Taek-Gu Lee

Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND The safety and short-term efficacy of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy has not been demonstrated. The aim of the randomised Comparison of Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid and low REctal cancer After Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN) trial was to compare open surgery with laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. METHODS Between April 4, 2006, and Aug 26, 2009, patients with cT3N0-2 mid or low rectal cancer without distant metastasis after preoperative chemoradiotherapy were enrolled at three tertiary-referral hospitals. Patients were randomised 1:1 to receive either open surgery (n=170) or laparoscopic surgery (n=170), stratified according to sex and preoperative chemotherapy regimen. Short-term outcomes assessed were involvement of the circumferential resection margin, macroscopic quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen, number of harvested lymph nodes, recovery of bowel function, perioperative morbidity, postoperative pain, and quality of life. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat population. Patients continue to be followed up for the primary outcome (3-year disease-free survival). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00470951. FINDINGS Two patients (1.2%) in the laparoscopic group were converted to open surgery, but were included in the laparoscopic group for analyses. Estimated blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (median 217.5 mL [150.0-400.0] in the open group vs 200.0 mL [100.0-300.0] in the laparoscopic group, p=0.006), although surgery time was longer in the laparoscopic group (mean 244.9 min [SD 75.4] vs 197.0 min [62.9], p<0.0001). Involvement of the circumferential resection margin, macroscopic quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen, number of harvested lymph nodes, and perioperative morbidity did not differ between the two groups. The laparoscopic surgery group showed earlier recovery of bowel function than the open surgery group (time to pass first flatus, median 38.5 h [23.0-53.0] vs 60.0 h [43.0-73.0], p<0.0001; time to resume a normal diet, 85.0 h [66.0-95.0] vs 93.0 h [86.0-121.0], p<0.0001; time to first defecation, 96.5 h [70.0-125.0] vs 123 h [94.0-156.0], p<0.0001). The total amount of morphine used was less in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (median 107.2 mg [80.0-150.0] vs 156.9 mg [117.0-185.2], p<0.0001). 3 months after proctectomy or ileostomy takedown, the laparoscopic group showed better physical functioning score than the open group (0.501 [n=122] vs -4.970 [n=128], p=0.0073), less fatigue (-5.659 [n=122] vs 0.098 [n=129], p=0.0206), and fewer micturition (-2.583 [n=122] vs 4.725 [n=129], p=0.0002), gastrointestinal (-0.400 [n=122] vs 4.331 [n=129], p=0.0102), and defecation problems (0.535 [n=103] vs 5.327 [n=99], p=0.0184) in repeated measures analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline values. INTERPRETATION Laparoscopic surgery after preoperative chemoradiotherapy for mid or low rectal cancer is safe and has short-term benefits compared with open surgery; the quality of oncological resection was equivalent.

Comparison of Early Mobilization and Diet Rehabilitation Program With Conventional Care After Laparoscopic Colon Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

PURPOSE: Although laparoscopic surgery may permit earlier recovery compared with open surgery, no published randomized controlled trial has investigated the benefit of a multimodal rehabilitation program after laparoscopic colonic resection. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a rehabilitation program after laparoscopic colon surgery in the context of a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Between September 2007 and October 2009, 100 patients who had received laparoscopic colon surgery were selected for the study and randomly assigned on a 1:1 basis to a rehabilitation program group with early mobilization and diet (n = 46) or conventional care group (n = 54). The rehabilitation program group received early oral feeding, early ambulation, and regular laxative. The primary outcome was recovery time, measured with criteria of tolerable diet for 24 hours, safe ambulation, analgesic-free, and afebrile status without major complications. Secondary outcomes were postoperative hospital stay, complications, quality of life by Short Form 36, pain by visual analog scale, and readmission. This study was registered (ID number NCT00606944, http://register.clinicaltrials.gov). RESULTS: Recovery time was shorter in the rehabilitation program group than in the conventional care group (median (interquartile range), 4 (3–5) d vs 6 (5–7) d, respectively; P < .0001). There was no difference in postoperative hospital stay between the 2 groups (rehabilitation program group, 7 (6–8) d vs conventional care group, 8 (7–9) d; P = .065). There was no difference in complication rates between the rehabilitation program group and conventional care group (10.9% vs 20.4%, respectively; P = .136). Quality of life and pain were similar in both groups. There were no readmissions or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: A rehabilitation program with early mobilization and diet after laparoscopic colon surgery results in reduced recovery time without increased complications. These results suggest that a multimodal rehabilitation program may increase the short-term benefits after laparoscopic colon surgery.

The accuracy of preoperative core biopsy in determining histologic grade, hormone receptors, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status in invasive breast cancer

BACKGROUND Proper determination of histologic type and biomarkers in a core biopsy specimen is important before preoperative systemic therapy. The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of preoperative core biopsy through comparative analysis of histologic grade (HG), hormone receptors, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2) status in both the core biopsy and surgical specimens. METHODS We identified 104 patients with invasive ductal cancer who underwent core biopsy and definitive surgery in our institution. The histologic type, HG, estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER-2 status were determined in both the core biopsy and surgical specimens by one pathologist. RESULTS The mean age of the 104 patients was 50 +/- 9.9 years and the mean number of core biopsies was 5.1 +/- .9. The concordance rates for histologic type, HG, ER, PR, and HER-2 status were 100%, 80.8%, 99%, 97.1%, and 86.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Core biopsy can predict histologic type, HG, ER, PR and HER-2 status preoperatively in breast cancer when used properly.

Intraoperative technical difficulty during laparoscopy-assisted surgery as a prognostic factor for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy-assisted surgery has technical drawbacks compared with open surgery, although laparoscopic surgery has become widely adopted with evidence of oncological safety for colon cancer treatment. The oncological risk of technical difficulties during laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer has not been previously reported. We aimed to investigate whether a technical difficulty encountered during laparoscopic surgery can be considered a recurrence-related factor for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Data from 427 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer between May 2003 and December 2007 were analyzed. An intraoperative technical difficulty was defined as a significant deviation from the ordinary surgical procedure. All conversions to open surgery and iatrogenic bowel perforation during laparoscopic surgery were included as technical difficulties. The Cox proportional-hazards regression model was used to evaluate the recurrence-related factor in the various risk factors including technical difficulty. RESULTS: Technical difficulties were found in 44 (10.3%) patients, which included 17 (3.9%) conversions to open surgery and 10 (2.4%) with iatrogenic bowel injury. Technical difficulties were encountered more frequently in men compared with women (13.5% vs 6.0%, P = .013), and for cancers located in the mid and low rectum, splenic flexure, and descending colon. The recurrence rates were higher in patients with technical difficulties (local recurrence, 2.6% vs 6.7%, P < .05; systemic recurrence, 6.3% vs 13.6%, P < .05) with a mean follow-up duration of 45.9 months. Multivariate analysis by the Cox proportional-hazards regression model showed that a technical difficulty was an independent factor related to recurrence after laparoscopic surgery (odds ratio, 2.374; 95% CI, 1.006–5.600; P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated that a technical difficulty during laparoscopy-assisted surgery jeopardizes oncological safety. It is suggested that surgeons should be prepared to minimize technical difficulties during laparoscopy-assisted surgery.

Intermediate-risk grouping of cervical cancer patients treated with radical hysterectomy: a Korean Gynecologic Oncology Group study

Background:In this study, we sought to identify a criterion for the intermediate-risk grouping of patients with cervical cancer who exhibit any intermediate-risk factor after radical hysterectomy.Methods:In total, 2158 patients with pathologically proven stage IB–IIA cervical cancer with any intermediate-risk factor after radical hysterectomy were randomly assigned to two groups, a development group and a validation group, at a ratio of 3 : 1 (1620 patients:538 patients). To predict recurrence, multivariate models were developed using the development group. The ability of the models to discriminate between groups was validated using the log-rank test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.Results:Four factors (histology, tumour size, deep stromal invasion (DSI), and lymphovascular space involvement (LVSI)) were significantly associated with disease recurrence and included in the models. Among the nine possible combinations of the four variables, models consisting of any two of the four intermediate-risk factors (tumour size ⩾3 cm, DSI of the outer third of the cervix, LVSI, and adenocarcinoma or adenosquamous carcinoma histology) demonstrated the best performance for predicting recurrence.Conclusion:This study identified a ‘four-factor model’ in which the presence of any two factors may be useful for predicting recurrence in patients with cervical cancer treated with radical hysterectomy.

Economic Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery for Colorectal Cancer in Korea

PurposeTo compare the economic outcomes of laparoscopic surgery (LAP) with those of open surgery (OS) for colorectal cancer.MethodsWe compared operating room (OR) costs, OR hospital-profits, total hospital charges, and payments made for 67 consecutive patients who underwent either OS (n = 41) or LAP (n = 26) for colorectal cancer.ResultsThe operating time was longer in the LAP group (P < 0.001), but the hospital stay was shorter (P < 0.001). OR costs were higher in the LAP group, which was primarily attributed to the higher costs of consumables (LAP

Apical-node metastasis in sigmoid colon or rectal cancer: is it a factor that indicates a poor prognosis after high ligation?

1441, OS

Early rehabilitation versus conventional care after laparoscopic rectal surgery: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial

575; P < 0.001) and the longer operating time (LAP 215 min, OS 155 min; P < 0.001). Total hospital charges were also higher after LAP (LAP

The State of Patient Satisfaction after Hernioplasty on an Ambulatory Basis

5017, OS

Risk Factors for Persistent Anal Incontinence After Restorative Proctectomy in Rectal Cancer Patients with Anal Incontinence: Prospective Cohort Study

4093; P < 0.001). Patients paid more after LAP (P < 0.001), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in National Health Insurance Corporation payments.ConclusionLaparoscopic surgery is less cost-effective than OS for colorectal cancer. The higher costs of consumables and the longer operating time associated with LAP must be addressed to make LAP more cost-effective.