Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. Laparoscopic-assisted approach in rectal cancer patients: lessons learned from >200 patients. Laparoscopically assisted colon resection for colon carcinoma: perioperative results and long-term outcome. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. Laparoscopic versus conventional open resection of rectal carcinoma: A clinical comparative study. Wound complications of laparoscopic vs open colectomy. Impact of hospital case volume on short-term outcome after laparoscopic operation for colonic cancer. Prospective evaluation of laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoidal and rectal carcinoma. Laparoscopic-assisted vs. open colectomy for colon cancer: a prospective randomized trial.
The aim of the current study is to report the long-term outcomes after laparoscopic-assisted surgery compared with conventional open surgery within the context of the UK MRC CLASICC trial. Results from randomized trials have indicated that laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer is as effective as open surgery in the short term. Few data are available on rectal cancer, and long-term data on survival and recurrence are now required.
                The United Kingdom Medical Research Council Conventional versus Laparoscopic-Assisted Surgery in Colorectal Cancer (UK MRC CLASICC; clinical trials number ISRCTN 74883561) trial study comparing conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with cancer of the colon and rectum. The randomization ratio was 2:1 in favor of laparoscopic surgery. Long-term outcomes (3-year overall survival [OS], disease-free survival [DFS], local recurrence, and quality of life [QoL]) have now been determined on an intention-to-treat basis.
                Seven hundred ninety-four patients were recruited (526 laparoscopic and 268 open). Overall, there were no differences in the long-term outcomes. The differences in survival rates were OS of 1.8% (95% CI, -5.2% to 8.8%; P = .55), DFS of -1.4% (95% CI, -9.5% to 6.7%; P = .70), local recurrence of -0.8% (95% CI, -5.7% to 4.2%; P = .76), and QoL (P > .01 for all scales). Higher positivity of the circumferential resection margin was reported after laparoscopic anterior resection (AR), but it did not translate into an increased incidence of local recurrence.
                Successful laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colon cancer is as effective as open surgery in terms of oncological outcomes and preservation of QoL. Long-term outcomes for patients with rectal cancer were similar in those undergoing abdominoperineal resection and AR, and support the continued use of laparoscopic surgery in these patients. The applicability of laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of colorectal diseases is still controversial. Early reports on laparoscopic-assisted colectomy in patients with colon cancer suggested that it minimizes surgical trauma, decreases perioperative complications, and leads to a more rapid recovery. To our knowledge, no previous studies have compared the laparoscopic vs the open approach in rectal cancer. The aim of this paper was to assess the results of laparoscopic techniques in patients with rectal cancer.
                From March 1998 to February 2003, all patients admitted to our unit with adenocarcinoma of the rectum were evaluated for surgery by the laparoscopic approach.
                A total of 220 patients with a mean age of 67.3 years were included in the study. One hundred thirty patients (59%) were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. In >75% of the patients, a surgical procedure with sphincter preservation was performed. The rate of conversion to the open approach was 20%. Ten patients had intraoperative complications. Fifty-eight patients (26.3%) developed postoperative complications. The length of hospital stay was 6.8 days. The distribution of tumor stages was as follows: stage I, 16.81%; stage II, 33.6%; stage III, 26.36%; stage IV, 19.09%. The mean number of lymph nodes was 13.8. The incidence of local relapse was 5.3%, with a follow-up of 18 months.
                Laparoscopic surgery can be safely performed in patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum with good short-term results. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results. The role of laparoscopic colon resection in the management of colon cancer is unclear. The aims of this study were to compare perioperative results and long-term outcomes in patients randomized to either open (O) or laparoscopically assisted (LA) colon resection for colon cancer.
                A prospective randomized trial comparing O to LA colon resection was conducted from January 1993 to November 1995. Preoperative workup, intraoperative results, complications, length of stay, pathologic findings, and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups. Statistical analysis was performed with t-test. Follow-up periods ranged from 3.5 to 6.3 years (mean, 4.9 years).
                No port-site or abdominal wall recurrences were noted in any patients. [table: see text]
                These results suggest that laparoscopically assisted colon resection for malignant disease can be performed safely, with morbidity, mortality, and en bloc resections comparable with those of open laparotomy. Long-term (5-year) follow-up assessment shows similar outcomes in both groups of patients, demonstrating definite perioperative advantages with LA surgery and no perioperative or long-term disadvantages. Minimally invasive, laparoscopically assisted surgery was first considered in 1990 for patients undergoing colectomy for cancer. Concern that this approach would compromise survival by failing to achieve a proper oncologic resection or adequate staging or by altering patterns of recurrence (based on frequent reports of tumor recurrences within surgical wounds) prompted a controlled trial evaluation.
                We conducted a noninferiority trial at 48 institutions and randomly assigned 872 patients with adenocarcinoma of the colon to undergo open or laparoscopically assisted colectomy performed by credentialed surgeons. The median follow-up was 4.4 years. The primary end point was the time to tumor recurrence.
                At three years, the rates of recurrence were similar in the two groups--16 percent among patients in the group that underwent laparoscopically assisted surgery and 18 percent among patients in the open-colectomy group (two-sided P=0.32; hazard ratio for recurrence, 0.86; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.63 to 1.17). Recurrence rates in surgical wounds were less than 1 percent in both groups (P=0.50). The overall survival rate at three years was also very similar in the two groups (86 percent in the laparoscopic-surgery group and 85 percent in the open-colectomy group; P=0.51; hazard ratio for death in the laparoscopic-surgery group, 0.91; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.21), with no significant difference between groups in the time to recurrence or overall survival for patients with any stage of cancer. Perioperative recovery was faster in the laparoscopic-surgery group than in the open-colectomy group, as reflected by a shorter median hospital stay (five days vs. six days, P<0.001) and briefer use of parenteral narcotics (three days vs. four days, P<0.001) and oral analgesics (one day vs. two days, P=0.02). The rates of intraoperative complications, 30-day postoperative mortality, complications at discharge and 60 days, hospital readmission, and reoperation were very similar between groups.
                In this multi-institutional study, the rates of recurrent cancer were similar after laparoscopically assisted colectomy and open colectomy, suggesting that the laparoscopic approach is an acceptable alternative to open surgery for colon cancer.
                Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society To evaluate the feasibility of laparoscopic resection of rectal carcinoma and to compare the short-term outcome of laparoscopic procedure with conventional open surgery for rectal cancer.
                Thirty-eight patients with rectal cancer were included in a prospective non-randomized study. The patients were assigned to laparoscopic (n=18) or open (n=18) colorectal resection. Case selection, surgical technique, and clinical and pathological results were reviewed.
                The operative time was longer in laparoscopic resection group (LAP) than in open resection group (189+/-18 min vs 146+/-22 min, P<0.05). Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative complications were less in LAP resection group than in open resection group. An earlier return of bowel motility was observed after laparoscopic surgery. The overall postoperative morbidity was 5.6% in the LAP resection group and 27.8% in open resection group (P<0.05). No anastomotic leakage was found in both groups. The pathologic examination showed that the length of the resected specimen, the mean number of harvested lymph nodes in laparoscopic resection group were comparable to those in open resection group.
                Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer is a feasible but technically demanding procedure. The present study demonstrates the safety of the procedure, while oncologic results are comparable to the open surgery, with a favorable short-term outcome. This study was conducted to determine if laparoscopic colon surgery has changed the incidence of wound complications after colon resection.
                Eighty-three patients were randomized to undergo either laparoscopic (LCR) or open colon resection (OCR) for cancer at our institution as part of a multicenter trial. Data were tabulated from review of the prospective database and physician records.
                Thirty-seven patients were randomized to LCR and 46 to OCR. Seven patients in the LCR group were converted to OCR. LCR was performed using a limited midline incision for anastomosis and specimen extraction. Incision length was significantly greater (p <0.001) in the OCR group (19.4 +/- 5.6 cm) compared to the LCR extraction site (6.3 +/- 1.4 cm). Wound infections occurred in 13.5% of patients after LCR (2.7% trocar, 10.8% extraction sites) and in 10.9% of patients after OCR. Over a mean follow-up period of 30.1 +/- 17.8 months, incisional hernias developed in 24.3% of patients after LCR and 17.4% after OCR. In the LCR group, extraction sites accounted for 85.7% of all wound complications.
                The extraction site for LCR is associated with a high incidence of complications, comparable to open colectomy. Strategies to alter operative technique should be considered to reduce the incidence of these complications. High hospital case volume has been associated with improved outcome after open operation for colorectal malignancies.
                To assess the impact of hospital case volume on short-term outcome after laparoscopic operation for colon cancer, we conducted an analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic colon resection within the COlon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection (COLOR) trial.
                A total of 536 patients with adenocarcinoma of the colon were included in the analysis. Median operating time was 240, 210 and 188 min in centers with low, medium, and high case volumes, respectively (p < 0.001). A significant difference in conversion rate was observed among low, medium, and high case volume hospitals (24% vs 24% vs 9%; p < 0.001). A higher number of lymph nodes were harvested at high case volume hospitals (p < 0.001). After operation, fewer complications (p = 0.006) and a shorter hospital stay (p < 0.001) were observed in patients treated at hospitals with high caseloads.
                Laparoscopic operation for colon cancer at hospitals with high caseloads appears to be associated with improved short-term results. This study was designed to examine the short-term results of laparoscopy in the treatment of curative cases of rectosigmoidal and rectal carcinoma.
                A review was performed of a prospective registry of 70 patients who underwent curative laparoscopic resection for rectosigmoidal and rectal carcinoma between July 1993 and April 2001. Before 1997, only patients with early (Tis or T1) cancers located in the rectosigmoid and upper rectum that required bowel resection were candidates for laparoscopy. In 1997, we expanded the application of laparoscopy to include T2 cancers located anywhere in the rectum. Mesorectal transection was performed at least 5 cm below the tumor for rectosigmoidal and upper rectal lesions, and total mesorectal excision was performed for lower tumors. Primary anastomosis was performed by a double-stapling technique, or a handsewn coloanal anastomosis was performed. Patient demographics and outcomes were recorded prospectively.
                The median follow-up was 23 months. An anastomosis was performed in 92.9 percent of the operations. Oral intake was started on median postoperative Day 1, and the median length of hospitalization was 8 days. Two patients needed conversion to conventional open surgery. A total of 15 postoperative complications occurred in 13 patients (18.6 percent), including anastomotic leakage in 6 (8.6 percent) and bowel obstruction in 3 (4.3 percent). Reoperation was required in six patients. Two patients developed recurrence of cancer at the anastomotic site. The expected 5-year survival and disease-free survival rates were 100 and 92.1 percent, respectively.
                The findings of the present study demonstrate the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic surgery for selected patients with rectal carcinoma. Morbidity and mortality rates and oncologic outcome appear to be comparable with conventional surgery. Although laparoscopic-assisted colectomy (LAC) has evolved as a technical option in the treatment of benign colonic diseases, its role in the treatment of malignancies remains controversial. The purpose of this prospective randomized trial was to compare perioperative parameters and outcomes between LAC vs. open colectomy (OC) in patients with stage I-III colon cancer.
                Eligible patients with colon cancer who were scheduled for an elective colon resection from January 1995 to February 2001 were randomized to either the LAC or the OC treatment group. The two groups were compared with regard to operative time, blood loss, complications, pathologic findings and lymph node yield, length of postoperative hospital stay, gastrointestinal function, use of analgesic drugs, recurrence, and survival rates. The median follow-up was 35 months (range, 3-69 months).
                A total of 49 patients were enrolled in the study: 20 were randomized to OC and 29 to LAC, one of whom was lost to follow-up. Thirteen patients in the LAC group had to be converted to OC (COC), and were analyzed in a separate group. The three patient groups were comparable with regard to age, gender distribution, tumor site, lymph node harvest, operative procedure, anastomotic type, perioperative complication, recurrence, and survival rates. Tumor margins were clear in all patients. No incidence of port-site recurrence in the LAC group, or wound recurrence in the OC and COC groups, was found. Three patients died of cancer-related causes, one in each patient group. The LAC patients had significantly shorter hospital stay, faster recovery of gastrointestinal function, and less use of intravenous analgesia.
                Short-term outcomes revealed that LAC could be performed safely and has therapeutic results similar to OC for colon cancer. Conversion of LAC to an open procedure was frequent but was not associated with a negative outcome.
Laparoscopic resection of carcinoma of the colon is associated with a long term outcome no different from that of open colectomy. Further studies are required to determine whether the incidence of incisional hernias and adhesions is affected by method of approach. Laparoscopic surgery for cancer of the upper rectum is feasible, but more randomised trials need to be conducted to assess long term outcome.