• Anastomosis
• Laparoscopy
• Open
• Postoperative
• Robotic

• 2022LYF17094 Lanyan City Joint Funding

• general surgery
• minimally invasive surgery
• robotic surgery
• visceral surgery

• Humans
• Cohort Studies
• Robotics
• Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery
• Colonic Neoplasms
• Laparoscopy/adverse effects

• Laparoscopic
• Long-term survival
• Meta-analysis
• Right colon cancer
• Robotic

• Humans
• Retrospective Studies
• Robotic Surgical Procedures
• Prospective Studies
• Treatment Outcome
• Laparoscopy
• Colonic Neoplasms/pathology
• Colectomy
• Multicenter Studies as Topic

• colorectal cancer
• complication
• laparoscopic-assisted colorectal surgery
• randomized controlled trial
• robot-assisted colorectal surgery

• Anastomosis
• Crohn disease
• Ileocolic resection
• Intracorporeal
• Laparoscopy
• Robotics

• Humans
• Crohn Disease/surgery
• Retrospective Studies
• Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods
• Ileum/surgery
• Colectomy/adverse effects
• Laparoscopy
• Surgical Wound Infection
• Anastomosis, Surgical
• Postoperative Complications/epidemiology
• Postoperative Complications/surgery
• Treatment Outcome

• colonic cancer
• complete mesocolic excision
• laparoscopic surgery
• right hemicolectomy
• robotic surgery

• Anti-reflux surgery
• LINX
• Laparoscopic fundoplication
• Radiofrequency ablation
• Recalcitrant GERD
• Transoral incisionless fundoplication

• Humans
• Fundoplication/methods
• Gastroesophageal Reflux/surgery
• Deglutition Disorders/etiology
• Deglutition Disorders/surgery
• Laparoscopy/methods
• Network Meta-Analysis
• Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
• Treatment Outcome

Robotic-assisted right hemicolectomy (RARH) has many benefits in treating colon cancer, but it is a new technology that needs to be evaluated. This study aims to assess the learning curve (LC) of RARH procedures with the complete mesoscopic exception and D3 lymph node dissection for colon carcinoma.

A retrospective analysis was performed on a consecutive series of 76 patients who underwent RARH from July 2014 to March 2018. The operation time was evaluated using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method to analyze the LC. The patients were categorized into two groups based on the LC: Phase I and Phase II. Statistical methods were used to compare clinicopathological data on intraoperative and perioperative outcomes at different stages of the study.

The peak point of the LC was observed in the 27th case. Using the CUSUM method, we divide the LC into two stages. Stage 1 (initial learning stage): Cases 1–27 and Stage 2 (proficiency phase): Cases 28–76. There were no obvious distinctions between the two patients’ essential characteristics (age, sex, body mass index, clinical stage, and ASA score). The mean operation time of each group is 187.37 ± 45.56 min and 161.1 ± 37.74 min (P = 0.009), respectively. The intraoperative blood loss of each group is 170.4 ± 217.2 ml and 95.7 ± 72.8 ml (P = 0.031), respectively.

Based on the LC with CUSUM analysis, the data suggest that the learning phase of RARH was achieved after 27 cases. The operation time and the intraoperative blood loss decrease with more cases performed.

• National Natural Science Foundation of China

Right colectomy (RC) is a frequently performed procedure. Beneath standard conventional open surgery (COS), various minimally invasive techniques had been introduced. Several advantages had recently been described for robotic approaches over COS or conventional laparoscopy. Nevertheless, novel minimally invasive techniques require continuous benchmarking against standard COS to gain maximum patient safety. Bowel dysfunction is a frequent problem after RC. Together with general complication rates postoperative bowel recovery are used as surrogate parameters for postoperative patient outcome in this study.

Retrospective, 10-year single-center analysis of consecutive patients who underwent sequentially either COS (n = 22), robotic-assisted (ECA: n = 39), or total robotic surgery (ICA: n = 56) for oncologic RC was performed.

The conversion from robotic to open surgery rate was low (overall: 3.2%). Slightly longer duration of surgery had been observed during the early phase after introduction of the robotic program to RC (ECA versus COS, p = 0.044), but not anymore thereafter (versus ICA). No differences were observed in oncologic parameters including rates of tumor-negative margins, lymph node-positive patients, and lymph node yield during mesocolic excision. Both robotic approaches are beneficial regarding postoperative complication rates, especially wound infections, and shorter length of in-hospital stay compared with COS. The duration until first postoperative stool is the shortest after ICA (COS: 4 [2–8] days, ECA: 3 [1–6] days, ICA: 3 [1–5] days, p = 0.0004). Regression analyses reveal neither a longer duration of surgery nor the extent of mesocolic excision, but the degree of minimally invasiveness and postoperative systemic inflammation contribute to postoperative bowel dysfunction, which prolongs postoperative in-hospital stay significantly.

The current study reflects the institutional learning curve of oncologic RC during implementation of robotic surgery from robotic-assisted to total robotic approach without compromises in oncologic results and patient safety. However, the total robotic approach is beneficial regarding postoperative bowel recovery and general patient outcome.

• Bowel dysfunction
• Complete mesocolic excision
• Ileus
• Intracorporal anastomosis
• Right colectomy
• Robot

• colorectal cancer
• laparoscopic surgery
• lymph node metastasis
• oncological surgery
• open surgery

• Colon cancer
• Intracorporeal anastomosis
• Laparoscopy
• Minimally invasive surgery
• Right colectomy
• Robotic surgery

Staple line reinforcement (SLR) during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the most commonly utilized techniques for SLR.

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare no reinforcement (NR), suture oversewing (SR), glue reinforcement (GR), bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement (Gore® Seamguard®) (GoR), and clips reinforcement (CR). Risk Ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used as pooled effect size measures.

Overall, 3994 patients (17 RCTs) were included. Of those, 1641 (41.1%) underwent NR, 1507 (37.7%) SR, 689 (17.2%) GR, 107 (2.7%) GoR, and 50 (1.3%) CR. SR was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bleeding (RR=0.51; 95% CrI 0.31–0.88), staple line leak (RR=0.56; 95% CrI 0.32–0.99), and overall complications (RR=0.50; 95% CrI 0.30–0.88) compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Operative time was significantly longer for SR (WMD=16.2; 95% CrI 10.8–21.7), GR (WMD=15.0; 95% CrI 7.7–22.4), and GoR (WMD=15.5; 95% CrI 5.6–25.4) compared to NR. Among treatments, there were no significant differences for surgical site infection (SSI), sleeve stenosis, reoperation, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality.

SR seems associated with a reduced risk of bleeding, leak, and overall complications compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Data regarding GoR and CR are limited while further trials reporting outcomes for these techniques are warranted.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11695-022-05950-z.

• Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
• Oversewing
• Staple line reinforcement
• Suture reinforcement

• Billroth I
• Billroth II
• Billroth II Braun
• Network meta-analysis
• Roux-en-Y

• Benign disease
• Colorectal surgery
• Diverticular disease
• Laparoscopic surgery
• Minimally invasive surgery
• Robotic surgery

Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly adopted in colorectal surgery. However, evidence for the implementation of robot-assisted surgery for colon cancer is sparse. This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted colon surgery (RCS) for cancer compared to laparoscopic colon surgery (LCS).

Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library were searched between January 1, 2005 and October 2, 2020. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies were included. Non-original literature was excluded. Primary endpoints were anastomotic leakage rate, conversion to open surgery, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Secondary endpoints were surgical efficacy and postoperative morbidity. We evaluated risk of bias using RoB2 and ROBINS-I quality assessment tools. We performed a pooled analysis of primary and secondary endpoints. Heterogeneity was assessed by I², and possible causes were explored by sensitivity- and meta-regression analyses. Publication bias was evaluated by Funnel plots and Eggers linear regression test. The level of evidence was assessed by GRADE.

Twenty studies enrolling 13,799 patients (RCS 1740 (12.6%) and LCS 12,059 (87.4%) were included in the meta-analysis that demonstrated RCS was superior regarding: anastomotic leakage (odds ratio (OR) = 0.54, 95% CI [0.32, 0.94]), conversion (OR = 0.31, 95% CI [0.23, 0.41]), overall complication rate (OR = 0.85, 95% CI [0.73, 1.00]) and time to regular diet (MD =  − 0.29, 95% CI [− 0.56, 0.02]). LCS proved to have a shortened operative time compared to RCS (MD = 42.99, 95% CI [28.37, 57.60]). Level of evidence was very low according to GRADE.

RCS showed advantages in colonic cancer surgery regarding surgical efficacy and morbidity compared to LCS despite a predominant inclusion of non-RCT with serious risk of bias assessment and a very low level of evidence.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08782-7.

• Colon cancer
• Laparoscopy
• Minimally invasive surgery
• Robot-assisted surgery

• Colectomy
• Colorectal neoplasms
• Intracorporeal anastomosis
• Robotic surgical procedures

• Anastomotic leakage
• CRP
• Ileocecal resection
• Ileocolic anastomosis
• Right hemicolectomy

• Colon cancer
• Intracorporeal anastomosis
• Laparoscopic surgery
• Right colectomy
• Robotic surgery

• Colorectal surgery
• Rectal prolapse
• Robotic surgery
• Ventral mesh rectopexy

The benefits of laparoscopic approach for right colectomy have been well established. However, the technical difficulty to construct the intra-corporeal anastomosis is still cumbersome.

To analyze the results of 3D and 2D laparoscopic right colectomy and to compare it to the published series through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

A retrospective study with propensity score matching analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic right colectomy at Umbria2 Hospitals from January 2014 to March 2020 was performed. A systematic review was accomplished comparing 2D and 3D right colectomy.

In the personal series 47 patients of the 2D group were matched to 47 patients of the 3D group. The 3D group showed a favorable trend in terms of mean operative time (170.7 ± 32.9 min vs 183.8 ± 35.4 min; P = 0.053) and a significant lower anastomotic time (16.9 ± 2.3 min vs 19.6 ± 2.9 min, P < 0.001). The complete mesocolic excision (CME) subgroups analysis showed a shorter anastomotic time (16.5 ± 1.8 min vs 19.9 ± 3.0 min; P < 0.001) and operative time (175.0 ± 38.5 min vs 193.7 ± 37.1 min; P = 0.063) in the 3D group. Six studies and our series were included in the meta-analysis with 551 patients (2D group: 291; 3D group: 260).The pooled analysis demonstrated a significant difference in favour of the 3D group regarding the operative time (P < 0.001) and the anastomotic time (P < 0.001) while no differences were identified between groups in terms of blood loss (P = 0.827), LNH yield (P = 0.243), time to first flatus (P = 0.333), postoperative complications (P = 0.718) and length of stay (P = 0.835).

The meta-analysis results showed that 3D laparoscopic right colectomy shortens operative and anastomotic time without affecting the standard lymphadenectomy. In our series, the advantage of the 3D system becomes evident when CME and/or more complex associated procedure are requested significantly reducing both the total operative and the anastomotic time.

• Colon cancer
• Right colectomy
• Laparoscopy
• Complete mesocolic excision
• Two-dimensional
• Three-dimensional

Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly implemented for the resection of colorectal cancer, although the scientific evidence for adopting this technique is still limited. This study’s main objective was to compare short-term complication rates, oncological outcomes, and the inflammatory stress response after colorectal resection for cancer performed laparoscopic or robot-assisted.

We conducted a retrospective cohort study comparing the robot-assisted approach to laparoscopic surgery for elective malignant colorectal neoplasm. Certified colorectal and da Vinci ® robotic surgeons performed resections at a Danish tertiary colorectal high volume center from May 2017 to March 2019. We analyzed the two surgical groups using uni- and multivariate regression analyses to detect differences in intra- and postoperative clinical outcomes and the inflammatory stress response.

Two hundred and ninety-eight patients were enrolled in the study. Significant differences favoring robot-assisted surgery was demonstrated for; length of hospital stay (4 days, interquartile range (4, 5) versus 5 days, interquartile range (4–7), p < 0.001), and intraoperative blood loss (50 mL, interquartile range (20–100) versus 100 mL, interquartile range (50–150), p < 0.001) compared to laparoscopic surgery. The inflammatory stress response was significantly higher after laparoscopic compared to robot-assisted surgery reflected by an increase in C-reactive protein concentration (exponentiated coefficient = 1.23, 95% confidence interval (1.06–1.46), p = 0.008). No differences between the two groups were found concerning mortality, microradical resection rate, conversion to open surgery, and surgical or medical short-term complication rates.

Robot-assisted surgery is feasible and can be safely implemented for colorectal resections. The robot-assisted approach, when compared to laparoscopic surgery, was associated with improved intra- and postoperative outcomes. Extensive prospective studies are needed to determine the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer.

• Colorectal cancer
• Laparoscopic colorectal surgery
• Minimally invasive surgery
• Postoperative inflammatory stress response
• Robot-assisted colorectal surgery
• Surgical oncology

No clear consensus on the need to perform an intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) after laparoscopic right colectomy is currently available. One of the potential benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis may be a reduction in surgical stress. Herein, we evaluated the surgical stress response and the metabolic response in patients who underwent right colonic resection for colon cancer. Fifty-nine patients who underwent laparoscopic resection for right colon cancer were randomized to receive an intracorporeal or an extracorporeal anastomosis (EA). Data including demographics (age, sex, BMI and ASA score), pathological (AJCC tumour stage and tumour localization) and surgical results were recorded. Moreover, to determine the levels of the inflammatory response, mediators, such as C-reactive protein (CRP), tumour necrosis factor (TNF), interleukin 1β (IL-1β), IL-6, IL-10, and IL-13, were evaluated. Similarly, cortisol and insulin levels were evaluated as hormonal responses to surgical stress. We found that the proinflammatory mediator IL-6, CRP, TNF and IL-1β levels, were significantly reduced in IA compared to EA. Concurrently, an improved profile of the anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-10 and IL-13 was observed in the IA group. Relative to the hormone response to surgical stress, cortisol was increased in patients who underwent EA, while insulin was reduced in the EA group. Based on these results, surgical stress and metabolic response to IA justify advocating the adoption of a totally laparoscopic approach when performing a right colectomy for cancer.

This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03422588).

• Anastomosis
• Extracorporeal
• Intracorporeal
• Laparoscopy
• Right colectomy
• Totally laparoscopic

Background and Objectives: There is general agreement on the benefits of laparoscopy for treatment of rectal and left colon cancers, whereas findings regarding the comparison of laparoscopic and open right colonic resections are discordant. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the outcomes and advantages of laparoscopic versus transverse-incision open surgery for management of right colon cancer. Materials and Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Comparative studies evaluating the results of laparoscopic and transverse-incision open right hemicolectomies were analyzed. The measured outcomes were mean operative time, time to feeding, duration of hospital stay, and number of lymph nodes harvested. Results: A total of 5 studies including 318 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis revealed no differences in time to resume oral feeding, hospital stay, and number of lymph nodes harvested in between groups, but mean length of surgery was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group. Conclusion: These data confirm that the preferred approach to right hemicolectomy is yet unclear. Laparoscopy has a longer operative time than transverse-incision open surgery, and no significant short-term benefits were observed for the studied parameters. Well-designed randomized control trials (RCTs) might help to identify the differences between these two techniques for the surgical treatment of right colon cancer.

• colon cancer
• laparoscopy
• laparotomy
• open surgery
• right colectomy
• transverse incision

• anastomotic leak
• colon cancer
• hospital stay
• ileus
• laparoscopic surgery
• open surgery
• post-operative complications
• risk ratios

• Aged
• Colectomy/adverse effects
• Colectomy/methods
• Colonic Neoplasms/surgery
• Female
• Humans
• Laparoscopy/adverse effects
• Laparoscopy/methods
• Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Operative Time
• Postoperative Complications/epidemiology

• colon cancer
• laparoscopic right hemicolectomy
• open surgery
• robotic surgery

• Implementation
• Intracorporeal anastomosis
• Laparoscopic right colectomy
• Learning curve
• Right hemicolectomy

Several studies have shown the safety, feasibility and oncologic adequacy of robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH). Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) is considered technically challenging. Robotic surgery has been introduced to overcome this technical limitation, but it is related to high costs. To maximize the benefits of such surgery, only selected patients are candidates for this technique. In addition, due to progressive aging of the population, an increasing number of minimally invasive procedures are performed on elderly patients with severe comorbidities, who are usually more prone to post-operative complications.

To investigate the outcomes of RRH vs LRH with regard to age and comorbidities.

We retrospectively analyzed 123 minimally invasive procedures (68 LRHs vs 55 RRHs) for right colon cancer or endoscopically unresectable adenoma performed in our Center from January 2014 until September 2019. The surgical procedures were performed according to standardized techniques. The primary clinical outcome of the study was the length of hospital stay (LOS) measured in days. Secondary outcomes were time to first flatus (TFF) and time to first stool evacuation. The robotic technique was considered the exposure and the laparoscopic technique was considered the control. Routine demographic variables were obtained, including age at time of surgery and gender. Body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status were registered. The age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI) was calculated; the tumor-node-metastasis system, intra-operative variables and post-operative complications were recorded. Post-operative follow-up was 180 d.

LOS, TFF, and time to first stool were significantly shorter in the robotic group: Median 6 [interquartile range (IQR) 5-8] vs 7 (IQR 6-10.5) d, P = 0.028; median 2 (IQR 1-3) vs 3 (IQR 2-4) d, P < 0.001; median 4 (IQR 3-5) vs 5 (IQR 4-6.5) d, P = 0.005, respectively. Following multivariable analysis, the robotic technique was confirmed to be predictive of significantly shorter hospitalization and faster restoration of bowel function; in addition the dichotomous variables of age over 75 years and ACCI more than 7 were significant predictors of hospital stay. No outcomes were significantly associated with Clavien-Dindo grading. Sub-group analysis demonstrated that patients aged over 75 years had a longer LOS (median 6 -IQR 5-8- vs 7 -IQR 6-12- d, P = 0.013) and later TFF (median 2 -IQR 1-3- vs 3 -IQR 2-4- d, P = 0.008), while patients with ACCI more than 7 were only associated with a prolonged hospital stay (median 7 -IQR 5-8- vs 7 -IQR 6-14.5- d, P = 0.036).

RRH is related to shorter LOS when compared with the laparoscopic approach, but older age and several comorbidities tend to reduce its benefits.

• Right hemicolectomy
• Robotic surgery
• Laparoscopic surgery
• Elderly patients
• Comorbidity
• Hospital stay

• Anastomotic leak
• Bowel perfusion
• Fluorescence imaging
• Indocyanine green
• Totally laparoscopy

While laparoscopic approach for right hemicolectomy (LRH) is considered appropriate for the surgical treatment of both malignant and benign diseases of right colon, there is still debate about how to perform the ileo-colic anastomosis. The ColonDxItalianGroup (CoDIG) was designed as a cohort, observational, prospective, multi-center national study with the aims of evaluating the surgeons’ attitude regarding the intracorporeal (ICA) or extra-corporeal (ECA) anastomotic technique and the related surgical outcomes.

One hundred and twenty-five Surgical Units experienced in colorectal and advanced laparoscopic surgery were invited and 85 of them joined the study. Each center was asked not to change its surgical habits. Data about demographic characteristics, surgical technique and postoperative outcomes were collected through the official SICE website database. One thousand two hundred and twenty-five patients were enrolled between March 2018 and September 2018.

ICA was performed in 70.4% of cases, ECA in 29.6%. Isoperistaltic anastomosis was completed in 85.6%, stapled in 87.9%. Hand-sewn enterotomy closure was adopted in 86%. Postoperative complications were reported in 35.4% for ICA and 50.7% for ECA; no significant difference was found according to patients’ characteristics and technologies used. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter for ICA (7.3 vs. 9 POD). Postoperative pain in patients not prescribed opioids was significantly lower in ICA group.

In our survey, a side-to-side isoperistaltic stapled ICA with hand-sewn enterotomy closure is the most frequently adopted technique to perform ileo-colic anastomosis after any indications for elective LRH. According to literature, our study confirmed better short-term outcomes for ICA, with reduction of hospital stay and postoperative pain.

Clinical trial (Identifier: NCT03934151).

• Ileo-colic anastomosis
• Intracorporeal anastomosis
• Laparoscopy
• Outcomes
• Postoperative complications
• Right hemicolectomy

• Enterotomy closure
• Laparoscopic colectomy
• Right colon cancer