Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Short-term outcomes following reduced-port, single-port, and multi-port laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: tailored laparoscopic approaches based on tumor size and nodal status

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Surgeons have recently developed more minimally invasive surgical procedures to reduce surgical stress and improve cosmesis. Although single-port laparoscopic colectomy (SPLC) has potential benefits over multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC), there are concerns about the increased technical difficulties associated with SPLC. Therefore, we attempted reduced-port laparoscopic colectomy (RPLC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the difference in perioperative outcome following tailored laparoscopic approaches for colon cancer on the basis of tumor characteristics.

Methods

The prospectively collected data of 170 patients who underwent only minimally invasive colectomy for colon cancer from July 2010 to June 2013 were reviewed. The MPLC, SPLC, and RPLC groups comprised 92 (54.1 %), 40 (23.5 %), and 38 (22.4 %) patients, respectively.

Results

The number of harvested lymph nodes was significantly higher in the RPLC group than in the MPLC and SPLC groups (29.9 ± 21.5, 21.9 ± 12.1, and 24.2 ± 13.8, respectively; p = 0.027). The mean operating time was significantly different among the MPLC, SPLC, and RPLC groups (243.5 ± 59.0, 207.2 ± 49.6, and 216.2 ± 53.7 min, respectively; p = 0.001). The time to first flatus was also significantly different among the MPLC, SPLC, and RPLC groups (3.1 ± 1.2, 3.6 ± 1.3, and 3.4 ± 1.1 days, respectively; p = 0.039). No significant differences in the other short-term surgical outcomes were observed among the three groups.

Conclusions

SPLC and RPLC according to tailored laparoscopic approaches for colon cancer appear to be beneficial in terms of operative time and lymph node retrieval, and may be considered as surgical options in laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer patients with favorable tumor characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS (1991) Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc 1(3):144–150

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lacy AM, García-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, Castells A, Taurá P, Piqué JM, Visa J (2002) Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 359(9325):2224–2229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM, UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group (2007) Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol 25(21):3061–3068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350(20):2050–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW Jr, Hellinger M, Flanagan R Jr, Peters W, Nelson H, Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2007) Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg 246(4):655–662

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown JM, Guillou PJ (2010) Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 97(11):1638–1645

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hasegawa F, Kawamura YJ, Sasaki J, Tsujinaka S, Konishi F (2013) Oncological 3-port laparoscopic colectomy by 1 surgeon and 1 camera operator: a preliminary report. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 23(2):176–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Park JM, Suh SW, Kwak JM, Kim J, Kim SH (2011) Three-port laparoscopy-assisted colectomy for colorectal cancer using external traction with suspension suture. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 21(5):e249–e252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bresadola F, Pasqualucci A, Donini A, Chiarandini P, Anania G, Terrosu G, Sistu MA, Pasetto A (1999) Elective transumbilical compared with standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Eur J Surg 165(1):29–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Piskun G, Rajpal S (1999) Transumbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy utilizes no incisions outside the umbilicus. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 9(4):361–364

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Rispoli G, Armellino MF, Esposito C (2002) One-trocar appendectomy. Surg Endosc 16(5):833–835

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaouk JH, Haber GP, Goel RK, Desai MM, Aron M, Rackley RR, Moore C, Gill IS (2008) Single-port laparoscopic surgery in urology: initial experience. Urology 71(1):3–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Remzi FH, Kirat HT, Kaouk JH, Geisler DP (2008) Single-port laparoscopy in colorectal surgery. Color Dis 10(8):823–826

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Choi SI, Lee KY, Park SJ, Lee SH (2010) Single port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with D3 dissection for advanced colon cancer. World J Gastroenterol 16(2):275–278

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Poon JT, Cheung CW, Fan JK, Lo OS, Law WL (2012) Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic colectomy for colonic neoplasm: a randomized, controlled trial. Surg Endosc 26(10):2729–2734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lim SW, Kim HJ, Kim CH, Huh JW, Kim YJ, Kim HR (2013) Umbilical incision laparoscopic colectomy with one additional port for colorectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol 17(2):193–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Choi EK, Yoo IR, Park HL, Choi HS, Han EJ, Kim SH, Chung SK, Joo Hyun O (2012) Value of surveillance (18)F-FDG PET/CT in colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional imaging studies. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 46(3):189–195

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim SJ, Choi BJ, Lee SC (2014) Overview of single-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancers: past, present, and the future. World J Gastroenterol 20(4):997–1004

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Ishii Y, Hasegawa H, Endo T, Ochiai H, Okabayashi K, Kitagawa Y (2013) Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: feasibility based on our early experience. Asian J Endosc Surg 6(3):249–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hirano Y, Hattori M, Douden K, Shimizu S, Sato Y, Maeda K, Hashizume Y (2012) Single-incision plus one port laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer as a reduced port surgery. Scand J Surg 101(4):283–286

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Costedio MM, Aytac E, Gorgun E, Kiran RP, Remzi FH (2012) Reduced port versus conventional laparoscopic total proctocolectomy and ileal J pouch-anal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 26(12):3495–3499

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Champagne BJ, Lee EC, Leblanc F, Stein SL, Delaney CP (2011) Single-incision vs straight laparoscopic segmental colectomy: a case-controlled study. Dis Colon Rectum 54(2):183–186

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kurmann A, Vorburger SA, Candinas D, Beldi G (2011) Operation time and body mass index are significant risk factors for surgical site infection in laparoscopic sigmoid resection: a multicenter study. Surg Endosc 25(11):3531–3534

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hübner M, Diana M, Zanetti G, Eisenring MC, Demartines N, Troillet N (2011) Surgical site infections in colon surgery: the patient, the procedure, the hospital, and the surgeon. Arch Surg 146(11):1240–1245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim SJ, Ryu GO, Choi BJ, Kim JG, Lee KJ, Lee SC, Oh ST (2011) The short-term outcomes of conventional and single-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg 254(6):933–940

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hasegawa H, Kabeshima Y, Watanabe M, Yamamoto S, Kitajima M (2003) Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open colectomy for advanced colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 17(4):636–640

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lim SB, Choi HS, Jeong SY, Park JG (2008) Feasibility of laparoscopic techniques as the surgical approach of choice for primary colorectal cancer: an analysis of 570 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc 22(12):2588–2595

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Braga M, Vignali A, Gianotti L, Zuliani W, Radaelli G, Gruarin P, Dellabona P, Di Carlo V (2002) Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: a randomized trial on short-term outcome. Ann Surg 236(6):759–766, discussion 767

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Le Voyer TE, Sigurdson ER, Hanlon AL, Mayer RJ, Macdonald JS, Catalano PJ, Haller DG (2003) Colon cancer survival is associated with increasing number of lymph nodes analyzed: a secondary survey of intergroup trial INT-0089. J Clin Oncol 21(15):2912–2919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Park SJ, Lee KY, Kang BM, Choi SI, Lee SH (2013) Initial experience of single-port laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon cancer. World J Surg 37(3):652–656

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Rosati CM, Boni L, Dionigi G, Cassinotti E, Giavarini L, David G, Rausei S, Rovera F, Dionigi R (2013) Single port versus standard laparoscopic right colectomies: results of a case-control retrospective study on one hundred patients. Int J Surg 11(Suppl 1):S50–S53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The statistical analysis was supported by the Clinical Trial Center of Inje University Busan Paik.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jin Yong Shin.

Ethics declarations

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the ethics committee of Inje University Haeundae Paik Hospital (institutional review board code: 129792-2014-123).

Informed consent

All patients provided written informed consent before undergoing the surgical procedure.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yu, H., Shin, J.Y. Short-term outcomes following reduced-port, single-port, and multi-port laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: tailored laparoscopic approaches based on tumor size and nodal status. Int J Colorectal Dis 31, 115–122 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-015-2399-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-015-2399-z

Keywords

Navigation