Single-operator-conducted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) for sigmoid colon cancer
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER:
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9610632 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Minimally invasive colorectal surgery is currently well-accepted, with open techniques being reserved for very difficult cases. Laparoscopic colectomy has been proven to have lower mortality, complication, and ostomy rates; a shorter median length of stay; and lower overall costs when compared to its open counterpart. This trend is seen in both benign and malignant indications. Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in colorectal surgery was first described in the early 1990s. Three recent meta-analyses comparing transabdominal extraction against NOSES concluded that NOSES was superior in terms of overall postoperative complications, recovery of gastrointestinal function, postoperative pain, aesthetics, and hospital stay. However, NOSES was associated with a longer operative time. Herein, we present our technique of robotic NOSES anterior resection using the da Vinci Xi platform in diverticular disease and sigmoid colon cancers.
| S-EPMC10781600 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGastric cancer and colon cancer are rarely seen in clinic, but there are still related reports. For gastric cancer and simultaneous colon cancer, surgical resection is the main treatment. Traditional surgery requires an incision from xiphoid process to pubic symphysis. With the progress of minimally invasive technology, laparoscopic surgery is also used in the treatment of gastric cancer, but also in the abdominal incision to remove specimens and in vitro anastomosis of digestive tract. Taking specimens through the natural cavity as a new surgical method can not only reduce the abdominal incision, but also reduce the occurrence of wound-related complications. Here, we report a patient with gastric cancer and colon cancer who was treated in our hospital.Case summaryWe report a series of patients with gastric cancer and colon cancer. upper abdominal pain was treated in our hospital for 6 months. electronic gastroscopy showed large irregular ulcers on the lesser curvature of the gastric antrum and biopsy showed poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma of the gastric antrum. The enhanced CT of abdomen and pelvis showed irregular thickening of gastric antrum wall, irregular thickening of sigmoid colon wall and no obvious enlarged lymph nodes around. Further electronic enteroscopy showed that the sigmoid colon showed cauliflower protuberance, the intestinal cavity was slightly narrow, the intestinal wall was stiff, and the biopsy pathology showed moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon. No obvious abnormality was found in serological tumor indexes. We diagnosed gastric cancer with sigmoid colon cancer and the patient received Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy and sigmoidectomy combined with natural orifice specimen extraction surgery. At present, 12 months after operation, no clear tumor recurrence was found in the metastasis.ConclusionWe should improve the understanding of gastric cancer and sigmoid cancer and combine examination with pathology to avoid misdiagnosis as metastatic cancer. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy should be performed for tumors with no serosa invasion, body mass index <30 and tumor diameter <6.5 cm. Sigmoidectomy combined with natural nostril sampling is feasible.
| S-EPMC9213650 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In recent years, natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in the treatment of colorectal cancer has attracted widespread attention. The potential benefits of NOSES including reduction in postoperative pain and wound complications, less use of postoperative analgesic, faster recovery of bowel function, shorter length of hospital stay, better cosmetic and psychological effect have been described in colorectal surgery. Despite significant decrease in surgical trauma of NOSES have been observed, the potential pitfalls of this technique have been demonstrated. Particularly, several issues including bacteriological concerns, oncological outcomes and patient selection are raised with this new technique. Therefore, it is urgent and necessary to reach a consensus as an industry guideline to standardize the implementation of NOSES in colorectal surgery. After three rounds of discussion by all members of the International Alliance of NOSES, the consensus is finally completed, which is also of great significance to the long-term progress of NOSES worldwide.
| S-EPMC6375350 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNatural orifice specimen extraction surgeries (NOSES) have been applied to colorectal cancer (CRC). Different types of NOSES have been proposed. Traditional laparoscopic CRC surgeries (non-NOSES) have been widely adopted in clinical practice. Therefore, the safety and feasibility of NOSES could be clarified by comparing with non-NOSES.MethodsConsecutive cases who underwent NOSE or non-NOSE rectal surgeries were retrospectively collected at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2018. Other inclusion criteria included patients with adenocarcinoma of the rectum within 15 cm of the anal verge, over the age of 18 and undergoing primary laparoscopic rectal resection. Patients who were lost to follow-up or had incomplete information were excluded. Basic characteristics including gender, tumor location, age, staging, treatment, and Body Mass Index (BMI) were analyzed. Short-term outcomes including comorbidities, intra-operative blood loss, hospital stay, gas exhaust time were compared between different NOSES and non-NOSES groups. Long-term outcomes including overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were also analyzed. Patients were followed-up during the inpatient period, at an outpatient clinic, or by phone call.ResultsA total of 196 NOSES cases and 243 non-NOSES cases were included. There was a sex difference between the two groups and other factors were comparable. Cases were divided into NOSES groups [including extra-abdominal resection (EVER), specimen extraction and extra-abdominal resection (EXER), and intra-abdominal resection and specimen extraction (IREX)] and non-NOSES groups. Differences in sex (P=0.016), BMI (with mean of 22.08, 22.00, 22.53, and 23.26 kg/m2, P=0.003), and staging (P=0.008) were observed between the four groups. There was a difference in the intra-operative blood loss between NOSES and non-NOSES groups (57.05±62.78, 52.65±68.19, 36.52±43.99 vs. 76.12±90.11 mL, P=0.002), in which NOSES groups had less blood loss. Furthermore, NOSES groups showed a better post-operative gas exhaust time (54.68±37.80, 45.06±24.69, 47.91±28.93 vs. 56.94±27.69 hours, P=0.012). NOSES groups also had fewer ileostomies (17 vs. 37, P=0.003). There was no difference in the long-term DFS and OS between the two groups.ConclusionsNOSES in rectal cancer showed better short-term outcomes and had comparable long-term outcomes compared with non-NOSE surgeries.
| S-EPMC9096365 | biostudies-literature
Project description:One of the major criticisms of laparoscopic colectomy is the requirement of an additional mini laparotomy to remove the resected specimen. This may be associated with postoperative pain and wound complications. Therefore, the use of a natural orifice as a delivery route for the specimen extraction without a laparotomy incision can subsequently reduce the risk of wound complications. In this video, we demonstrate the natural orifice specimen extraction procedure with a side-to-end single-stapling colorectal anastomosis.
| S-EPMC8985621 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNatural orifice specimen extraction surgery is a novel technique of minimally invasive surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety of laparoscopic anterior resection with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE-LAR) and abdominal incision specimen extraction (AISE-LAR) for sigmoid or rectum tumors.MethodsMEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Scopus, and ClinicalTrials databases were systematically searched for related articles up to August 2019. The primary outcomes included postoperative complications (overall postoperative complication, incision-related complication, anastomotic fistula, and severe complication) and pathologic results (lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, and distal resection edge). The statistical analysis was performed on STATA 12.0 software.ResultsTen studies comprising 1787 patients were used for meta-analysis. Compared with AISE-LAR, NOSE-LAR had more advantages in terms of overall postoperative complication (odds ratio (OR) = 0.65 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.90; P = 0.01)), incision-related complication (OR = 0.13 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.35; P < 0.01)), distal resection edge (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.17 cm (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.33 cm; P = 0.02)), recovery of gastrointestinal function (WMD = - 0.38 day (95% CI, - 0.70 to - 0.06 day; P = 0.02 )), pain scores in postoperative day 1 (WMD = - 1.64 (95% CI, - 2.31 to - 0.98; P < 0.01)), additional analgesics usage (OR = 0.21 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.40; P < 0.01)) and hospital stay (WMD = - 0.71 day (95% CI, - 1.10 to - 0.32 day; P < 0.01)), while the operation time of NOSE-LAR was prolonged (WMD = 7.4 min (95% CI, 0.17 to 14.64 min; P = 0.04)). The anastomotic fistula, severe complication, lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, intraoperative blood loss, and long-term outcomes in NOSE-LAR were comparable with AISE-LAR.ConclusionsThe safety of NOSE-LAR was demonstrated, and it could be an alternative to conventional surgery in laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid and rectal tumors. However, further randomized and multi-center trials are required.
| S-EPMC7439723 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe clinical outcomes and benefits of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in colorectal cancer have not been fully evaluated comparing to conventional laparoscopic-assisted radical resection. This retrospective study was conducted to investigate the short-term clinical benefits of NOSES versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted surgery for the treatment of sigmoid and rectal cancer.MethodsA total of 112 patients with sigmoid or rectal cancer were included in this retrospective study. The observation group (n=60) was treated with NOSES, and the control group (n=52) was treated with conventional laparoscopic-assisted radical resection. Following these interventions, the postoperative recovery and inflammatory response indexes were compared between the two groups.ResultsIn contrast with the control group, the observation group significantly had longer operation time (t=2.83, P=0.006), but shorter durations for the resumption of a semi-liquid diet (t=2.17, P=0.032), and length of postoperative hospital stay (t=2.74, P=0.007), as well as fewer postoperative incision infections (χ2=7.32, P=0.009). Moreover, the levels of immunoglobulin (Ig), including IgG (t=2.29, P=0.024), IgA (t=3.30, P=0.001), and IgM (t=3.38, P=0.001), in the observation group were markedly higher than those within the control group at 3 days postoperatively. Also, the levels of inflammatory indicators including interleukin (IL)-6 (t=4.22, P=5.02E-5), C-reactive protein (CRP) (t=3.73, P=3.5E-4), and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α (t=2.94, P=0.004) in the observation group were considerably lower than those in the control group at 3 days after the operation.ConclusionsNOSES can improve the postoperative recovery and has benefits in reducing the inflammatory response than conventional laparoscopic-assisted surgery.
| S-EPMC10186496 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNatural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) is a technique that involves collecting a specimen for extraction through a natural opening avoiding a mini-laparotomy incision. The aim of this study was to compare NOSE and transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic (LAP) colorectal cancer surgery for postoperative outcomes and oncological safety.MethodA systematic search was conducted in five electronic databases from inception till October 2020. Articles were selected based on the inclusion criteria (studies comparing LAP and NOSE colorectal surgeries reporting at least one of the outcomes) and analysed. Primary outcomes included postoperative complications, pathological results (resection margins and lymph node collection), and oncological outcomes. Secondary outcomes included operating time, blood losses, use of analgesics, functional recovery, duration of hospital stay, and cosmetic results. Fixed and random-effect models were used to measure the pooled estimates.ResultsNineteen studies involving a total of 3432 participants were analysed (3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 16 retrospective non-randomized studies). Pooled results showed significantly reduced postoperative complications (OR 0.54; 95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 0.67; P < 0.00001). Pathological outcomes of NOSE were comparable to LAP with no significant difference noted in terms of resection margins (P > 0.05) and lymph node collection (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.47; 95 per cent c.i. -0.94 to 0; P = 0.05). Pooled analysis demonstrated comparable long-term outcomes in terms of cancer recurrence (OR 0.94; 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 1.39; P = 0.75), 5-year disease-free survival (HR 0.97; 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 1.29; P = 0.83), and overall survival (HR 0.93, 95 per cent c.i. 0.58 to -1.51; P = 0.78). Finally, the NOSE group had decreased use of additional analgesia after surgery and earlier resumption of oral intake when compared with LAP (respectively OR 0.28; 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.37; P < 0.00001 and WMD -0.35; 95 per cent c.i. -0.54 to -0.15; P = 0.0005).ConclusionThis meta-analysis showed that in comparison with LAP, NOSE decreases severe postoperative morbidity while improving postoperative recovery without compromising oncological safety, but it is limited by the small number of RCTs performed in this field.
| S-EPMC9155237 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interventions: single arm:NOSES Method
Primary outcome(s): Periprocedural complications
Study Design: Single arm
| 2686503 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:The goal of this type of study: a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial is to assess the safety and feasibility of NOSE surgery to compare the NOSE and conventional laparoscopy groups in Colorectal cancer patients. The main questions it aims to answer are measuring the postoperative inflammatory response and monitoring the early morbidity and mortality rate after surgery. Participants will be assigned patients to undergo either NOSE surgery or conventional laparoscopic mini-laparotomy resection. If there is a comparison group: Researchers will compare the control group to see if postoperative inflammatory response.
| 9277 | ecrin-mdr-crc