10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Natural orifice specimen extraction in colorectal surgery: patient selection and perspectives

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Over the past 30 years, colorectal surgery has evolved to include minimally invasive surgical techniques. Minimally invasive surgery is associated with reduced postoperative pain, reduced wound complications, earlier return of bowel function, and possibly shorter length of hospital stay. These benefits have been attributed to a reduction in operative trauma compared to open surgery. The need to extract the specimen in colorectal operations through a “mini-laparotomy” can negate many of the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) is the opening of a hollow viscus that already communicates with the outside world, such as the vagina or distal gastrointestinal tract, in order to remove a specimen. The premise of this technique is to reduce the trauma required to remove the specimen with the expectation that this may improve outcomes. Reduction in postoperative analgesic use, quicker return of bowel function, and shorter length of hospital stay have been observed in colorectal operations with NOSE compared to conventional specimen extraction. While the feasibility of NOSE has been demonstrated in colorectal surgery, failures of this technique have also been described. Selection of patients who can successfully undergo NOSE needs further investigation. This review aims to guide surgeons in appropriately selecting patients for NOSE in colorectal surgery. Patient and specimen characteristics are reviewed in order to define patient populations in which NOSE is likely to be successful. Randomized trials comparing NOSE to conventional specimen extraction in colorectal surgery tend to enroll patients with favorable characteristics (body mass index <30, American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≤3, specimen diameter <6.5 cm) and demonstrate improved outcomes. Adopters of NOSE should restrict using this technique to the populations in which feasibility has been defined in the literature. Wider application to other populations, particularly patients with body mass index >30 and those with significant comorbidities, requires further study.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial.

          Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer has been proven safe, but debate continues over whether the available long-term survival data justify implementation of laparoscopic techniques in surgery for colon cancer. The aim of the COlon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection (COLOR) trial was to compare 3-year disease-free survival and overall survival after laparoscopic and open resection of solitary colon cancer. Between March 7, 1997, and March 6, 2003, patients recruited from 29 European hospitals with a solitary cancer of the right or left colon and a body-mass index up to 30 kg/m(2) were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic or open surgery as curative treatment in this non-inferiority randomised trial. Disease-free survival at 3 years after surgery was the primary outcome, with a prespecified non-inferiority boundary at 7% difference between groups. Secondary outcomes were short-term morbidity and mortality, number of positive resection margins, local recurrence, port-site or wound-site recurrence, and blood loss during surgery. Neither patients nor health-care providers were blinded to patient groupings. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00387842. During the recruitment period, 1248 patients were randomly assigned to either open surgery (n=621) or laparoscopic surgery (n=627). 172 were excluded after randomisation, mainly because of the presence of distant metastases or benign disease, leaving 1076 patients eligible for analysis (542 assigned open surgery and 534 assigned laparoscopic surgery). Median follow-up was 53 months (range 0.03-60). Positive resection margins, number of lymph nodes removed, and morbidity and mortality were similar in both groups. The combined 3-year disease-free survival for all stages was 74.2% (95% CI 70.4-78.0) in the laparoscopic group and 76.2% (72.6-79.8) in the open-surgery group (p=0.70 by log-rank test); the difference in disease-free survival after 3 years was 2.0% (95% CI -3.2 to 7.2). The hazard ratio (HR) for disease-free survival (open vs laparoscopic surgery) was 0.92 (95% CI 0.74-1.15). The combined 3-year overall survival for all stages was 81.8% (78.4-85.1) in the laparoscopic group and 84.2% (81.1-87.3) in the open-surgery group (p=0.45 by log-rank test); the difference in overall survival after 3 years was 2.4% (95% CI -2.1 to 7.0; HR 0.95 [0.74-1.22]). Our trial could not rule out a difference in disease-free survival at 3 years in favour of open colectomy because the upper limit of the 95% CI for the difference just exceeded the predetermined non-inferiority boundary of 7%. However, the difference in disease-free survival between groups was small and, we believe, clinically acceptable, justifying the implementation of laparoscopic surgery into daily practice. Further studies should address whether laparoscopic surgery is superior to open surgery in this setting.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Wound complications of laparoscopic vs open colectomy.

            This study was conducted to determine if laparoscopic colon surgery has changed the incidence of wound complications after colon resection. Eighty-three patients were randomized to undergo either laparoscopic (LCR) or open colon resection (OCR) for cancer at our institution as part of a multicenter trial. Data were tabulated from review of the prospective database and physician records. Thirty-seven patients were randomized to LCR and 46 to OCR. Seven patients in the LCR group were converted to OCR. LCR was performed using a limited midline incision for anastomosis and specimen extraction. Incision length was significantly greater (p <0.001) in the OCR group (19.4 +/- 5.6 cm) compared to the LCR extraction site (6.3 +/- 1.4 cm). Wound infections occurred in 13.5% of patients after LCR (2.7% trocar, 10.8% extraction sites) and in 10.9% of patients after OCR. Over a mean follow-up period of 30.1 +/- 17.8 months, incisional hernias developed in 24.3% of patients after LCR and 17.4% after OCR. In the LCR group, extraction sites accounted for 85.7% of all wound complications. The extraction site for LCR is associated with a high incidence of complications, comparable to open colectomy. Strategies to alter operative technique should be considered to reduce the incidence of these complications.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Laparoscopic natural orifice specimen extraction-colectomy: a systematic review.

              Over the last 20 years, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has shown equal efficacy for benign and malignant colorectal diseases when compared to open surgery. However, a laparoscopic approach reduces postoperative morbidity and shortens hospital stay. In the quest to optimize outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal surgery, reduction of access trauma could be a way to improve recovery. To date, one method to reduce access trauma is natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE). NOSE aims to reduce access trauma in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The specimen is delivered via a natural orifice and the anastomosis is created intracorporeally. Different methods are used to extract the specimen and to create a bowel anastomosis. Currently, specimens are delivered transcolonically, transrectally, transanally, or transvaginally. Each of these NOSE-procedures raises specific issues with regard to operative technique and application. The presumed benefits of NOSE-procedures are less pain, lower analgesia requirements, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, better cosmetic results, and lower incisional hernia rates. Avoidance of extraction site laparotomy is the most important characteristic of NOSE. Concerns associated with the NOSE-technique include bacterial contamination of the peritoneal cavity, inflammatory response, and postoperative outcomes, including postoperative pain and the functional and oncologic outcomes. These issues need to be studied in prospective randomized controlled trials. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the role of NOSE in minimally invasive colorectal surgery.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Clin Exp Gastroenterol
                Clin Exp Gastroenterol
                Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
                Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology
                Dove Medical Press
                1178-7023
                2018
                24 July 2018
                : 11
                : 265-279
                Affiliations
                Division of Colorectal Surgery, Lankenau Medical Center, Wynnewood, PA, USA, MarksJ@ 123456MLHS.org
                Author notes
                Correspondence: John H Marks, Division of Colorectal Surgery, Lankenau Medical Center, 100 East Lancaster Avenue, Medical Science Building Suite 375, #330w, Wynnewood, PA, USA, Tel +1 610 645 9093, Email MarksJ@ 123456MLHS.org
                Article
                ceg-11-265
                10.2147/CEG.S135331
                6063249
                30087574
                e3377369-ddf1-4184-9be5-eb47a1d09492
                © 2018 Izquierdo et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                History
                Categories
                Review

                Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                natural orifice specimen extraction,colorectal,minimally invasive surgery,patient selection,rectum,feasibility of nose,target organ

                Comments

                Comment on this article