Minimally invasive left colectomy with total intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis. A single center cohort study. Stage 2b IDEAL framework for evaluating surgical innovation

Author:

Serra-Aracil XavierORCID,Gómez-Torres IreneORCID,Torrecilla-Portoles Andrea,Serracant-Barrera Anna,García-Nalda Albert,Pallisera-Lloveras Anna

Abstract

Abstract Purpose Performing intracorporeal anastomoses in minimally invasive colon surgery appears to provide better short-term outcomes for patients with colon cancer. The aim of the study is to compare surgical aspects and short-term outcomes between intracorporeal and extracorporeal techniques in left colectomies with both laparoscopic and robotic approaches and evaluate advantages and disadvantages of intracorporeal anastomosis according to IDEAL framework (Exploration, stage 2b). Methods This is a single center, ambispective cohort study comparing total intracorporeal anastomosis (TIA) and standard surgery with extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). Patients with colon cancer treated by left colectomy, sigmoidectomy and high anterior resection by total intracorporeal anastomosis between May 2020 and January 2023 without exclusion criteria were prospectively included in a standardized database. Short-term outcomes in the group undergoing TIA were compared with a historical EA cohort. The main assessment outcomes were intraoperative complications, postoperative morbidity according to the Clavien-Dindo scale and the comparison of pathological. We conducted a preliminary comparative study within the TIA group between approaches, a primary analysis between the two anastomotic techniques, and a propensity score matched analysis including only the laparoscopic approach, between both anastomotic techniques. Results Two hundred and forty-six patients were included: 103 who underwent TIA, 35 of them with laparoscopic approach and 68 with robotic approach, and a comparison group comprising another 103 eligible consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic EA. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic variables. No statistically significant differences were observed in anastomotic dehiscence. Intraoperative complications are fewer in the TIA group, with a higher C-Reactive Protein levels. Relevant anastomotic bleeding and the number of retrieved lymph nodes were higher in EA group. Nevertheless, no differences were observed in terms of overall morbidity. Conclusion Minimally invasive left colectomy with intracorporeal resection and anastomosis is technically feasible and safe suing either a laparoscopic or a robotic approach. Clinical data from this cohort demonstrate outcomes comparable to those achieved through the conventional EA procedure in relation to postoperative morbidity and oncological efficacy, with indications suggesting that the utilization of robotic-assisted techniques may play a contributing role in enhancing overall treatment outcomes.

Funder

Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference47 articles.

1. Tjandra JJ, Chan MK (2006) Systematic review on the short-term outcome of laparoscopic resection for colon and rectosigmoid cancer. Colorectal Dis. ;8(5):375 – 88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2006.00974. x. Erratum in: Colorectal Dis. 2008;10(3):305-6. PMID: 16684081

2. Lacy AM, García-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, Castells A, Taurá P, Piqué JM, Visa J (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomized trial. Lancet. ;359(9325):2224-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)09290-5. PMID: 12103285

3. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH; de, Lange-de Klerk ES, Lacy AM, Bemelman WA, Andersson J, Angenete E et al (2015) COLOR II Study Group. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. ;372(14):1324-32. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1414882. PMID: 25830422

4. Green BL, Marshall HC, Collinson F, Quirke P, Guillou P, Jayne DG, Brown JM (2013) Long-term follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of conventional versus laparoscopically assisted resection in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 100(1):75–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8945Epub 2012 Nov 6. PMID: 23132548

5. Bollo J, Turrado V, Rabal A, Carrillo E, Gich I, Martinez MC, Hernandez P, Targarona E (2020) Randomized clinical trial of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy (IEA trial). Br J Surg 107(4):364–372 Epub 2019 Dec 17. PMID: 31846067

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3