Search

ObjectiveThe value of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) compared with laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) for pancreatic and periampullary tumors is controversial. This study aims to assess the available literature and compare the short outcomes of RPD and LPD.MethodsThe PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify available research published up to 24 July, 2024. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.ResultsSeventeen studies with a total of 9417 patients (RPD group: 3334 patients; LPD group: 6083 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. The RPD group had lower overall morbidity (RR, 0.79), conversion (RR, 0.29) and blood transfusion rates (RR, 0.61), shorter length of stay (MD, -0.72 days), and higher number of harvested lymph nodes (MD, 0.62) than the LPD group. There were no significant differences in 90-day mortality (RR, 0.89), major complications (RR, 0.87), operative time (MD, -3.74 mins), blood loss (MD, -24.14 mL), reoperation (RR, 0.94), bile leak (RR, 0.62), postoperative pancreatic hemorrhage (RR, 0.96), postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR, 0.74), delayed gastric emptying (RR, 1.24), and R0 resection (RR, 1.00) between the groups.ConclusionsCompared with LPD, RPD for pancreatic and periampullary tumors could be safe and effective, and it has superior surgical outcomes. Further randomized controlled trials to verify the potential advantages of RPD over LPD are necessary.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=581133, identifier CRD42024581133.

ObjectiveThe superiority of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) in obese patients remains controversial. The study aims to assess the available literature and compare the perioperative outcomes of LLR and OLR for liver tumors in obese patients.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies comparing LLR and OLR. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.ResultsNine studies were included, with a total of 1116 patients (LLR group: 482 patients; OLR group: 634 patients). Compared with OLR, LLR has lower overall morbidity (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.34, 0.64), major complications (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25, 0.82), surgical site infection (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07, 0.48), bile leak (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22, 0.95), less blood loss (MD, -329.12 mL; 95% CI, -623.35, -34.88), and shorter length of stay (MD, -5.20 days; 95% CI, -7.43, -2.97). There were no significant differences in mortality, operation time, liver failure, and blood transfusion between the two groups.ConclusionsLLR for obese patients is safe and feasible. Compared to OLR, it offers better short-term outcomes. Further randomized controlled trials to verify the potential advantages of LLR over OLR are warranted.

BackgroundLymph node ratio has garnered increasing attention as a prognostic marker for rectal cancer; however, few studies have investigated the relationship between lymph node ratio and rectal cancer recurrence. Additionally, Carbon Nanoparticle tracking is a safe and effective strategy for locating tumors and tracking lymph nodes. However, no studies have reported the relationship between Carbon Nanoparticles and rectal cancer recurrence.MethodsPatients with stage III rectal cancer who underwent radical resection between January 2016 and 2020 were analyzed. The primary outcome was tumor recurrence. 269 patients with stage III rectal cancer were included in this study. The effects of lymph node ratio, Carbon Nanoparticles, and other clinicopathological factors on rectal cancer recurrence were assessed using univariate, multivariate analyses and the t-test.ResultsUnivariate analysis determined tumor recurrence using cytokeratin 19 fragment, CA-199, CEA, N-stage, positive lymph nodes, total lymph nodes, and lymph node ratio(positive/total); with the lymph node ratio being the most relevant. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis determined lymph node ratio =0.38 as the optimal cutoff value. The analysis of lymph node ratio ≥0.38 and

BackgroundIn two facilities in Chongqing, this research sought to retrospectively evaluate the effects of perineal wound infection on survival after laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (LAPR) of rectal cancer.MethodsTo obtain clinical information on patients who underwent LAPR between January 2013 and December 2021, we performed a multicenter cohort study. A total of 473 patients were enrolled: 314 in the non-infection group and 159 in the group with perineal infection. The general data, perioperative conditions, and tumor outcomes between groups were analyzed. The infection rates, recurrence rates, and survival rates of the two centers were compared.ResultsThe age, height, weight, body mass index (BMI), preoperative complications, preoperative treatment, and intraoperative conditions of patients in the LAPR infection group were not statistically different from those in the non-infection group. The percentage of men, typical postoperative hospital stay, length of initial postoperative therapy, and recurrence and metastasis rates were all considerably higher in the infection group than those in the non-infection group. Wound infection was an independent factor affecting tumor recurrence and metastasis after LAPR as well as an independent factor shortening patient survival time according to multivariate analysis. The incidence of wound infection, the rate of recurrence, and the rate of mortality did not vary significantly across sites.ConclusionWound infection after LAPR increases the mean postoperative hospital stay, prolongs the time to first postoperative treatment, and decreases the disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Therefore, decreasing the rate of LAPR wound infection is expected to shorten the postoperative hospital stay and prolong the patient DFS and OS. Patients with postoperative infection may require intensive adjuvant therapy.

Hypoperfusion is the main cause of anastomotic leakage (AL) following colorectal surgery. The conventional method for evaluating anastomotic perfusion is to observe color change and active bleeding of the resection margin of the intestine and the pulsation of mesenteric vessels. However, the accuracy of this method is low, which may be due to insufficient observation time. A novel surgical procedure that separates the mesentery in advance at the intended transection site can delay the observation of anastomotic perfusion, and can potentially detect more anastomotic sites with insufficient vascular supply and reduce the rate of AL. This study aimed to investigate the effects of a novel surgical procedure on AL following sigmoid colon and rectal cancer surgeries. A total of 343 patients who underwent rectal and sigmoid colon cancer surgeries were included in the study. From August 2021 to June 2022, patients with sigmoid colon or rectal cancer underwent a new surgical procedure of pre-division of the mesentery (PDM) at the intended transection site (PDM group). Patients with colorectal cancer who underwent conventional surgical procedures from August 2018 to July 2021 were categorized as the non-PDM group. Symptomatic AL (SAL) within 30 days and other outcomes were retrospectively analyzed using propensity score matching and compared between the two groups. The incidences of SAL were 1.3% and 11.3% in the PDM and non-PDM groups, respectively. PDM significantly reduced the SAL rate in sigmoid colon and rectal cancer surgeries (P = 0.009). The incidence of total postoperative complications (P < 0.05) was significantly lower in the PDM group than that in the non-PDM group. There were no significant differences between the two groups for operative time (P = 0.662), intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.651), intraoperative blood transfusion (P = 0.316), and intensive care rate (P = 1). The length of postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.010) and first exhaust (P = 0.001) and defecation time (P < 0.05) were shorter in the PDM group than in the non-PDM group. PDM can effectively prevent AL, and this procedure can be safely performed in sigmoid colon and rectal cancer surgeries.