Purpose To compare laparoscopic non-CME colectomy with laparoscopic CME colectomy in two hospitals with similar experience in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Methods Data was collected retrospectively from Päijät-Häme Central Hospital (PHCH, NCME group) and Central Finland Central Hospital (CFCH, CME group) records. Elective laparoscopic resections performed during 2007-2016 for UICC stage I-III adenocarcinoma were included to assess differences in short-term outcome and survival. Results There were 340 patients in the NCME group and 325 patients in the CME group. CME delivered longer specimens (p < 0.001), wider resection margins (p < 0.001), and more lymph nodes (p < 0.001) but did not result in better 5-year overall or cancer-specific survival (NCME 77.9% vs CME 72.9%, p = 0.528, NCME 93.2% vs CME 88.9%, p = 0.132, respectively). Thirtyday morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay were similar between the groups. Conversion to open surgery was associated with decreased survival. Discussion Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is reported to improve survival. Most previous studies have compared open CME with open non-CME (NCME) or open CME with laparoscopic CME. NCME populations have been historical or heterogeneous, potentially causing bias in the interpretation of results. Studies comparing laparoscopic CME with laparoscopic NCME are few and involve only small numbers of patients. In this study, diligently performed laparoscopic non-CME D2 resection delivered disease-free survival results comparable with laparoscopic CME but was not safer.

To evaluate the accuracy of heart rate variability (HRV) parameters obtained with a wrist-worn photoplethysmography (PPG) monitor in patients recovering from minimally invasive colon resection to investigate whether PPG has potential in postoperative patient monitoring. 31 patients were monitored for three days or until discharge or reoperation using a wrist-worn PPG monitor (PulseOn, Finland) with a Holter monitor (Faros 360, Bittium Biosignals, Finland) as a reference measurement device. Beat-to-beat intervals (BBI) and HRV information collected by PPG were compared with RR intervals (RRI) and HRV obtained from the ECG reference after removing artefacts and ectopic beats. The beat-to-beat mean error (ME) and mean absolute error (MAE) of good quality heartbeat intervals obtained by wrist PPG were estimated as − 1.34 ms and 10.4 ms respectively. A significant variation in the accuracy of the HRV parameters was found. In the time domain, SDNN (9.11%), TRI (11.4%) and TINN (11.1%) were estimated with low relative MAE, while RMSSD (34.3%), pNN50 (139%) and NN50 (188%) had higher errors. The logarithmic parameters in the frequency domain (VLF Log, LF Log and HF Log) exhibited the lowest relative error, and for non-linear parameters, SD2 (7.5%), DFA α1 (8.25%) and DFA α2 (4.71%) were calculated much more accurately than SD1 (34.3%). The wrist PPG shows some potential for use in a clinical setting. The accuracy of several HRV parameters analyzed post hoc was found sufficient to be used in further studies concerning postoperative recovery of patients undergoing laparoscopic colon resection, although there were large errors in many common HRV parameters such as RMSSD, pNN50 and NN50, rendering them unusable.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04996511, August 9, 2021, retrospectively registered