Woon Kyung Jeong

Reduced-port robotic anterior resection for left-sided colon cancer using the Da Vinci single-site(®) platform.

Single‐Site® port plus one conventional robotic port, a reduced‐port robotic surgery (RPRS) for left‐sided colorectal cancer, can enable lymphovascular dissection using the Endowrist® function; this allows safe rectal transection through an additional port and maintains the cosmetic advantage of single‐incision laparoscopic surgery.

Cefotetan versus Conventional Triple Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective Colorectal Cancer Surgery

This study examined infectious outcomes in elective colorectal cancer surgery between cefotetan alone or conventional triple antibiotics. From January to December 2007, 461 consecutive primary colorectal cancer patients underwent elective surgery. Group A contained 225 patients who received conventional triple antibiotics (cephalosporin, aminoglycoside and metronidazole) for prophylaxis, and group B contained 236 patients who received cefotetan alone for prophylaxis. Treatment failure was defined as the presence of postoperative infection including surgical-site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and pneumonia or urinary tract infection. The two groups were similar in terms of demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, tumour location, stage, surgical approach (conventional open vs. laparoscopy-assisted), and type of operation. The treatment failure rates were 3.1% in Group A and 3.4% in Group B (absolute difference, -0.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 3.07, P=0.866), with SSI being the most common reason for failure in both groups (2.7% in Group A and 3.0% in Group B [absolute difference, -0.3%; 95% CI, 0.37 to 3.37, P=0.846]). Cefotetan alone is as effective as triple antibiotics for prophylaxis in primary colorectal cancer patients undergoing elective surgery.

Robotic Anterior Resection for Sigmoid Colon Cancer Using Reduced Port Access.

245 Diseases of the Colon & ReCtum Volume 59: 3 (2016) Recently, 2 new advancements, single-port laparoscopic surgery (sPls) and a robotic surgical system, have been integrated into modern colorectal surgical practice. the potential advantages of sPls include improved cosmetic outcomes, reduced postoperative incisional pain, fewer incisional hernias and organ injuries, and fewer wound complications. however, sPls for left-sided colon cancer is a challenging procedure even in the hands of a skilled laparoscopic colorectal surgeon because of difficulties in creating instrument triangulation and using endostaplers in the pelvic cavity with sufficient distal margins from the single port at the umbilicus. Robotic single-port access was designed especially to overcome the limitations of sPls, and it has been used to perform cholecystectomies, gynecological surgeries, and urological procedures. this platform can easily create instrument triangulation while minimizing external robotic arm collisions because the robotic instruments are crossed at the port site but are reassigned by the software to fit the corresponding hand of the surgeon on the robotic console. however, it has not been widely applied to colorectal diseases because of the lack of wrist articulation, limited range of motion of the semirigid robotic instruments, limited variety of instruments available for the robotic single-port platform, difficulty in using endostaplers in the pelvic cavity, and lack of a second retraction that is required for colorectal surgery. Robotic reduced-port access in left-sided colorectal cancer surgery can enable lymph node dissection around the inferior mesenteric artery with autonomic nerve preservation by using wrist articulation. this allows safe distal bowel transection through the additional port and maintains the cosmetic advantages of sPls. this technique can be a viable option until a more advanced robotic platform specifically designed for sPls is developed (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/a211).

Influence of old age on the postoperative outcomes of obstructive colorectal cancer surgery after the insertion of a stent

Purpose In some patients more than 70 years of age with obstructive colorectal cancer, their concerns about the postoperative complications lead them to refuse surgery after the insertion of a stent. This study aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes between obstructive colorectal cancer patients aged less than 70 years and those aged 70 years and more who underwent surgery after the insertion of a colonoscopic stent. Methods Patients with obstructive colorectal cancer who underwent surgery after the insertion of a colonoscopic stent between March 2004 and March 2014 were reviewed retrospectively by using medical records. The patients were divided into two groups: 22 patients were aged less than 70 years (group A) and 30 patients were aged more than 70 years (group B). Results Although no significant difference in comorbidity was noted between the two groups, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score was higher in group B. There was no significant difference in cancer location, stage, or the time from the insertion of the stent to operation. The perioperative results including operation time, blood loss, and length of stay were not significantly different between the groups. The postoperative complications were also not significantly different. Conclusion The surgical outcomes of elderly patients were similar to those of younger patients, despite higher ASA scores. These results indicate that surgery can be performed safely in elderly patients with obstructive colorectal cancer after the insertion of a stent.

Oncologic outcomes of early adjuvant chemotherapy initiation in patients with stage III colon cancer

Purpose Although adjuvant chemotherapy reduces the risk of disease recurrence in stage III colon cancer patients, published guidelines do not specify when it should be initiated. This study aimed to assess the effect of adjuvant chemotherapy initiation time on disease recurrence and survival in stage III colon cancer patients undergoing curative surgical resection. Methods The medical records of stage III colon cancer patients undergoing curative resection between February 2004 and December 2009 were reviewed. Results Of the 133 enrolled patients, 27 (20.3%) began adjuvant chemotherapy within 3 weeks of surgery, whereas 106 (79.7%) did after 3 weeks following surgery. Patients receiving chemotherapy within 3 weeks of surgery were less likely to experience recurrences than those beginning treatment later (11.1% vs. 33%, P = 0.018). The mean disease-free survival of patients receiving adjuvant therapy earlier was 54.6 months, whereas that of patients with later treatment was 43.5 months (P = 0.014). However, no significant differences in overall survival were observed between the 2 groups. Conclusion Adjuvant chemotherapy should be initiated as soon as a patients clinical condition allows. Patients with stage III colon cancer may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy initiated within 3 weeks of surgery.

Reduced-port robotic total mesorectal resection for rectal cancer using a single-port access: a technical note

Introduction Single-port laparoscopic surgery has some advantages, including improved cosmetic outcomes and minimized parietal trauma. However, pure single-port laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery is challenging because of the difficulties in creating triangulation and applying the laparoscopic staplers with sufficient distal margins in the narrow pelvic cavity. Recently, a reduced-port robotic operation with a robotic single-port access plus one wristed robotic arm for colon cancer was introduced to overcome the limitations of single-port laparoscopic rectal surgery. Aim Single-port laparoscopic surgery has some advantages, including improved cosmetic outcomes and minimized parietal trauma. However, the pure single-port laparoscopic rectal cancer operation is challenging. Recently, a reduced-port robotic operation with a robotic single-port access plus one wristed robotic arm for colon cancer was introduced to overcome the limitations of single-port laparoscopic rectal surgery. Material and methods We performed a single-port plus an additional port robotic operation using a robotic single-port access through the umbilical incision, and the wristed robotic instruments were inserted through an additional robotic port in the right lower quadrant. Results The total operative and docking times were 310 min and 25 min, respectively. The total number of lymph nodes harvested was 12, and the proximal and distal resection margins were 11.1 and 2 cm, respectively. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 12 uneventfully. Conclusions Based on a representative case, reduced-port robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer using the single-port access appears to be feasible and safe. This approach could overcome the limitations of single-port laparoscopic rectal surgery.

Single-port plus an additional port robotic complete mesocolic excision and intracorporeal anastomosis using a robotic stapler for right-sided colon cancer

The concept of complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation for colonic cancer has been recently introduced. The paper describes a technique of right-sided complete mesocolic excision and intracorporeal anastomosis by using a single-port robotic approach with an additional conventional robotic port. We performed a single-port plus an additional port robotic surgery using the Da Vinci Single-Site platform via the Pfannenstiel incision and the wristed robotic instruments via an additional robotic port in the left lower quadrant. The total operative and docking times were 280 and 25 minutes, respectively. The total number of lymph nodes harvested was 36 and the proximal and distal resection margins were 31 and 50 cm, respectively. Single-port plus an additional port robotic surgery for right-sided complete mesocolic excision and intracorporeal anastomosis appears to be feasible and safe. This system can overcome certain limitations of the previous robotic systems and conventional single-port laparoscopic surgery.

Single-Port Laparoscopic Interval Appendectomy for Perforated Appendicitis With a Periappendiceal Abscess

Purpose Nonoperative management followed by an interval appendectomy is a commonly used approach for treating patients with perforated appendicitis with abscess formation. As minimally-invasive surgery has developed, single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is increasingly being used to treat many conditions. We report our initial experience with this procedure using a multichannel single-port. Methods The study included 25 adults who underwent a single-port laparoscopic interval appendectomy for perforated appendicitis with periappendiceal abscess by using a single-port with or without needlescopic grasper between June 2014 and January 2016. Results Of the 25 patients, 9 (36%) required percutaneous drainage for a median of 7 days (5–14 days) after insertion, and 3 (12%) required conversion to reduced-port laparoscopic surgery with a 5-mm port insertion because of severe adhesions to adjacent organs. Of 22 patients undergoing SPLS, 13 underwent pure SPLS (52.0%) whereas 9 patients underwent SPLS with a 2-mm needle instrument (36.0%). Median operation time was 70 minutes (30–155 minutes), and a drainage tube was placed in 9 patients (36.0%). Median total length of incision was 2.5 cm (2.0–3.0 cm), and median time to soft diet initiation and length of stay in the hospital were 2 days (0–5 days) and 3 days (1–7 days), respectively. Two patients (8.0%) developed postoperative complications: 1 wound site bleeding and 1 surgical site infection. Conclusion Conservative management followed by a single-port laparoscopic interval appendectomy using a multichannel single-port appears feasible and safe for treating patients with acute perforated appendicitis with periappendiceal abscess.

Prognostic Significance of Tissue Leptin Expression in Colorectal Cancer Patients

Purpose Leptin is encoded by the ob gene and is involved in the control of food intake and energy expenditure. Recent studies have implicated leptin expression to be an indicator of tumor features and prognosis. The purpose of this study was to investigate the association of tissue expression of leptin with the clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes in colorectal cancer patients. Methods Patients who had undergone a curative surgical resection for a colorectal adenocarcinoma from 2000 to 2004 were included in the study. Immunohistochemical analyses of leptin expression were performed, and clinicopathological parameters were evaluated. Results Clinical data and tumor tissues of 146 patients were evaluated. The mean age was 68.6 ± 11.3 years, and 61.0% were men. Immunohistochemically, the rates of negative, weak, moderate, and strong leptin expression were 2.7% (4 of 146), 5.5% (8 of 146), 43.2% (63 of 146), and 48.6% (71 of 146), respectively. We compared the negative, weak, and moderate expression group (group A) with the strong expression group (group B). Leptin expression was inversely associated with nodal stage (P = 0.007) between the two groups. Leptin expression was not significantly associated with differentiation (P = 0.37), T stage (P = 0.16), and American Joint Committee on Cancer stage (P = 0.49), and no significant differences in the disease-free and the overall survivals (P = 0.78 and P = 0.61) were observed. Conclusion Results demonstrated an inverse association of nodal stage with high leptin expression. Higher leptin expression level might predict better oncologic outcome. However, further studies are warranted to identify the exact role of leptin expression in colorectal cancer.

Prognostic impact of programmed cell death ligand 1 expression on long‑term oncologic outcomes in colorectal cancer

The present study evaluated the association between programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression and long-term oncologic outcomes in colorectal cancer (CRC). PD-L1 expression was evaluated using immunohistochemistry in 175 patients who underwent surgical resection for CRC between September 1999 and August 2004. Patients were grouped according to PD-L1 expression, with 82 (46.9%) and 93 (53.1%) in the low and high PD-L1 expression groups, respectively. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates were significantly better in the high expression group compared with in the low expression group (OS: 48.2 vs. 32.9%, P=0.047; DFS: 43.3 vs. 32.9%, P=0.021). According to the Tumor-Node-Metastasis stage subgroups, the OS rates in the low and high expression groups, respectively, were 66.7 and 60.0% in stage I (P=0.715), 51.8 and 46.7% in stage II (P=0.789), 19.6 and 51.1% in stage III (P=0.011) and 9.1 and 0% in stage IV (P=0.005). The DFS rates in the low and high expression groups, respectively, were 66.7 and 60.0% in stage I (P=0.715), 51.8 and 46.7% in stage II (P=0.857), 19.6 and 38.3% in stage III (P=0.006) and 9.1 and 0% in stage IV (P=0.700). The systemic recurrence rate was significantly higher in the low expression group compared with in the high expression group (42.7 vs. 12.9%, respectively, P=0.030). Low PD-L1 expression was significantly associated with tumor relapse and poor prognosis in stage III CRC.