Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for T4 colon cancer: evaluation of margin status

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic resection has been considered a relative contraindication for T4 colonic and rectal lesions due to concern over inadequate margins. The objective of this study was to compare planned laparoscopic and open resections of T4 lesions with respect to the positive margin rate.

Methods

Data were obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participant use file to perform a retrospective cohort analysis. The study population consisted of patients that underwent a colorectal resection for a primary T4 lesion during 2011 and 2012. A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of positive margins based on surgical approach. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was used to account for confounding by indication. A sensitivity analysis including only “as-treated” cases was also performed.

Results

The sub-selected population consisted of 455 and 406 patients in the laparoscopic and open group, respectively. In the original cohort, demographic variables were similar. The open group had a higher incidence of comorbidities, metastatic disease, and emergency cases. Laparoscopic surgery was found to be no different than open surgery with respect to positive margin status (OR 1.10, p = 0.54). After IPTW adjustment, surgical approach remained a nonsignificant predictor of positive margins (OR 1.18, p = 0.31). The “as-treated” analysis also showed that surgical approach had no significant effect on the positive margin rate (OR 1.24, p = 0.24).

Conclusions

Using this large national surgical database, select patients with T4 lesions who underwent planned laparoscopic colorectal resections did not have a significantly higher positive margin rate compared with patients with open operations. Further research is needed to identify the role of laparoscopy in managing T4b lesions before any consensus can be reached regarding its application in locally advanced colon cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brenner H, Kloor M, Pox CP (2014) Colorectal cancer. Lancet 383:1490–1502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Landmann RG, Weiser MR (2005) Surgical management of locally advanced and locally recurrent colon cancer. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 18:182–189

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Fleming ID, Cooper JS, Henson DE, Hutter RVP, Kennedy BJ, Murphy GP, O’Sullivan B, Sobin LH, Yarbro JW (1998) AJCC cancer staging handbook, 5th edn. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS (1991) Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 1:144–150

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kuhry E, Schwenk W, Gaupset R, Romild U, Bonjer HJ (2008) Long-term results of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:1–70

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lee JK, Delaney CP, Lipman JM (2012) Current state of the art in laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer: update on the multi-centric international trials. Ann Surg Inov Res 6:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Berends FJ, Kazemier G, Bonjer HJ, Lange JF (1994) Subcutaneous metastases after laparoscopic colectomy. Lancet 344:58

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee SW (2009) Laparoscopic procedures for colon and rectal cancer surgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg 22:218–224

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Bretagnol F, Dedieu A, Zappa M, Guedj N, Ferron M, Panis Y (2011) T4 colorectal cancer: is laparoscopic resection contraindicated. Colorectal Dis 13:138–143

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakafusa Y, Tanaka T, Tanaka M, Kitajima Y, Sato S, Miyazaki K (2004) Comparison of multivisceral resection and standard operation for locally advanced colorectal cancer: analysis of prognostic factors for short-term and long-term outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 47:2055–2063

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Veldkamp R, Gholghesaei M, Bonjer HJ, Meijer DW, Buunen M, Jeekel J, Anderberg B, Cuesta MA, Cuschieri A, Fingerhut A, Fleshman JW, Guillou PJ, Haglind E, Himpens J, Jacobi CA, Jakimowicz JJ, Koeckerling F, Lacy AM, Lezoche E, Monson JR, Morino M, Neugebauer E, Wexner SD, Whelan RL (2004) Laparoscopic resection of colon cancer: consensus of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc 18:1163–1185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (2012) Guidelines for laparoscopic resection of curable colon and rectal cancer. http://www.sages.org/publications/guidelines/guidelines-for-laparoscopic-resection-of-curable-colon-and-rectal-cancer/. Accessed 15 Sept 2014

  14. Khuri SF, Henderson WG, Daley J (2007) The patient safety in surgery study: background, study design, and patient populations. J Am Coll Surg 204:1089–1102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W (2007) Risk adjustment of the postoperative mortality rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg 185:315–327

    Google Scholar 

  16. Daley J, Khuri SF, Henderson W (1997) Risk adjustment of the postoperative morbidity rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg 185:328–340

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Daley J, Forbes MG, Young GJ (1997) Validating risk-adjusted surgical outcomes: site visit assessment of process and structure National VA Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg 185:341–351

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Khuri SF, Henderson WG, Daley J (2008) Successful implementation of the Department of Veterans Affairs’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in the private sector: the patient safety in surgery study. Ann Surg 248:329–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Austin P (2011) An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res 46:399–424

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM, MRC CLASSIC Trial Group (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Lancet 365:1718–1726

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (2009) Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomized clinical trial. Lancet Oncol 10:44–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yamamoto S, Inomata M, Katayama H, Mizusawa J, Etoh T, Konishi F, Sugihara K, Watanabe M, Moriya Y, Kitano S, Japan Clinical Oncology Group Colorectal Cancer Study Group (2014) Short-term surgical outcomes from a randomized controlled trial to evaluate laparoscopic and open D3 dissection for stage II/III colon cancer: Japan Clinical Oncology Group Study JCOG 0404. Ann Surg 260:23–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Vignali A, Girardelli L, Di Palo S, Orsenigo E, Staudacher C (2013) Laparoscopic treatment of advanced colonic cancer: a case-matched control with open surgery. Colorectal Dis 15:944–948

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Huh JW, Kim HR (2012) The feasibility of laparoscopic resection compared to open surgery in clinically suspected T4 colorectal cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 22:463–467

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A (2010) Colon and rectum: AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th edn. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  26. Marusch F, Gastinger I, Schneider C, Scheidbach H, Konradt J, Bruch HP, Kohler L, Barlehner E, Kockerling F, Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group (LCSSG) (2001) Experience as a factor influencing the indications for laparoscopic colorectal surgery and the results. Surg Endosc 15:116–120

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kuhry E, Bonjer HJ, Haglind E, Hop WC, Veldkamp R, Cuesta MA, Jeekel J, Pahlman L, Morino M, Lacy A, Delgado S, COLOR Study Group (2005) Impact of hospital case volume on short-term outcome after laparoscopic operation for colonic cancer. Surg Endosc 19:687–692

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Toronto Western Hospital – University Health Network, University of Toronto, 399 Bathurst Street, Room 8MP – 320, Toronto, ON, M5T 2S8, Canada

    Ahmad Elnahas, Supreet Sunil, Timothy D. Jackson, Allan Okrainec & Fayez A. Quereshy

  2. Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Center, University of Toronto, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, ON, M5G 2M9, Canada

    Fayez A. Quereshy

Authors
  1. Ahmad Elnahas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Supreet Sunil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Timothy D. Jackson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Allan Okrainec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fayez A. Quereshy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fayez A. Quereshy.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Elnahas, Sunil, Jackson, Okrainec, and Quereshy have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Disclaimer: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and the hospitals participating in the ACS NSQIP are the source of the data used herein; they have not verified and are not responsible for the statistical validity of the data analysis or the conclusions derived by the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Elnahas, A., Sunil, S., Jackson, T.D. et al. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for T4 colon cancer: evaluation of margin status. Surg Endosc 30, 1491–1496 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4360-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4360-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation