Colectomy for Cancer in the Elderly by Laparoscopy or Laparotomy
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
DISEASE(S): Colon Cancer,Colonic Cancer,Colonic Neoplasms
PROVIDER: 2235205 | ecrin-mdr-crc |
REPOSITORIES: ECRIN MDR
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study aimed to characterize the effects of pre-operative volitional running wheel exercise on post-operative physical function and skeletal muscle gene expression in 24-month-old C57BL/6N mice following laparotomy. Soleus muscles collected on post-operative day 5 (POD 5) were used for this study.
2022-04-28 | GSE201252 | GEO
Project description:The possible advantages of laparoscopic radical hysterectomy (LRH) versus open radical hysterectomy (RH) have not been well reviewed systematically. The aim of this study was to systematically review the comparative effectiveness between LRH and RH in the treatment of cervical cancer based on the evaluation of the Perioperative outcomes, oncological clearance, complications and long-term outcomes.The systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and BIOSIS databases. All original studies that compared LRH with RH were included for critical appraisal. Data were pooled and analyzed.A total of twelve original studies that compared LRH (n?=?754) with RH (n?=?785) in patients with cervical cancer fulfilled quality criteria were selected for review and meta-analysis. LRH compared with RH was associated with a significant reduction of intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference?=?-268.4 mL (95 % CI -361.6, -175.1; p?<?0.01), a reduced risk of postoperative complications (OR?=?0.46; 95 % CI 0.34-0.63) and shorter hospital stay (weighted mean difference?=?-3.22 days; 95 % CI-4.21, -2.23 days; p?<?0.01). These benefits were at the cost of longer operative time (weighted mean difference?=?26.9 min (95 % CI 8.08-45.82). The rate of intraoperative complications was similar in the two groups. Lymph nodes yield and positive resection margins were similar between the two groups. There were no significant differences in 5-year overall survival (HR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.48-1.71; p?=?0.76) and 5-year disease-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.97, 95 % CI 0.56-1.68; p?=?0.91).LRH shows better short term outcomes compared with RH in patients with cervical cancer. The oncologic outcome and 5-year survival were similar between the two groups.
| S-EPMC4657298 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:There is minimal evidence evaluating the risks and benefits of laparoscopy use in hemodynamically stable children with suspected abdominal injuries. The objective of this study was to evaluate postoperative outcomes in a large cohort of hemodynamically stable pediatric patients with blunt abdominal injury. METHODS:Using the 2015-2016 National Trauma Data Bank, all patients aged <18 y with injury severity score (ISS) ≤25, Glasgow coma scale ≥13, and normal blood pressure who underwent an abdominal operation for blunt abdominal trauma were included. Patients were grouped into three treatment groups: laparotomy, laparoscopy, and laparoscopy converted to laparotomy. Treatment effect estimation with inverse probability weighting was used to determine the association between treatment group and outcomes of interest. RESULTS:Of 720 patients, 504 underwent laparotomy, 132 underwent laparoscopy, and 84 underwent laparoscopy converted to laparotomy. The median age was 10 (IQR: 7-15) y, and the median ISS was 9 (IQR: 5-14). Mean hospital length of stay was 2.1 d shorter (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9-3.2 d) and mean intensive care unit length of stay was 1.1 d shorter (95% CI: 0.6-1.5 d) for the laparoscopy group compared with the laparotomy group. The laparoscopy group had a 2.0% lower mean probability of surgical site infection than the laparotomy group (95% CI: 1.0%-3.0%). CONCLUSIONS:In this cohort of hemodynamically stable pediatric patients with blunt abdominal injury, laparoscopy may have improved outcomes over laparotomy.
| S-EPMC7247932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Surgery in a frozen abdomen can be difficult and dangerous with a significant risk of visceral injuries. We report a case of a 26-year-old lady with chronic pelvic pain diagnosed to have large bilateral adnexal cysts on magnetic resonance imaging with normal tumor markers. She had previous two laparotomies for benign conditions. Laparoscopy was planned, but pneumoperitoneum could not be created due to dense intraperitoneal adhesions. Direct entry was done into the preperitoneal space followed by insufflation of gas in this space. Blunt and sharp dissection of this space was done without breaching the peritoneum to reach the adnexa. The adnexal cyst was found to be encysted collection due to adhesions from previous surgeries. Deroofing was done followed by the visualization of pelvic structures intraperitoneally. Extraperitoneal laparoscopy may be used as a safe alternative to laparotomy in patients with dense intra-abdominal adhesions with the advantage of faster postoperative recovery.
| S-EPMC8384020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives The aims of this study were to assess the feasibility of single-port laparoscopic surgical staging (SPLS) in early ovarian cancer and to compare the surgical outcomes of SPLS with those of staging laparotomy.MethodsBetween January 2014 and December 2018, 40 patients underwent SPLS and 41 patients underwent staging laparotomy at Yonsei Cancer Center. The patients were diagnosed with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage I ovarian cancer. Variables such as patient age, body mass index (BMI), tumor size, FIGO stage, and perioperative surgical outcomes and survival outcomes of SPLS and laparotomy were compared.ResultsThe total operation time was similar between the 2 groups (SPLS: 201.4 vs. laparotomy: 203.0 minutes, P=0.806). The median tumor diameters in the SPLS and laparotomy groups were 11.0 (2.5-28 cm) and 15.4 (6-40 cm), respectively (P=0.001). The SPLS group had lower tumor spillage rate (5.0% vs. 19.5%, P=0.047), less intraoperative blood loss (102.0 vs. 371.5 mL, P<0.001), less postoperative pain, and shorter postoperative hospital stay (5 vs. 9.5 days, P<0.001). The intraoperative major complication rate was similar between groups (2.5% vs. 4.9%, P=0.571). There was no significant difference in progression-free survival between the 2 groups (P=0.945). There were no deaths in either group.ConclusionSPLS is feasible in early ovarian cancer and has better perioperative surgical outcomes, in some aspects, than staging laparotomy without compromising survival outcomes. SPLS could be performed in patients suspected to have early ovarian cancer.
| S-EPMC7834751 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe safety and effectiveness of robotic surgery are evaluated by comparing perioperative outcomes with laparoscopy and laparotomy in endometrial cancer.MethodPubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and other databases were searched for eligible studies up to April 2019. Studies that compared robotic surgery with laparoscopy or laparotomy in surgical staging of endometrial cancer were included. The pooled odds ratio and weighted mean difference were calculated using a random-effects or a fixed-effects model to summarize the results.ResultsTwenty-seven articles were ultimately included, with one randomized controlled trial and 26 observational studies. A total of 6568 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed that robotic surgery had less estimated blood loss (P < 0.001), blood transfusion (P = 0.04), intraoperative complications (P = 0.001), and conversion to open surgery (P = 0.001), and a shorter hospital stay (P = 0.001), but had a longer operation time (P = 0.04) in surgical staging of endometrial cancer compared with laparoscopy. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications, the total number of lymph nodes harvested, the number of pelvic lymph nodes harvested, and the number of para-aortic lymph nodes harvested between techniques. Robotic surgery had a longer operation time (P = 0.008), less estimated blood loss (P < 0.001), blood transfusion (P < 0.001), and postoperative complications (P < 0.001), and a shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001) compared with laparotomy. There were no significant differences in other variables between techniques.ConclusionRobotic surgery is a safer surgical approach than laparoscopy and laparotomy in surgical staging of endometrial cancer, with less estimated blood loss, blood transfusion, and conversion, and the same number of lymph nodes harvested.
| S-EPMC7212337 | biostudies-literature
Project description:After minimally invasive surgery gained popularity in gynecology, laparoscopic operations became widespread among oncologic operations. However, more studies evaluating experiences of oncologic surgeons during the learning period of laparoscopy are needed. To compare the surgical outcomes and perioperative complications of laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy in the treatment of early-stage endometrioid endometrial cancer patients, we retrospectively investigated patients who underwent surgery due to endometrial cancer at our institution between 2014 and 2018. Early-stage (stage I) endometrioid endometrial cancer patients were included in the study. Operative times, length of hospital stay, extracted pelvic lymph nodes, perioperative complications, and blood loss were compared. A total of 128 patients were treated for stage I endometrial cancer during the study period. Sixty-two patients (48.4%) underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 66 (51.6%) patients underwent laparotomy. Median operation time and pelvic lymph node count in the laparotomy and laparoscopy groups did not demonstrate statistically significant differences. However, the length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and perioperative complication rate were lower in the laparoscopic surgery group. Laparoscopic surgery in early-stage endometrial cancer may be performed with less blood loss, shorter duration of hospital stays, and similar lymph node counts compared to laparotomic surgery.
| S-EPMC7210537 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There has been recent progress in intraoperative fluid therapy. However, little is known about intraoperative fluid therapy in laparoscopic surgery. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there are differences in the basal fluid requirements during surgery between laparotomy and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy.This retrospective cohort study analyzed the electronic medical records of 253 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy via either laparotomy (73 patients) or laparoscopy (180 patients) between June 2006 and March 2016. The volume of intraoperative fluid administered, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate were evaluated. The total volume of fluids was calculated as the sum of the volume of crystalloid plus the volume of colloid multiplied by 1.5 or 2.0.Patients who had laparotomy were older and had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classes. Anesthesia time was longer and estimated blood loss was larger in laparotomy. More colloid (1.8?mL/kg per h vs. 1.2?mL/kg per h, P?<?.001) and more total calculated fluid (1.5 times: 11.7?mL/kg per h vs. 10.6?mL/kg per h, P?=?.002; 2.0 times: 12.6?mL/kg per h vs. 11.2?mL/kg per h, P?=?.001) were infused in laparotomy. Crystalloid (9.0?mL/kg per h vs. 8.9?mL/kg per h, P?=?.203) did not show significant difference. Postoperative complications were more frequent (63% vs. 45%, P?=?.008), the hospital stay was longer (18 days vs. 13.4 days, P?<?.001), and readmission rate was higher (15% vs. 5.6%, P?=?.02) in laparotomy. By logistic regression analysis, we could find that operation type (laparotomy vs. laparoscopy, odds ratio 1.900, 95% confidence interval 1.072-3.368) and operation time (P?=?.004) had effect on complications.In patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy, basal fluid requirements were larger in laparotomy compared with laparoscopy. Operation time and estimated blood loss had effects on fluid administration. Postoperative complications were more frequent in laparotomy but we could not find relationships with infused colloid or total calculated fluid volumes. Operation type (laparotomy vs. laparoscopy) and operation time were the only related factors to postoperative complications.
| S-EPMC5708974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo compare the relative merits among robotic surgery, laparoscopy, and laparotomy for patients with endometrial cancer by conducting a meta-analysis.MethodsThe MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Studies clearly documenting a comparison between robotic surgery and laparoscopy or between robotic surgery and laparotomy for endometrial cancer were selected. The outcome measures included operating time (OT), number of complications, length of hospital stay (LOHS), estimated blood loss (EBL), number of transfusions, total lymph nodes harvested (TLNH), and number of conversions. Pooled odds ratios and weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using either a fixed-effects or random-effects model.ResultsTwenty-two studies were included in the meta-analysis. These studies involved a total of 4420 patients, 3403 of whom underwent both robotic surgery and laparoscopy and 1017 of whom underwent both robotic surgery and laparotomy. The EBL (p?=?0.01) and number of conversions (p?=?0.0008) were significantly lower and the number of complications (p<0.0001) was significantly higher in robotic surgery than in laparoscopy. The OT, LOHS, number of transfusions, and TLNH showed no significant differences between robotic surgery and laparoscopy. The number of complications (p<0.00001), LOHS (p<0.00001), EBL (p<0.00001), and number of transfusions (p?=?0.03) were significantly lower and the OT (p<0.00001) was significantly longer in robotic surgery than in laparotomy. The TLNH showed no significant difference between robotic surgery and laparotomy.ConclusionsRobotic surgery is generally safer and more reliable than laparoscopy and laparotomy for patients with endometrial cancer. Robotic surgery is associated with significantly lower EBL than both laparoscopy and laparotomy; fewer conversions but more complications than laparoscopy; and shorter LOHS, fewer complications, and fewer transfusions but a longer OT than laparoscopy. Further studies are required.
| S-EPMC4178241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceTemporal shifts in clinical knowledge and practice need to be adjusted for in treatment outcome assessment in clinical evidence.ObjectiveTo use electronic health record (EHR) data to (1) assess the temporal trends in treatment decisions and patient outcomes and (2) emulate a randomized clinical trial (RCT) using EHR data with proper adjustment for temporal trends.Design, setting, and participantsThe Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST) Study Group Trial assessing overall survival of patients with stages I to III early-stage colon cancer was chosen as the target trial. The RCT was emulated using EHR data of patients from a single health care system cohort who underwent colectomy for early-stage colon cancer from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2017, and were followed up to January 1, 2020, from Mass General Brigham. Analyses were conducted from December 2, 2019, to January 24, 2022.ExposuresLaparoscopy-assisted colectomy (LAC) vs open colectomy (OC).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was 5-year overall survival. To address confounding in the emulation, pretreatment variables were selected and adjusted. The temporal trends were adjusted by stratification of the calendar year when the colectomies were performed with cotraining across strata.ResultsA total of 943 patients met key RCT eligibility criteria in the EHR emulation cohort, including 518 undergoing LAC (median age, 63 [range, 20-95] years; 268 [52%] women; 121 [23%] with stage I, 165 [32%] with stage II, and 232 [45%] with stage III cancer; 32 [6%] with colon adhesion; 278 [54%] with right-sided colon cancer; 18 [3%] with left-sided colon cancer; and 222 [43%] with sigmoid colon cancer) and 425 undergoing OC (median age, 65 [range, 28-99] years; 223 [52%] women; 61 [14%] with stage I, 153 [36%] with stage II, and 211 [50%] with stage III cancer; 39 [9%] with colon adhesion; 202 [47%] with right-sided colon cancer; 39 [9%] with left-sided colon cancer; and 201 [47%] with sigmoid colon cancer). Tests for temporal trends in treatment assignment (χ2 = 60.3; P < .001) and overall survival (χ2 = 137.2; P < .001) were significant. The adjusted EHR emulation reached the same conclusion as the RCT: LAC is not inferior to OC in overall survival rate with risk difference at 5 years of -0.007 (95% CI, -0.070 to 0.057). The results were consistent for stratified analysis within each temporal period.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that confounding bias from temporal trends should be considered when conducting clinical evidence studies with long time spans. Stratification of calendar time and cotraining of models is one solution. With proper adjustment, clinical evidence may supplement RCTs in the assessment of treatment outcome over time.
| S-EPMC9227003 | biostudies-literature