrosis factor-alpha(TNF-α)were lower in Group A compared to Group B(P<0.05).Furthermore,immune function indicators,including CD3+,CD4+,CD8+,and CD4+/CD8+ratios,were better in Group A(P<0.05).The complication rate in Group A was also lower than in Group B(P<0.05).Conclusion:Laparoscopic radical treatment for colorectal cancer is efficient and feasible,causing minimal immune function impairment and inflammatory response.It also shortens postoperative recovery time.

Laparoscopic vs open surgery for gastric cancer: Assessing time, recovery, complications, and markers

BACKGROUND Gastric cancer(GC)is one of the most common cancers worldwide.Morbidity and mortality have increased in recent years,making it an urgent issue to address.La-paroscopic radical surgery(LRS)is a crucial method for treating patients with GC;However,its influence on tumor markers is still under investigation.The data of 194 patients treated at Chongqing University Cancer Hospital bet-ween January 2018 and January 2019 were retrospectively analyzed.Patients who underwent traditional open surgery and LRS were assigned to the control(n=90)and observation groups(n=104),respectively.Independent sample t-tests andχ2 tests were used to compare the two groups based on clinical efficacy,changes in tumor marker levels after treatment,clinical data,and the incidence of posto-perative complications.To investigate the association between tumor marker levels and clinical efficacy in patients with GC,three-year recurrence rates in the two groups were compared.RESULTS Patients in the observation group had a shorter duration of operation,less in-traoperative blood loss,an earlier postoperative eating time,and a shorter hospital stay than those in the control group(P<0.05).No significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding the number of lymph node dissections(P>0.05).After treatment,the overall response rate in the control group was significantly lower than that in the observation group(P=0.001).Furthermore,after treatment,the levels of carbohydrate antigen 19-9,cancer antigen 72-4,carcinoembryonic antigen,and cancer antigen 125 decreased significantly.The observation group also exhibited a significantly lower incidence rate of postoperative complications compared to the control group(P<0.001).Additionally,the two groups did not significantly differ in terms of three-year survival and recurrence rates(P>0.05).CONCLUSION LRS effectively treats early gastric cancer by reducing intraoperative bleeding,length of hospital stays,and postoperative complications.It also significantly lowers tumor marker levels,thus improving the short-term prognosis of the disease.

Therapeutic effects of Buzhong Yiqi decoction in patients with spleen and stomach qi deficiency after routine surgery and chemotherapy for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND According to the theory of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM),the spleen and stomach are the basis of acquired nature and the source of qi and blood biochemistry.After surgery and chemotherapy,patients with colorectal cancer often develop spleen and stomach qi deficiency syndrome,leading to decreased immune function.Buzhong Yiqi decoction,a classic TCM prescription,has the effect of tonifying middle-jiao and invigorating qi,boosting Yang,and suppressing immune-related inflammation.Moreover,it is widely used in the treatment of spleen and stomach qi deficiency syndrome.AIM To investigate the effect of Buzhong Yiqi decoction on spleen and stomach qi deficiency in patients with colorectal cancer.METHODS One hundred patients with colorectal cancer who underwent preoperative chemotherapy and laparoscopy at The First TCM Hospital of Changde from January 2022 to October 2023 were retrospectively analyzed.The patients were divided equally into control and observation groups.Both groups underwent conventional rehabilitation surgery,and the observation group was supplemented with Buzhong Yiqi decoction.SPSS 26.0 was used for statistical analyses.Theχ2 test was used for univariate analysis;independent sample t-tests were used in all cases.RESULTS No significant differences were observed preoperatively in the general characteristics of the two groups.Fourteen days post-surgery,the abdominal distension,emaciation,loose stool,loss of appetite,and vomiting scores were significantly lower in the observation group than in the control group(P<0.05).Immune function and interleukin(IL)-10 levels in the observation group were significantly higher than those of the control group,whereas IL-6,tumor necrosis factor-α,and C-reactive protein levels,tumor biological indexes,and adverse reactions in the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group(P<0.05).One month after surgery,the patients’quality of life in the observation group was significantly higher than that of the patients in the control group(P<0.05).CONCLUSION Buzhong Yiqi decoction can regulate inflammatory responses and metabolic processes by enhancing immune function,thereby promoting overall immune nutrition and restoring the body’s balance.

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.

Long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open surgery for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study

AIM: To evaluate the 5-year survival after laparoscopic surgery vs open surgery for stages Ⅱ and Ⅲ rectal cancer.METHODS:This study enrolled 406 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2009[laparoscopic rectal resection(LRR),n=152;open rectal resection(ORR),n=254].Clinical characteristics,operative outcomes,pathological outcomes,postoperative recovery,and 5-year survival outcomes were compared between the two groups.RESULTS:Most of the clinical characteristics were similar except age(59 years vs 55 years,P=0.033)between the LRR group and ORR group.The proportion of anterior resection was higher in the LRR group than that in the ORR group(81.6%vs 66.1%,P=0.001).The LRR group had less estimated blood loss(50m L vs 200 m L,P<0.001)and a lower rate of blood transfusion(4.6%vs 11.8%,P=0.019)compared to the ORR group.The pathological outcomes of the two groups were comparable.The LRR group was associated with faster recovery of bowel function(2.8 d vs 3.7 d,P<0.001)and shorter postoperative hospital stay(11.7 d vs 13.7 d,P<0.001).The median followup time was 63 mo in the LRR group and 65 mo in the ORR group.As for the survival outcomes,the 5-year local recurrence rate(16.0%vs 16.4%,P=0.753),5-year disease-free survival(DFS)rate(63.0%vs63.1%,P=0.589),and 5-year overall survival(OS)rate(68.1%vs 63.5%,P=0.682)were comparable between the LRR group and the ORR group.Stageby stage,there were also no statistical differences between the LRR group and the ORR group in terms of the 5-year local recurrence rate(stageⅡ:6.3%vs 8.7%,P=0.623;stageⅢ:26.4%vs 23.2%,P=0.747),5-year DFS rate(stageⅡ:77.5%vs 77.6%,P=0.462;stageⅢ:46.5%vs 50.9%,P=0.738),and5-year OS rate(stageⅡ:81.4%vs 74.3%,P=0.242;stageⅢ:53.9%vs 54.1%,P=0.459).CONCLUSION:LRR for stagesⅡandⅢrectal cancer can yield comparable long-term survival while achieving short-term benefits compared to open surgery.

Meta-analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of rectal cancer

AIM: To conduct a meta-analysis to determine the relative merits of robotic surgery (RS) and laparoscopic surgery (LS) for rectal cancer. METHODS: A literature search was performed to identify comparative studies reporting perioperative outcomes for RS and LS for rectal cancer. Pooled odds ratios and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using either the fixed effects model or random effects model. RESULTS: Eight studies matched the selection criteria and reported on 661 subjects, of whom 268 underwent RS and 393 underwent LS for rectal cancer. Compared the perioperative outcomes of RS with LS, reports of RS indicated favorable outcomes considering conversion(WMD: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.11-0.58; P = 0.001). Meanwhile, operative time (WMD: 27.92, 95% CI: -13.43 to 69.27; P = 0.19); blood loss (WMD: -32.35, 95% CI: -86.19 to 21.50; P = 0.24); days to passing flatus (WMD: -0.18, 95% CI: -0.96 to 0.60; P = 0.65); length of stay (WMD: -0.04; 95% CI: -2.28 to 2.20; P = 0.97); complications (WMD: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.71-1.55; P = 0.82) and pathological details, including lymph nodes harvested (WMD: 0.41, 95% CI: -0.67 to 1.50; P = 0.46), distal resection margin (WMD: -0.35, 95% CI: -1.27 to 0.58; P = 0.46), and positive circumferential resection margin (WMD: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.12-2.39; P = 0.42) were similar between RS and LS. CONCLUSION: RS for rectal cancer is superior to LS in terms of conversion. RS may be an alternative treatment for rectal cancer. Further studies are required.

Technical feasibility of laparoscopic extended surgerybeyond total mesorectal excision for primary or recurrentrectal cancer

Relatively little is known about the oncologic safety of laparoscopic surgery for advanced rectal cancer.Recently, large randomized clinical trials showed that laparoscopic surgery was not inferior to open surgery, as evidenced by survival and local control rates. However, patients with T4 tumors were excluded from these trials. Technological advances in the instrumentation and techniques used by laparoscopic surgery have increased the use of laparoscopic surgery for advanced rectal cancer. High-definition, illuminated, and magnified images obtained by laparoscopy may enable more precise laparoscopic surgery than open techniques, even during extended surgery for T4 or locally recurrent rectal cancer. To date, the quality of evidence regarding the usefulness of laparoscopy for extended surgery beyond total mesorectal excision has been low because most studies have been uncontrolled series, with small sample sizes, and long-term data are lacking. Nevertheless, laparoscopic extended surgery for rectal cancer, when performed by specialized laparoscopic colorectal surgeons, has been reported safe in selected patients, with significant advantages, including a clear visual field and less blood loss. This review summarizes current knowledge on laparoscopic extended surgery beyond total mesorectal excision for primary or locally recurrent rectal cancer.

Clinical comparison of laparoscopy vs open surgery in a radical operation for rectal cancer: A retrospective casecontrol study

AIM: To assess the diverse immediate and longterm clinical outcomes, a retrospective comparison between laparoscopic and conventional operation was performed.METHODS: A total number of 916 clinical cases, from January 2006 to December 2013 in our hospital, were analyzed which covered 492 patients underwent the laparoscopy in radical resection(LRR) and 424 cases in open radical resection(ORR). A retrospective analysis was proceeded by comparing the general information, surgery performance, pathologic data, postoperative recovery and complications as well as long-term survival to investigate the diversity of immediate and long-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic radical operation.RESULTS: There were no statistically significance differences between gender, age, height, weight, body mass index(BMI), tumor loci, tumor node metastasis stages, cell differentiation degree or American Society of Anesthesiologists scores of the patients(P > 0.05). In contrast to the ORR group, the LRR group experienced less operating time(P < 0.001), a lower blood loss(P < 0.001), and had a 2.44% probability of conversion to open surgery. Postoperative bowel function recovered more quickly, analgesic usage and the average hospital stay(P < 0.001) were reduced after LRR. Lymph node dissection during LRR appeared to be slightly more than in ORR(P = 0.338). There were no obvious differences in the lengths and margins(P = 0.182). And the occurrence rate in the two groups was similar(P = 0.081). Overall survival rate of ORR and LRR for 1, 3 and 5 years were 94.0% and 93.6%(P = 0.534), 78.1% and 80.9%(P = 0.284) and 75.2% and 77.0%(P = 0.416), respectively.CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy as a radical operation for rectal cancer was safe, produced better immediate outcomes. Long-term survival of laparoscopy revealed that it was similar to the open operation.

3-Port incisionless laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer with a transrectal assistance

Introduction: To present the initial experience of 3-port incisionless laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer with a transrectal assistance by using a toothed oval clamp. Case Presentation: One patient received 3-port incisionless laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer with a transrectal assistance by using a toothed oval clamp. Better direct vision and exposure could be acquired for performing laparoscopic surgical procedure, avoiding additional port inserted. Using this procedure, with strictly adhering to the principles of laparoscopic colectomy and oncological procedure, along with the specimen exteriorized via recta, transacted and a stapled anastomosis performed, no incision can be achieved at the end of an operation. The operative time was 180 minutes. The estimated blood loss in the course of an operation was 80 ml. The patient recovered quickly after surgery, with no post-operative pain and no incision. The patient was dischanged home on the 6th postoperative day. Conclusions: With a transrectal assistance by using a toothed oval clamp, 3-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer could be achieved without no incision at the end of the operation, the same as NOTES. It is enormously advantageous to the patient and suitable for application in developing countries, especially in a rural area.

New classification system for radical rectal cancer surgery based on membrane anatomy

BACKGROUND Total mesorectal excision along the“holy plane”is the only radical surgery for rectal cancer,regardless of tumor size,localization or even tumor stage.However,according to the concept of membrane anatomy,multiple fascial spaces around the rectum could be used as the surgical plane to achieve radical resection.AIM To propose a new membrane anatomical and staging-oriented classification system for tailoring the radicality during rectal cancer surgery.METHODS A three-dimensional template of the member anatomy of the pelvis was established,and the existing anatomical nomenclatures were clarified by cadaveric dissection study and laparoscopic surgical observation.Then,we suggested a new and simple classification system for rectal cancer surgery.For simplification,the classification was based only on the lateral extent of resection.RESULTS The fascia propria of the rectum,urogenital fascia,vesicohypogastric fascia and parietal fascia lie side by side around the rectum and form three spaces(medial,middle and lateral),and blood vessels and nerves are precisely positioned in the fascia or space.Three types of radical surgery for rectal cancer are described,as are a few subtypes that consider nerve preservation.The surgical planes of the proposed radical surgeries(types A,B and C)correspond exactly to the medial,middle,and lateral spaces,respectively.CONCLUSION Three types of radical surgery can be precisely defined based on membrane anatomy,including nerve-sparing procedures.Our classification system may offer an optimal tool for tailoring rectal cancer surgery.

Comparative analysis of conventional laparoscopic surgery and single-incision laparoscopic surgery in gastric cancer treatment:Outcomes and prognosis

BACKGROUND Gastric cancer surgery has advanced with minimally invasive techniques.This study compares outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic surgery plus one port(SILS+1)and conventional laparoscopic surgery(CLS)in treating gastric cancer.AIM To explore the curative effect of SILS+1 and CLS on gastric cancer and their influences on prognosis.METHODS A total of 93 patients with gastric cancer undergoing radical gastrectomy in the hospital were retrospectively analyzed between September 2019 and September 2022.According to different surgical methods,they were divided into SILS+1 group(n=56)and CLS group(n=37).The perioperative indexes,pain degree[visual analogue scale(VAS)]and stress response[C-reactive protein(CRP),white blood cell count(WBC)]in the two groups were compared.The postoperative complications,recurrence rate and mortality at 1 year after surgery were recorded.RESULTS Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the SILS+1 group(76.53±8.12 mL)compared to the CLS group(108.67±12.34 mL,P<0.001),and the total incision length was also significantly shorter in the SILS+1 group(5.29±1.01 cm vs 9.45±2.34 cm,P<0.001).SILS+1 patients experienced faster recovery,with shorter times to first flatus(1.94±0.43 days vs 3.23±0.88 days,P<0.001)and ambulation(2.76±0.58 days vs 4.10±0.97 days,P<0.001).Postoperative pain,as measured by VAS scores,was significantly lower in the SILS+1 group on postoperative days 1,2,and 3(P<0.001).Additionally,stress markers(CRP and WBC)were significantly lower in the SILS+1 group on the first postoperative day(CRP:6.41±1.63 mg/L vs 7.82±1.88 mg/L,P<0.001;WBC:6.34±1.50×109/L vs 7.09±1.61×109/L,P=0.024).The complication rate in the SILS+1 group was also significantly lower than in the CLS group(8.93%vs 27.03%,P=0.020).However,there was no significant difference in recurrence rates between the two groups after one year(3.57%vs 8.11%,P>0.05).CONCLUSION SILS+1 and CLS have the comparable lymph node clearance effect in patients with gastric cancer.However,SILS+1 is more beneficial to reduce intraoperative blood loss,relieve pain,alleviate stress response,reduce the incidence of complications and promote rapid postoperative recovery.

Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Every colorectal surgeon during his or her career is faced with anastomotic leakage(AL); one of the most dreaded complications following any type of gastrointestinal anastomosis due to increased risk of morbidity, mortality, overall impact on functional and oncologic outcome and drainage on hospital resources. In order to understand and give an overview of the AL risk factors in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, we carried out a careful review of the existing literature on this topic and found several different definitions of AL which leads us to believe that the lack of a consensual, standard definition can partly explain the considerable variations in reported rates of AL in clinical studies. Colorectal leak rates have been found to vary depending on the anatomic location of the anastomosis with reported incidence rates ranging from 0 to 20%, while the laparoscopic approach to colorectal resections has not yet been associated with a significant reduction in AL incidence. As well, numerous risk factors, though identified, lack unanimous recognition amongst researchers. For example, the majority of papers describe the risk factors for left-sided anastomosis, the principal risk being male sex and lower anastomosis, while little data exists defining AL risk factors in a right colectomy. Also, gut microbioma is gaining an emerging role as potential risk factor for leakage.

Quality of life after laparoscopic vs open sphincter-preserving resection for rectal cancer

AIM: To compare quality of life (QoL) outcomes in Chinese patients after curative laparoscopic vs open surgery for rectal cancer. METHODS: Eligible Chinese patients with rectal cancer undergoing curative laparoscopic or open sphincterpreserving resection between July 2006 and July 2008 were enrolled in this prospective study. The QoL outcomes were assessed longitudinally using the validated Chinese versions of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQCR38 questionnaires before surgery and at 4, 8, and 12 mo after surgery. The QoL scores at the different time points were compared between the laparoscopic and open groups. A higher score on a functional scale indicated better functioning, whereas a higher score on a symptom scale indicated a higher degree of symptoms.RESULTS: Seventy-four patients (49 laparoscopic and 25 open) were enrolled. The two groups of patients were comparable in terms of sociodemographic data, types of surgery, tumor staging, and baseline mean QoL scores. There was no significant decrease from baseline in global QoL for the laparoscopic group at different time points, whereas the global QoL was worse compared to baseline beginning at 4 mo but returned to baseline by 12 mo for the open group (P = 0.019, Friedman test). Compared to the open group, the laparoscopic group had significantly better physical (89.9±1.4 vs 79.2±3.7, P = 0.016), role (85.0±3.4 vs 63.3±6.9, P = 0.005), and cognitive (73.5±3.4 vs 50.7±6.2, P = 0.002) functioning at 8 mo, fewer micturition problems at 4-8 mo (4 mo: 32.3±4.7 vs 54.7±7.1, P = 0.011; 8 mo: 22.8±4.0 vs 40.7±6.9, P = 0.020), and fewer male sexual problems from 8 mo onward (20.0±8.5 vs 76.7±14.5, P = 0.013). At 12 mo after surgery, no significant differences were observed in any functional or symptom scale between the two groups, with the exception of male sexual problems, which remained worse in the open group (29.2±11.3 vs 80.0±9.7, P = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic sphincter-preserving resection for rectal cancer is associated with better preservation of QoL and fewer male sexual problems when compared with open surgery in Chinese patients. These findings, however, should be interpreted with caution because of the small sample size of the study.

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with abdominal wall lift in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer:initial experience

AIM To evaluate the safety and feasibility of a new technology combining low-pressure pneumoperitoneum(LPP) and abdominal wall lift(AWL) in laparoscopic total mesorectal excision(TME) for rectal cancer.METHODS From November 2015 to July 2017,26 patients underwent laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer using LPP(6-8 mm Hg) with subcutaneous AWL in Qilu Hospital of Shandong University,Jinan,China.Clinical data regarding patients' demographics,intraoperative monitoring indices,operation-related indices andpathological outcomes were prospectively collected.RESULTS Laparoscopic TME was performed in 26 cases(14 anterior resection and 12 abdominoperineal resection) successfully,without conversion to open or laparoscopic surgery with standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.Intraoperative monitoring showed stable heart rate,blood pressure and paw airway pressure.The mean operative time was 194.29 ± 41.27 min(range:125-270 min) and 200.41 ± 20.56 min(range:170-230 min) for anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection,respectively.The mean number of lymph nodes harvested was 16.71 ± 5.06(range:7-27).There was no positive circumferential or distal resection margin.No local recurrence was observed during a median follow-up period of 11.96 ± 5.55 mo(range:5-23 mo).CONCLUSION LPP combined with AWL is safe and feasible for laparoscopic TME.The technique can provide satisfactory exposure of the operative field and stable operative monitoring indices.

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.

Application of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision combined with sphincter-preserving surgery in low or ultralow rectal cancer

This study aimed to investigate the influence of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision combined with sphincter-preserving surgery on the postoperative defecation function,urinary function and sexual function in low or ultralow rectal cancer.A retrospective study was undertaken on 107 patients(65 laparoscopic resection and 42 laparoctomic resection)with rectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic or open laparoscopic total mesorectal excision combined with sph incter-preserving surgery from April 2009 to April 2013.The quality of life outcomes of all patients,including defection,urinary and sexual function,were assessed at 6,12 and 24 months after operation.Gastrointestinal quality of life index(GQOLI)was used to evaluate the fecal incont inence and bowel dysfunction.Urinary and sexual functions were studied by means of questionnaires on the basis of the international prostatic symptom score(IPSS)and international index of erectile function(IEF),respectively.In laparoscopic surgery group,there were two cases of anastomotic leakage,three cases of anast omotic strict ure,seven cases of local recurrence,ten cases of hepatic metastasis and five cases of lung metastasis.The satisfaction rates of patients about their defe-cation function reached 60.3%(35/58,84.5%(49/58)and 913%(53/58)at6,12,and 24 months follow-up,respectively.The assessment after one year showed that the overall incidence of uri-nary dysfunction was 10.7%(7/65);Among male patients,18.4%(7/36)sufered from erectile dysfunction and 27.8%(10/36)sufered from ejaculatory dysfunction;65.5%(19/29)female patients investigated were satisfied with their postoperative sexual life.In open surgery group,there were two cases of anastomotic leakage,two cases of anastomotic stricture,nine cases of local recurrence,ten cases of hepatic metastasis and seven cases of kung metastasis.The satisfaction rates of patients about their defecation function were 56.4%(22/39),82.1%(32/39)and 94.8%(37/39)at 6,12,and 24 months follow-up,respectively.The assessment after one year showed that the overall incidence of urinary dysfunction was 11.9%(5/42);25%(4/16)male patients suffered from erectile dysfunction and 313%(5/16)sufered from ejaculatory dysfunction;69.2%(19/26)female patients investigated were satisfied of their postoperative sexual life.There was no statistic difference in the two groups.Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision combined with sphincter-preserving surgery in low or ultralow rectal carcinoma is safe and pract icable.It can be helpful for enhancing the probability of anus reservation,and obtains satisfactory defecation,sexual and urinary functions.

From basic to clinical:Anatomy of Denonvilliers’fascia and its application in laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer

The total mesorectal excision(TME)approach has been established as the gold standard for the surgical treatment of middle and lower rectal cancer.This approach is widely accepted to minimize the risk of local recurrence and increase the long-term survival rate of patients undergoing surgery.However,standardized TME causes urogenital dysfunction in more than half of patients,thus lowering the quality of life of patients.Of note,pelvic autonomic nerve damage during TME is the most pivotal cause of postoperative urogenital dysfunction.The anatomy of the Denonvilliers’fascia(DVF)and its application in surgery have been investigated both nationally and internationally.Nevertheless,controversy exists regarding the basic to clinical anatomy of DVF and its application in surgery.Currently,it is a hotspot of concern and research to improve the postoperative quality of life of patients with rectal cancer through the protection of their urinary and reproductive functions after radical resection.Herein,this study systematically describes the anatomy of DVF and its appli-cation in surgery,thus providing a reference for the selection of surgical treatment modalities and the enhancement of postoperative quality of life in patients with middle and low rectal cancer.

Robotic surgery vs conventional laparoscopy for the treatment of rectal cancer: Review of the literature

Laparoscopic surgery has established itself as a safe and effective alternative to open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer. However, laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer, and in particular of the lower rectum, remains challenging in view of the limitations of operating in the confined pelvic space, limited movementof instruments with fixed tips, assistant-dependant two-dimensional view, easy camera fogging, and poor ergonomics. The introduction of robotic surgery and its application in particular to pelvic surgery, has potentially resolved many of these issues. To define the role of robotic surgery in total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer, a review of the current literature was performed using Pub Med, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google databases, identifying clinical trials comparing shortterm outcomes of conventional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with the robotic approach. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer is a safe alternative to conventional laparoscopy. However, randomised trials are needed to clearly establish its role.