» Articles » PMID: 30235691

Outcomes of Trans-anal Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Combined with Laparoscopic Anterior Resection for Sigmoid and Rectal Carcinoma: An Observational Study

Overview
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2018 Sep 22
PMID 30235691
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Colorectal carcinoma is currently the third most frequent cancer worldwide. Conventional open surgery was replaced by laparoscopic anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for the treatment of sigmoid and rectal carcinomas; however, it needed an incision to harvest the specimen, which contributed to complications. In 2013, trans-anal natural orifice specimen extraction laparoscopic anterior resection (Ta-NOSE-LAR) to treat sigmoid and rectal carcinoma was performed in our hospital for the first time. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of Ta-NOSE-LAR in sigmoid and rectal carcinoma.Seventy-three patients diagnosed with sigmoid and rectal carcinoma were enrolled between September 2013 and June 2016. Thirty-five patients underwent Ta-NOSE-LAR, whereas the others underwent traditional laparoscopic anterior resection (LAR). We compared the operative data, postoperative complications, pathological evaluation results, and incision-related complications between the 2 groups.Our result showed that the operative time, specimen length, tumor size, amount of total lymph nodes, and lymph node metastasis between the 2 groups were not statistically different. Further, without abdominal scaring for harvesting the specimen, the operative blood loss (49.29 ± 14.63 vs 69.29 ± 13.54 mL, P < .001) and post-operation hospital stay (5.77 ± 0.94 vs 6.76 ± 0.75 days, P < .001) of the Ta-NOSE-LAR group were less than those of the LAR group. Besides, the follow-up data showed that 2 patients were lost to follow-up, and 1 patient had liver metastasis 2 years after surgery in the LAR group, whereas the others showed no regional recurrence, distant metastases, or critical complications.Ta-NOSE-LAR is a valuable and alternative surgical method to treat sigmoid and rectal carcinoma, with the advantages of being a scarless procedure and having a lower post-operation hospital stay duration.

Citing Articles

Short-term clinical outcomes and five-year survival analysis of laparoscopic-assisted transanal natural orifice specimen extraction versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid and rectal cancer: a single-center retrospective study.

Zheng Z, Kang F, Yang Y, Fang Y, Yao K, Zeng Q Front Surg. 2024; 10:1340869.

PMID: 38234452 PMC: 10791885. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1340869.


Laparoscopic natural orifice specimen extraction, a minimally invasive surgical technique for mid-rectal cancers: Retrospective single-center analysis and single-surgeon experience of selected patients.

Muhammad S, Gao Y, Guan X, QingChao T, Fei S, Wang G J Int Med Res. 2022; 50(11):3000605221134472.

PMID: 36440806 PMC: 9712411. DOI: 10.1177/03000605221134472.


Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis.

Brincat S, Lauri J, Cini C BJS Open. 2022; 6(3).

PMID: 35640267 PMC: 9155237. DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrac074.


The safety and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery versus laparoscopic NOSE for sigmoid and rectal cancer.

Xu S, Liu K, Chen X, Yao H Surg Endosc. 2021; 36(1):222-235.

PMID: 33475847 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-08260-6.


Safety and Feasibility of Robotic Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery in Colorectal Neoplasms During the Initial Learning Curve.

Yao H, Li T, Chen W, Lei S, Liu K, Jin X Front Oncol. 2020; 10:1355.

PMID: 33072544 PMC: 7533530. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01355.


References
1.
Pucciarelli S, Zorzi M, Gennaro N, Gagliardi G, Restivo A, Saugo M . In-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission, and length of hospital stay after surgery for primary colorectal cancer: A national population-based study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017; 43(7):1312-1323. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.03.003. View

2.
Andres G, Garcia-Mediero J, Garcia-Tello A, Arance I, Cabrera P, Angulo J . The best option: Umbilical LESS radical nephrectomy with vaginal extraction. Actas Urol Esp. 2014; 39(3):188-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.acuro.2014.05.007. View

3.
Feinberg A, Chesney T, Acuna S, Sammour T, Quereshy F . Oncologic Outcomes Following Laparoscopic versus Open Resection of pT4 Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016; 60(1):116-125. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000641. View

4.
Kvasha A, Hadary A, Biswas S, Szvalb S, Willenz U, Waksman I . Novel Totally Laparoscopic Endolumenal Rectal Resection With Transanal Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction (NOSE) Without Rectal Stump Opening: A Modification of Our Recently Published Clean Surgical Technique in a Porcine Model. Surg Innov. 2014; 22(3):245-51. DOI: 10.1177/1553350614540812. View

5.
Widmar M, Keskin M, Beltran P, Nash G, Guillem J, Temple L . Incisional hernias after laparoscopic and robotic right colectomy. Hernia. 2016; 20(5):723-8. PMC: 5025379. DOI: 10.1007/s10029-016-1518-2. View