| Literature DB >> 36187060 |
Mengao Qian1, Shangyu Yin1, Kepeng Hu1, Quanpeng Wang1, Weilan Cao2, Changbao Liu2, Zhonglin Wang2, Chongjie Huang2.
Abstract
Introduction: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has been widely regarded as a new technology in minimally invasive surgery. Meanwhile, carbon nanoparticles have been increasingly used for lymph node tracing in colorectal cancer surgery. Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of carbon nanoparticle-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery with left colic artery preservation for total laparoscopic colorectal resection. Material and methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 83 patients diagnosed with sigmoid colon cancer or mid- and upper-rectal cancer from October 2017 to June 2020. These patients were divided into the NOSES group who underwent left colic artery preservation NOSES, being injected with a carbon nanoparticle suspension under colonoscopy the day before surgery, and the LA group, who underwent left colic artery preservation laparoscopic surgery. Surgical outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.Entities:
Keywords: carbon nanoparticle suspension; colorectal surgery; laparoscope; left colic artery preservation; natural orifice specimen extraction surgery
Year: 2022 PMID: 36187060 PMCID: PMC9511920 DOI: 10.5114/wiitm.2022.116284
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne ISSN: 1895-4588 Impact factor: 1.627
Photo 1Carbon nanoparticle suspension was injected at a distance of about 0.5 cm from the lower edge of the tumor for labeling and tracing the day before surgery
Photo 2Intraoperative image of black-stained lymph nodes showing clear boundaries and well-defined distribution patterns along the IMA
Photo 3Lymph node dissection guided by black-stained lymph nodes surrounding the IMA
Photo 4Freed IMA and LCA during lymph node dissection
Photo 5Superior rectal artery ligation at the origin of the LCA from the IMA while leaving the LCA intact
Photo 6A, B – Pulling the collected specimen out of the body from the distal rectum before anastomosis
Photo 7After abdominal lymph node dissection by laparoscope, and then the specimens were resected in vitro
Intergroup comparison of general information
| Parameter | NOSES group ( | LA group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex: | 0.522 | ||
| Male | 27 (71%) | 29 (64%) | |
| Female | 11 (29%) | 16 (36%) | |
| Age [years] | 61.2 ±9.7 | 65.0 ±8.1 | 0.097 |
| BMI [kg/m2] | 23.9 ±1.3 | 23.3 ±1.7 | 0.164 |
| ASA score: | 0.912 | ||
| I | 18 (47%) | 20 (45%) | |
| II | 19 (50%) | 24 (53%) | |
| III | 1 (3%) | 1 (2%) | |
| Tumor site: | 0.677 | ||
| Sigmoid colon | 16 (42%) | 21 (47%) | |
| Upper and middle rectum | 22 (58%) | 24 (53%) | |
| T-staging: | 0.052 | ||
| T1 | 7 (19%) | 3 (7%) | |
| T2 | 11 (29%) | 8 (18%) | |
| T3 | 18 (47%) | 24 (53%) | |
| T4 | 2 (5%) | 10 (22%) |
BMI – body mass index, ASA – American Society of Anesthesiologists.
Intergroup comparison of surgical outcomes
| Outcomes | NOSES group ( | LA group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Operative time [min] | 129.5 ±18.7 | 120.4 ±17.1 | 0.073 |
| Blood loss [ml] | 50.6 ±21.0 | 40.9 ±20.2 | 0.352 |
| Number of harvested lymph node | 22.8 ±5.6 | 17.0 ±2.8 | < 0.001 |
| Time to first flatus [day] | 2.2 ±0.4 | 2.4 ±0.6 | 0.081 |
| Complication | 2 (5%) | 6 (13%) | 0.385 |
| Anastomotic leakage | 0 (0) | 2 (4%) | 0.498 |
| Postoperative hospital stay [day] | 7.1 ±1.2 | 8.2 ±1.9 | 0.035 |
| VAS pain score | 3.6 ±1.2 | 4.8 ±0.9 | < 0.001 |
VAS – visual analog scale.