BackgroundLaparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer is associated with substantial morbidity despite the introduction of enhanced recovery protocols and laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with an intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) is less invasive than laparoscopic assisted hemicolectomy, possibly leading to further decrease in post-operative morbidity and faster recovery. The current standard technique includes an extracorporeal anastomosis with mobilization of the colon, mesenteric traction and a extraction wound located in the mid/upper abdomen with relative more post-operative morbidity compared to extraction wounds located in the lower abdomen.MethodsA systematic review of PubMed and Embase databases was performed on studies comparing the intracorporeal versus the extracorporeal performed anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. Primary outcomes were mortality, short-term morbidity and length of stay. For quality assessment, the MINORS checklist was used. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, and a subgroup analysis was performed for data regarding short-term morbidity and length of stay in studies published in 2012≥.ResultsA total of 2692 papers were identified, 12 non-randomized comparative studies were included in the analysis with a total number of 1492 patients. No significant change in mortality was found (OR 0.36, 95 % CI 0.09–1.46; I
2 = 0 %). Short-term morbidity decreased significantly in favour of IA (OR 0.68, 95 % CI 0.49–0.93; I
2 = 20 %). Length of stay was decreased, but with serious risk of heterogeneity (MD −0.77 days, 95 % CI −1.46 to −0.07; I
2 = 81 %). Subgroup analysis for papers published in 2012≥ resulted in an even larger decrease in short-term morbidity (OR 0.65, 95 % CI 0.50–0.85; I
2 = 0 %) and a significant decrease in length of stay with low risk of heterogeneity (MD −0.77 days, 95 % CI −1.17 to −0.37; I
2 = 4 %).ConclusionIntracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is associated with reduced short-term morbidity and decreased length of hospital stay suggesting faster recovery as shown in this meta-analysis.
BackgroundTransanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has rapidly become an important component of the treatment of rectal cancer surgery. Cohort studies have shown feasibility concerning procedure, specimen quality and morbidity. However, concerns exist about quality of life and ano(neo)rectal function. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate quality of life in patients following TaTME for rectal cancer with anastomosis.MethodsConsecutive patients who underwent restorative TaTME surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma in an academic teaching center with tertiary referral function were evaluated. Validated questionnaires were prospectively collected. Quality of life was assessed by the EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer’s QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) scale. Outcomes of the questionnaires at 1 and 6 months were compared with preoperative (baseline) values.ResultsThirty patients after restorative TaTME for rectal cancer were included. Deterioration for all domains was mainly observed at 1 month after surgery compared to baseline, but most outcomes had returned to baseline at 6 months. Social function and anal pain remained significantly worse at 6 months. Major LARS (score >30) was 33% at 6 months after ileostomy closure. No end colostomies were required.ConclusionsTaTME is associated with acceptable quality of life and functional outcome at 6 months after surgery comparable to published results after conventional laparoscopic low anterior resection.
RC is a moderately effective long-term alternative in patients who do not respond to medical therapy and biofeedback exercises. There is a high dropout rate in the first months, but a moderate rate of continuation in the period hereafter. No predictive factors for continuation were found in medical history or function tests. Those who continued RC performed better on the SF-36 subscale energy/fatigue.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.