Robotic surgery is increasingly used in the field of rectal cancer surgery. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection (uLAR) and coloanal anastomosis (CAA). Between January 2007 and December 2010, a retrospective chart review was performed for all patients with low rectal cancer who underwent curative uLAR and CAA with or without intersphincteric resection using either a robotic or a laparoscopic approach. The study excluded patients with tumors invading the levator ani or external sphincter, patients with T4 cancers invading the prostate or vagina, and patients for whom an open approach was used. Patients' short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated. This study enrolled 84 consecutive patients (47 in the robotic group and 37 in the laparoscopic group). The patient characteristics and operative data did not differ significantly between the groups except for the rate of conversion to open surgery (robot, 2.1 % vs laparoscopy, 16.2 %; p = 0.02). The postoperative outcomes also were similar in the two groups, but the hospital stay was shorter in the robotic group than in the laparoscopic group (robot, 9 days vs laparoscopy, 11 days; p = 0.011). No postoperative mortality occurred. The median follow-up period was 31.5 months. No difference was shown in local recurrence, 3-year overall survival, or disease-free survival between the two groups. Robotic uLAR and CAA with or without ISR is a safe and feasible surgical approach with a lower conversion rate, a shorter hospital stay, and similar oncologic outcomes compared with a laparoscopic approach. Further prospective and case-control cohort studies with longer follow-up periods are required.

CIHE program was as effective as IIHE program in increasing the level of PA, and the increase in PA resulted in significant change in HOMA-IR, IGF-1 axis, TNF-α, and adiponectin levels in stage II-III colorectal cancer survivors.

Low-to-moderate-intensity postsurgical exercise reduces length of hospital stay and improves bowel motility after colectomy procedure in patients with stages I-III colon cancer.

BackgroundTo evaluate the impact of diabetes on outcomes in colorectal cancer patients and to examine whether this association varies by the location of tumor (colon vs. rectum).Patients and methodsThis study includes 4,131 stage I-III colorectal cancer patients, treated between 1995 and 2007 (12.5% diabetic, 53% colon, 47% rectal) in South Korea. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to determine the prognostic influence of DM on survival endpoints.ResultsColorectal cancer patients with DM had significantly worse disease-free survival (DFS) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00–1.37] compared with patients without DM. When considering colon and rectal cancer independently, DM was significantly associated with worse overall survival (OS) (HR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.11–1.92), DFS (HR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.15–1.84) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR: 1.32, 95% CI: 0.98–1.76) in colon cancer patients. No association for OS, DFS or RFS was observed in rectal cancer patients. There was significant interaction of location of tumor (colon vs. rectal cancer) with DM on OS (P = 0.009) and DFS (P = 0.007).ConclusionsThis study suggests that DM negatively impacts survival outcomes of patients with colon cancer but not rectal cancer.

The level and the pattern of physical activity by colorectal cancer survivors differed across cancer trajectories, which were significantly influenced by age and adjuvant chemotherapy.