Robotic gastrectomy (RG) has always been a hot topic in the field of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer. More and more studies have confirmed that short- and long-term outcomes of RG are similar to those of laparoscopic gastrectomy. Robotic surgical systems have more advantages in specific regional lymph node dissection. More delicate operation can reduce intraoperative blood loss and the incidence of postoperative complications. Robotic surgical systems are also more ergonomically designed. However, there are also some problems such as high surgical cost, lack of tactile feedback and prolonged total operation time. In the future, robotic surgical system may be further developed in the direction of miniaturization, intelligence and modularity. At the same time, the robotic surgical system deeply integrated with artificial intelligence technology may realize the automation of some operation steps to some extent.
Humans ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects* ; Stomach Neoplasms/pathology* ; Artificial Intelligence ; Treatment Outcome ; Lymph Node Excision/adverse effects* ; Gastrectomy/adverse effects* ; Laparoscopy/adverse effects* ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Retrospective Studies

Radical gastrectomy combined with perioperative comprehensive treatment is the main curable strategy for gastric cancer patients, and postoperative complications are the issue that gastric surgeons have to face. Complications not only affect the short-term postoperative recovery, but also facilitate tumor recurrence or metastasis, thus resulting in poor prognosis. Therefore, unifying the diagnostic criteria for postoperative complications, bringing the surgeons' attention to complications, and understanding the potential mechanism of complications undermining long-term survival, will be helpful to the future improvement of the clinical diagnosis and treatment as well as prognosis for gastric cancer patients in China. Meanwhile, surgeons should constantly hone their operative skills, improve their sense of responsibility and empathy, and administer individualized perioperative management based on patients' general conditions, so as to minimize the occurrence of postoperative complications and their influence on prognosis.
Humans ; Stomach Neoplasms/pathology* ; Empathy ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery* ; Prognosis ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Surgeons ; Retrospective Studies

The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) or locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) has been a difficulty and challenge in the field of advanced rectal cancer, while pelvic exenteration (PE), as an important way to potentially achieve radical treatment of LARC and LRRC, has been shown to significantly improve the long-term prognosis of patients. The implementation of PE surgery requires precise assessment of the extent of invasion of LARC or LRRC and adequate preoperative preparation through multidisciplinary consultation before surgery. The lateral pelvis involves numerous tissues, blood vessels, and nerves, and resection is most difficult, and the ureteral and Marcille triangle approaches are recommended; while the supine transabdominal approach combined with intraoperative change to the prone jacket position facilitates adequate exposure of the surgical field and enables precise overall resection of the bony pelvis and pelvic floor muscle groups invaded by the tumor. Empty pelvic syndrome has always been an major problem to be solved during PE. The application of extracellular matrix biological mesh to reconstruct pelvic floor defects and isolate the abdominopelvic cavity is expected to reduce postoperative pelvic floor related complications. Reconstruction of the urinary system and important vessels after PE is essential, and the selection of appropriate reconstruction methods helps to improve the patient's postoperative quality of life, while more new methods are also being continuously explored.
Humans ; Pelvic Exenteration/adverse effects* ; Quality of Life ; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery* ; Pelvis/pathology* ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Rectal Neoplasms/pathology* ; Retrospective Studies ; Treatment Outcome

Objective: In this study, we aimed to investigate the prevalence of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) in patients who had survived for more than 5 years after sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer and to analyze its relationship with postoperative time. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, cross-sectional study. The study cohort comprised patients who had survived for at least 5 years (60 months) after undergoing sphincter- preserving radical resection of pathologically diagnosed rectal adenocarcinoma within 15 cm of the anal verge in the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital from January 2005 to May 2016. Patients who had undergone local resection, had permanent stomas, recurrent intestinal infection, local recurrence, history of previous anorectal surgery, or long- term preoperative defecation disorders were excluded. A LARS questionnaire was administered by telephone interview, points being allocated for incontinence for flatus (0-7 points), incontinence for liquid stools (0-3 points), frequency of bowel movements (0-5 points), clustering of stools (0-11 points), and urgency (0-16 points). The patients were allocated to three groups based on these scores: no LARS (0-20 points), minor LARS (21-29 points), and major LARS (30-42 points). The prevalence of LARS and major LARS in patients who had survived more than 5 years after surgery, correlation between postoperative time and LARS score, and whether postoperative time was a risk factor for major LARS and LARS symptoms were analyzed. Results: The median follow-up time of the 160 patients who completed the telephone interview was 97 (60-193) months; 81 (50.6%) of them had LARS, comprising 34 (21.3%) with minor LARS and 47 (29.4%) with major LARS. Spearman correlation analysis showed no significant correlation between LARS score and postoperative time (correlation coefficient α=-0.016, P=0.832). Multivariate analysis identified anastomotic height (RR=0.850, P=0.022) and radiotherapy (RR=5.760, P<0.001) as independent risk factors for major LARS; whereas the postoperative time was not a significant risk factor (RR=1.003, P=0.598). The postoperative time was also not associated with LARS score rank and frequency of bowel movements, clustering, or urgency (P>0.05). However, the rates of incontinence for flatus (3/31, P=0.003) and incontinence for liquid stools (8/31, P=0.005) were lower in patients who had survived more than 10 years after surgery. Conclusions: Patients with rectal cancer who have survived more than 5 years after sphincter-preserving surgery still have a high prevalence of LARS. We found no evidence of major LARS symptoms resolving over time.
Humans ; Rectal Neoplasms/pathology* ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Low Anterior Resection Syndrome ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Retrospective Studies ; Flatulence/complications* ; Anal Canal/pathology* ; Diarrhea ; Quality of Life

Objective: To methodically assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted total rectal mesenteric resection (RTME), laparoscopic-assisted total rectal mesenteric resection (laTME), and transanal total rectal mesenteric resection (taTME). Methods: A computer search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Ovid databases to identify English-language reports published between January 2017 and January 2022 that compared the clinical efficacy of the three surgical procedures of RTME, laTME, and taTME. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the NOS and JADAD scales for retrospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials, respectively. Direct meta-analysis and reticulated meta-analysis were performed using Review Manager software and R software, respectively. Results: Twenty-nine publications comprising 8,339 patients with rectal cancer were ultimately included. The direct meta-analysis indicated that the length of hospital stay was longer after RTME than after taTME, whereas according to the reticulated meta-analysis the length of hospital stay was shorter after taTME than after laTME (MD=-0.86, 95%CI: -1.70 to -0.096, P=0.036). Moreover, the incidence of anastomotic leak was lower after taTME than after RTME (OR=0.60, 95%CI: 0.39 to 0.91, P=0.018). The incidence of intestinal obstruction was also lower after taTME than after RTME (OR=0.55, 95%CI: 0.31 to 0.94, P=0.037). All of these differences were statistically significant (all P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the three surgical procedures regarding the number of lymph nodes cleared, length of the inferior rectal margin, or rate of positive circumferential margins (all P>0.05). An inconsistency test using nodal analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between the results of direct and indirect comparisons of the six outcome indicators (all P>0.05). Furthermore, we detected no significant overall inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence. Conclusion: taTME has advantages over RTME and laTME, in terms of radical and surgical short-term outcomes in patients with rectal cancer.
Humans ; Robotics ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects* ; Network Meta-Analysis ; Retrospective Studies ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/methods* ; Rectum/surgery* ; Rectal Neoplasms/pathology* ; Laparoscopy/methods* ; Treatment Outcome

Objective: To compare the short-term and long-term outcomes between transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (laTME) for mid-to-low rectal cancer and to evaluate the learning curve of taTME. Methods: This study was a retrospective cohort study. Firstly, consecutive patients undergoing total mesorectal excision who were registered in the prospective established database of Division of Colorectal Diseases, Department of General Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital during July 2014 to June 2020 were recruited. The enrolled patients were divided into taTME and laTME group. The demographic data, clinical characteristics, neoadjuvant treatment, intraoperative and postoperative complications, pathological results and follow-up data were extracted from the database. The primary endpoint was the incidence of anastomotic leakage and the secondary endpoints included the 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and the 3-year local recurrence rate. Independent t-test for comparison between groups of normally distributed measures; skewed measures were expressed as M (range). Categorical variables were expressed as examples (%) and the χ(2) or Fisher exact probability was used for comparison between groups. When comparing the incidence of anastomotic leakage, 5 variables including sex, BMI, clinical stage evaluated by MRI, distance from tumor to anal margin evaluated by MRI, and whether receiving neoadjuvant treatment were balanced by propensity score matching (PSM) to adjust confounders. Kaplan-Meier curve and Log-rank test were used to compare the DFS of two groups. Cox proportional hazard model was used to analyze and determine the independent risk factors affecting the DFS of patients with mid-low rectal cancer. Secondly, the data of consecutive patients undergoing taTME performed by the same surgical team (the trananal procedures were performed by the same main surgeon) from February 2017 to March 2021 were separately extracted and analyzed. The multidimensional cumulative sum (CUSUM) control chart was used to draw the learning curve of taTME. The outcomes of 'mature' taTME cases through learning curve were compared with laTME cases and the independent risk factors of DFS of 'mature' cases were also analyzed. Results: Two hundred and forty-three patients were eventually enrolled, including 182 undergoing laTME and 61 undergoing taTME. After PSM, both fifty-two patients were in laTME group and taTME group respectively, and patients of these two groups had comparable characteristics in sex, age, BMI, clinical tumor stage, distance from tumor to anal margin by MRI, mesorectal fasciae (MRF) and extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) by MRI and proportion of receiving neoadjuvant treatment. After PSM, as compared to laTME group, taTME group showed significantly longer operation time [(198.4±58.3) min vs. (147.9±47.3) min, t=-4.321, P<0.001], higher ratio of blood loss >100 ml during surgery [17.3% (9/52) vs. 0, P=0.003], higher incidence of anastomotic leakage [26.9% (14/52) vs. 3.8% (2/52), χ(2)=10.636, P=0.001] and higher morbidity of overall postoperative complications [55.8%(29/52) vs. 19.2% (10/52), χ(2)=14.810, P<0.001]. Total harvested lymph nodes and circumferential resection margin involvement were comparable between two groups (both P>0.05). The median follow-up for the whole group was 24 (1 to 72) months, with 4 cases lost, giving a follow-up rate of 98.4% (239/243). The laTME group had significantly better 3-year DFS than taTME group (83.9% vs. 73.0%, P=0.019), while the 3-year local recurrence rate was similar in two groups (1.7% vs. 3.6%, P=0.420). Multivariate analysis showed that and taTME surgery (HR=3.202, 95%CI: 1.592-6.441, P=0.001) the postoperative pathological staging of UICC stage II (HR=13.862, 95%CI:1.810-106.150, P=0.011), stage III (HR=8.705, 95%CI: 1.104-68.670, P=0.040) were independent risk factors for 3-year DFS. Analysis of taTME learning curve revealed that surgeons would cross over the learning stage after performing 28 cases. To compare the two groups excluding the cases within the learning stage, there was no significant difference between two groups after PSM no matter in the incidence of anastomotic leakage [taTME: 6.7%(1/15); laTME: 5.3% (2/38), P=1.000] or overall complications [taTME: 33.3%(5/15), laTME: 26.3%(10/38), P=0.737]. The taTME was still an independent risk factor of 3-year DFS only analyzing patients crossing over the learning stage (HR=5.351, 95%CI:1.666-17.192, P=0.005), and whether crossing over the learning stage was not the independent risk factor of 3-year DFS for mid-low rectal cancer patients undergoing taTME (HR=0.954, 95%CI:0.227-4.017, P=0.949). Conclusions: Compared with conventional laTME, taTME may increase the risk of anastomotic leakage and compromise the oncological outcomes. Performing taTME within the learning stage may significantly increase the risk of postoperative anastomotic leakage.
Anastomotic Leak/etiology* ; Humans ; Laparoscopy/methods* ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Prognosis ; Prospective Studies ; Rectal Neoplasms/pathology* ; Rectum/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery/methods* ; Treatment Outcome

Pancreatic cancer was considered to be one of the contraindications of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy, but a large number of studies have shown that laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe and feasible for surgeons who have passed the learning curve in high-volume hospitals.Laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy can provide high-resolution intraoperative exploration and unique operative perspective,which can help to reduce intraoperative and postoperative complications,dissect lymph nodes more thoroughly and reduce intraoperative metastasis of tumors,so as to promote the development of postoperative adjuvant therapy and improve patients' quality of life.However,due to the long learning curve and unclear survival outcome, the application of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients with pancreatic cancer is still controversial.This article summarizes the existing literature and the experience of the author's team,exploring the value and controversy of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.Further,suggestions are put forward on how to improve the laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy in China.
Humans ; Laparoscopy/adverse effects* ; Operative Time ; Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology* ; Pancreaticoduodenectomy/adverse effects* ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Quality of Life ; Retrospective Studies

Objective: To explore the promotion effect of laparoscopic standardized surgery for gastric cancer observational in some regional medical centers in Shanghai. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was carried out. Eleven regional medical centers in Shanghai received the promotion program of laparoscopic standardized surgery for gastric cancer, which was led by Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine (Shanghai Minimally Invasive Surgery Center) from January to December 2020. Clinicopathological data of gastric cancer patients treated at these 11 regional medical centers before and after the promotion program were collected. Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients undergoing laparoscopic distal gastrectomy or total gastrectomy; gastric cancer confirmed by pathology; without distant metastasis or peritoneal metastasis. Patients who did not undergo laparoscopic D2 radical resection, or received neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery, or without complete clinical data were excluded. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery from January to December 2019 were included in the pre-promotion group (46 cases). Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery from January to December 2021 were included in the post-promotion group (102 cases). In addition, patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery at Ruijin Hospital from January 2021 to December were included in the control group (138 cases). The baseline data, perioperative measurements postoperative complications, and pathological results of the three groups were analyzed and compared. Results: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics among the three groups (all P>0.05). Compared with the pre-promotion group, the operation time in post-promotion group was significantly shorter [(207.3±36.0) minutes vs. (254.2±47.1) minutes, t=7.038,P<0.001], and the number of harvested lymph node was significantly more (24.4±12.2 vs. 18.9±5.5, t=2.900, P=0.004). However, there were no significant differences in the extent of resection, time to fluid intake, and postoperative hospital stay between the two groups (all P>0.05). Compared with the control group, the operation time [(207.3±36.0) minutes vs (172.6±26.0) minutes, t=8.281, P<0.001], time to fluid intake [(6.3±3.2) days than (5.5±3.0) days, t=2.029, P=0.044], and the postoperative hospital stay [(14.3±5.6) days vs. (10.1±4.8) days, t=6.036, P<0.001] in the post- promotion group were still longer. Total gastrectomy was less common in the post-promotion group compared with the control group [18 cases (17.6%) vs. 41 cases (29.7%), χ²=7.380, P=0.007]. However, there was no significant difference in the number of harvested lymph node between the two groups (P>0.05). The morbidity of postoperative complication in the post-promotion group (9.8%, 10/102) was significantly lower than that in the pre-promotion group (23.9%, 11/46) (χ²=5.183, P=0.023), while above morbidity was not significantly different between the post-promotion group and the control group [9.8% vs. 6.5% (9/138), χ²=0.867, P=0.352]. Conclusion: After the promotion of laparoscopic standardized surgery for gastric cancer in regional medical centers, the standardization degree of surgery has been improved, and the morbidity of postoperative complication decreases. Laparoscopic standardized surgery for gastric cancer can be promoted to more regional medical centers.
China ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Lymph Node Excision/methods* ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms/pathology* ; Treatment Outcome

Objective: To investigate the safety and feasibility of pure single-port laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (SDG) in the radical treatment of gastric cancer. Methods: A retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted. Subjects were included in the study who were diagnosed by imaging examination and pathology as early distal gastric cancer, no distant metastasis, no serious cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases and underwent radical gastrectomy. Patients with incomplete clinical data, unplanned second operation and complicated with other tumors were excluded. A retrospective analysis was performed on 15 patients who underwent pure SDG radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer from September 2020 to March 2022, namely the SDG group. Fifty-eight patients undergoing conventional five-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer were included as the control group, namely the LDG group. As it was found that there was a statistically significant difference in baseline body mass index (BMI) between the two groups [(20.8±0.8) kg/m² vs. (22.9±0.4) kg/m², t=2.456, P=0.017], one-to-one PSM was conducted between the two groups. Then the basic conditions of the two groups of patients in perioperative period were analyzed and compared. Results: There were 14 patients after PSM in the SDG group and the LDG group respectively. There were no significant differences in intraoperative bleeding, number of lymph nodes dissected, time to the first postoperative feeding and postoperative complications between the SDG group and the LDG group (all P>0.05). Compared with LDG group, the operative time in the SDG group was longer [(163.6±6.3) minutes vs. (133.9±4.4) minutes, t=3.866, P=0.001]. However, in the SDG group, time to the first flatus [(2.6±0.2) days vs. (3.3±0.1) days, t=3.053,P=0.005], time to drainage tube removal [(4.5±0.8) days vs. (6.9±0.2) days, t=2.914, P=0.007)] and postoperative hospital stay [(6.7±0.1) days vs. (9.2±1.0) days, t=2.534,P=0.018)] were significantly shorter, and pain score at the first postoperative day evaluated by NRS (1.86±0.29 vs. 2.86±0.35, t=2.205, P=0.037) was significantly lower as compared to the LDG group. Four patients in SDG group did not receive peritoneal drainage tube placement after surgery, and they all recovered safely. Conclusion: The pure single-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer is safe and feasible, and has an advantage over the LDG in postoperative recovery.
Feasibility Studies ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Humans ; Laparoscopy/methods* ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms/pathology* ; Treatment Outcome

Objective: To investigate the efficacy of transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach (TOETVA) assisted with submental mini-incision in early thyroid papillary carcinoma. Methods: A total of 63 patients with early papillary thyroid carcinoma (cT1N0M0) were included who underwent TOETVA from December 2019 to May 2021 in Department of Thyroid Surgery of the Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University. There were 4 males and 59 females, aged from 17 to 46 years old. Of those 36 patients received traditional TOETVA as control and 27 patients accepted modified TOETVA assisted with submental mini-incision. The clinical outcomes of patients in two groups were compared. Chi-square test and t test were used in statistical analyses. Results: Compared to control group, modified TOETVA group had the less mean operation time [(146.63±38.62) minutes vs. (167.78±36.71) minutes, t=-2.21, P=0.031], the shorter time required for returning to normal diet after operation [(2.11±0.89) days vs. (2.72±1.16) days, t=-2.28, P=0.026], and the lower probability of mandibular numbness (0 vs. 16.67%, χ²=4.97, P=0.026). There was no significant difference between two groups in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, number of central lymph nodes dissection, and postoperative complications such as gas embolism, postoperative bleeding, postoperative infection, skin burns, subcutaneous effusion and so on(all P>0.05). After 6 months of operation, the thyroid ultrasound of the patients in two groups showed no recurrence, and the patients were satisfied with their surgical incision appearances. Conclusion: Both the modified and traditional TOETVA show similar efficacies for treatments of early thyroid papillary carcinoma, but the modified TOETVA can reduce the operation time and improve the quality of life.
Adolescent ; Adult ; Carcinoma, Papillary/surgery* ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Postoperative Complications/etiology* ; Quality of Life ; Surgical Wound/surgery* ; Thyroid Cancer, Papillary/surgery* ; Thyroid Neoplasms/pathology* ; Thyroidectomy/adverse effects* ; Young Adult