Juha Ka Rinne1,2, Anu Ehrlich3, Jaana Ward4, Ville Väyrynen5, Mikael Laine6, Ilmo H Kellokumpu5, Matti Kairaluoma5, Marja K Hyöty7, Jyrki Ao Kössi4. 1. Päijät-Häme Central Hospital, Keskussairaalankatu 7, 15850, Lahti, Finland. juha.rinne@phsotey.fi. 2. Tampere University, Tampere, Finland. juha.rinne@phsotey.fi. 3. Department of Abdominal Surgery, Jorvi Hospital, Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa, Turuntie 150, PL 800, 00029 HUS, Espoo, Finland. 4. Päijät-Häme Central Hospital, Keskussairaalankatu 7, 15850, Lahti, Finland. 5. Department of Gastrointerstinal Surgery, Central Hospital of Central Finland, Keskussairaalantie 19, 40620, Jyväskylä, Finland. 6. Department of Abdominal Surgery, Porvoo Hospital, Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa, Porvoo, Finland. 7. Department of Gastroenterology, Tampere University Hospital, Teiskontie 35, 33520, Tampere, Finland.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare laparoscopic non-CME colectomy with laparoscopic CME colectomy in two hospitals with similar experience in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Data was collected retrospectively from Päijät-Häme Central Hospital (PHCH, NCME group) and Central Finland Central Hospital (CFCH, CME group) records. Elective laparoscopic resections performed during 2007-2016 for UICC stage I-III adenocarcinoma were included to assess differences in short-term outcome and survival. RESULTS: There were 340 patients in the NCME group and 325 patients in the CME group. CME delivered longer specimens (p < 0.001), wider resection margins (p < 0.001), and more lymph nodes (p < 0.001) but did not result in better 5-year overall or cancer-specific survival (NCME 77.9% vs CME 72.9%, p = 0.528, NCME 93.2% vs CME 88.9%, p = 0.132, respectively). Thirty-day morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay were similar between the groups. Conversion to open surgery was associated with decreased survival. DISCUSSION: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is reported to improve survival. Most previous studies have compared open CME with open non-CME (NCME) or open CME with laparoscopic CME. NCME populations have been historical or heterogeneous, potentially causing bias in the interpretation of results. Studies comparing laparoscopic CME with laparoscopic NCME are few and involve only small numbers of patients. In this study, diligently performed laparoscopic non-CME D2 resection delivered disease-free survival results comparable with laparoscopic CME but was not safer.
PURPOSE: To compare laparoscopic non-CME colectomy with laparoscopic CME colectomy in two hospitals with similar experience in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Data was collected retrospectively from Päijät-Häme Central Hospital (PHCH, NCME group) and Central Finland Central Hospital (CFCH, CME group) records. Elective laparoscopic resections performed during 2007-2016 for UICC stage I-III adenocarcinoma were included to assess differences in short-term outcome and survival. RESULTS: There were 340 patients in the NCME group and 325 patients in the CME group. CME delivered longer specimens (p < 0.001), wider resection margins (p < 0.001), and more lymph nodes (p < 0.001) but did not result in better 5-year overall or cancer-specific survival (NCME 77.9% vs CME 72.9%, p = 0.528, NCME 93.2% vs CME 88.9%, p = 0.132, respectively). Thirty-day morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay were similar between the groups. Conversion to open surgery was associated with decreased survival. DISCUSSION: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is reported to improve survival. Most previous studies have compared open CME with open non-CME (NCME) or open CME with laparoscopic CME. NCME populations have been historical or heterogeneous, potentially causing bias in the interpretation of results. Studies comparing laparoscopic CME with laparoscopic NCME are few and involve only small numbers of patients. In this study, diligently performed laparoscopic non-CME D2 resection delivered disease-free survival results comparable with laparoscopic CME but was not safer.
Authors: Charlotte L Deijen; Jeanine E Vasmel; Elly S M de Lange-de Klerk; Miguel A Cuesta; Peter-Paul L O Coene; Johan F Lange; W J H Jeroen Meijerink; Jack J Jakimowicz; Johannes Jeekel; Geert Kazemier; Ignace M C Janssen; Lars Påhlman; Eva Haglind; H Jaap Bonjer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-10-12 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Tamara Díaz-Vico; María Fernández-Hevia; Aida Suárez-Sánchez; Carmen García-Gutiérrez; Luka Mihic-Góngora; Daniel Fernández-Martínez; José Antonio Álvarez-Pérez; Jorge Luis Otero-Díez; José Electo Granero-Trancón; Luis Joaquín García-Flórez Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-06-04 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Giuseppe S Sica; Danilo Vinci; Leandro Siragusa; Bruno Sensi; Andrea M Guida; Vittoria Bellato; Álvaro García-Granero; Gianluca Pellino Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-09-12 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: G Anania; R J Davies; F Bagolini; N Vettoretto; J Randolph; R Cirocchi; A Donini Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2021-06-12 Impact factor: 3.781