Cargando…

Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns

Background: Colorectal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is considered to be a scarless operation that avoids the laparotomy of extraction specimen, but bacteriological and oncological concerns are raised with this technique. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ouyang, Qianhui, Peng, Jian, Xu, Shuai, Chen, Jie, Wang, Wen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7330106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32670877
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00946
_version_ 1783553042539347968
author Ouyang, Qianhui
Peng, Jian
Xu, Shuai
Chen, Jie
Wang, Wen
author_facet Ouyang, Qianhui
Peng, Jian
Xu, Shuai
Chen, Jie
Wang, Wen
author_sort Ouyang, Qianhui
collection PubMed
description Background: Colorectal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is considered to be a scarless operation that avoids the laparotomy of extraction specimen, but bacteriological and oncological concerns are raised with this technique. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the oncological and bacteriological outcomes of NOSES and conventional laparoscopic (CL) procedures. Methods: This is a retrospective study of prospectively collected outcomes data. Patients operated with colorectal cancer from January 2016 to December 2019 in Xiangya Hospital were assigned to the group NOSES and the group CL according to the size of the tumor. Prior to dissection, peritoneal lavage fluid was collected for cytological assessment. At the end of the procedure, peritoneal lavage fluid was collected for aerobic culture and cytological assessment. Baseline characteristics and short-term and long-term outcomes for NOSES and CL were compared. Results: Between January 2016 and December 2019, 212 patients were enrolled from our center and 185 patients were analyzed (96 and 89 in NOSES and CL groups, respectively). The bacterial positive rate of peritoneal lavage fluid was 34.4 vs. 32.6% in NOSES and CL groups, respectively (P = 0.80). The positive rate of tumor cells in peritoneal lavage fluid was 7.3 vs. 9.0% in NOSES and CL groups, respectively (P = 0.67). Univariate analysis showed that the positive rate of tumor cells in peritoneal lavage fluid was significantly associated with tumor invasion depth and lymph node metastasis (P < 0.05). T4 (OR = 20.47, 95%CI = 1.241–337.661; P = 0.04), N1 (OR = 5.445, 95%CI = 1.412–20.991; P = 0.01), and N2 (OR = 6.315, 95%CI = 1.458–27.348; P = 0.01) served as independent predictors of peritoneal lavage fluid positive oncology patients. Local recurrence-free survival was not significantly different between two groups (HR = 0.909, 95%CI = 0.291–2.840; P = 0.87). Conclusions: Compared with conventional laparoscopic procedure, NOSES is in conformity with the principle of asepsis and tumor-free technique and can be worthy of clinical application and promotion.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7330106
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73301062020-07-14 Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns Ouyang, Qianhui Peng, Jian Xu, Shuai Chen, Jie Wang, Wen Front Oncol Oncology Background: Colorectal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is considered to be a scarless operation that avoids the laparotomy of extraction specimen, but bacteriological and oncological concerns are raised with this technique. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the oncological and bacteriological outcomes of NOSES and conventional laparoscopic (CL) procedures. Methods: This is a retrospective study of prospectively collected outcomes data. Patients operated with colorectal cancer from January 2016 to December 2019 in Xiangya Hospital were assigned to the group NOSES and the group CL according to the size of the tumor. Prior to dissection, peritoneal lavage fluid was collected for cytological assessment. At the end of the procedure, peritoneal lavage fluid was collected for aerobic culture and cytological assessment. Baseline characteristics and short-term and long-term outcomes for NOSES and CL were compared. Results: Between January 2016 and December 2019, 212 patients were enrolled from our center and 185 patients were analyzed (96 and 89 in NOSES and CL groups, respectively). The bacterial positive rate of peritoneal lavage fluid was 34.4 vs. 32.6% in NOSES and CL groups, respectively (P = 0.80). The positive rate of tumor cells in peritoneal lavage fluid was 7.3 vs. 9.0% in NOSES and CL groups, respectively (P = 0.67). Univariate analysis showed that the positive rate of tumor cells in peritoneal lavage fluid was significantly associated with tumor invasion depth and lymph node metastasis (P < 0.05). T4 (OR = 20.47, 95%CI = 1.241–337.661; P = 0.04), N1 (OR = 5.445, 95%CI = 1.412–20.991; P = 0.01), and N2 (OR = 6.315, 95%CI = 1.458–27.348; P = 0.01) served as independent predictors of peritoneal lavage fluid positive oncology patients. Local recurrence-free survival was not significantly different between two groups (HR = 0.909, 95%CI = 0.291–2.840; P = 0.87). Conclusions: Compared with conventional laparoscopic procedure, NOSES is in conformity with the principle of asepsis and tumor-free technique and can be worthy of clinical application and promotion. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7330106/ /pubmed/32670877 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00946 Text en Copyright © 2020 Ouyang, Peng, Xu, Chen and Wang. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Ouyang, Qianhui
Peng, Jian
Xu, Shuai
Chen, Jie
Wang, Wen
Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns
title Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns
title_full Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns
title_fullStr Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns
title_short Comparison of NOSES and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Colorectal Cancer: Bacteriological and Oncological Concerns
title_sort comparison of noses and conventional laparoscopic surgery in colorectal cancer: bacteriological and oncological concerns
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7330106/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32670877
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00946
work_keys_str_mv AT ouyangqianhui comparisonofnosesandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryincolorectalcancerbacteriologicalandoncologicalconcerns
AT pengjian comparisonofnosesandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryincolorectalcancerbacteriologicalandoncologicalconcerns
AT xushuai comparisonofnosesandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryincolorectalcancerbacteriologicalandoncologicalconcerns
AT chenjie comparisonofnosesandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryincolorectalcancerbacteriologicalandoncologicalconcerns
AT wangwen comparisonofnosesandconventionallaparoscopicsurgeryincolorectalcancerbacteriologicalandoncologicalconcerns