BackgroundNatural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), as a new star of minimally invasive techniques, has been increasingly favored and promoted in the field of surgery around the world. Most previous studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic NOSES and conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, there is little research on comparing robotic colorectal cancer NOSES with conventional robotic-assisted colorectal cancer resection surgery.Participant and methodsThis study is a retrospective study of propensity score matching (PSM). This study included Ninety-one propensity score-matched pairs of the participant who had undergone robotic colorectal cancer resection surgery at our center between January 2017 and December 2020. The covariates used in the propensity score included gender, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumor diameter, the tumor's height from the anal verge, histological differentiation, AJCC stage, T stage, N stage, and history of previous abdominal surgery. The outcome measurement criteria included postoperative complications, inflammatory response, pelvic floor function, anal function, cosmetic outcome, quality of life, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).ResultsThe robotic NOSES group had faster recovery time from gastrointestinal function (P = 0.014), shorter abdominal incision length (P < 0.001), less pain (P < 0.001), less additional analgesia required (P < 0.001), and lower postoperative indicators of white blood cell count (P < 0.001) and C-reactive protein content compared to the robotic-assisted resection surgery (RARS) group (P = 0.035). Additionally, the robotic NOSES group had significantly better body imagery (P < 0.001), cosmetic scores (P < 0.001), somatic function (P = 0.003), role function (P = 0.039), emotional function (P = 0.001), social function (P = 0.004), and overall function (P < 0.001) than the RARS group. The two groups demonstrated no significant difference between DFS and OS.ConclusionRobotic colorectal cancer NOSES is a safe and feasible minimally invasive procedure and offers shorter abdominal incisions, less pain, less surgical stress response, and better postoperative quality of life. Therefore, this technique can be further promoted for colorectal cancer patients eligible for NOSES.
BackgroundThe transvaginal route for specimen extraction is considered ideal for colorectal surgery, but its safety is still questioned. There has been little research on transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in the right hemicolectomy. As a result, we conducted a study comparing transvaginal NOSES to traditional transabdominal specimen extraction surgery.Patients and methodsData on female patients who underwent radical right hemicolectomy at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between January 2015 and December 2020 were collected retrospectively. A total of 847 patients were compliant, with 51 undergoing the transvaginal specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) group and 796 undergoing the transabdominal specimen extraction surgery (TISES) group. A propensity score matching method (1:2) was used to balance the clinicopathological characteristics of the two groups.ResultsFinally, 138 patients were enrolled in our study, with 46 in the NOSES group and 92 in the TISES group. Compared to the TISES group, the NOSES group had less intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.036), shorter time to first flatus (p < 0.001), shorter time to first liquid diet (p < 0.001), lower postoperative white blood cell counts (p = 0.026), lower C-reactive protein levels (p = 0.027), and lower visual analog scale (VAS) scores (p < 0.001). Regarding the quality of life after surgery, the NOSES group had better role function (p < 0.01), emotional function (p < 0.001), and improved symptoms of postoperative pain (p < 0.001) and diarrhea (p = 0.024). The scar satisfaction was significantly higher in the NOSES group than in the TISES group. Overall survival and disease-free survival in two groups were similar.ConclusionThe short-term results of transvaginal NOSES were superior to conventional transabdominal specimen extraction surgery. At the same time, transvaginal NOSES could improve the abdominal wall appearance and quality of life. The long-term survival was similar in the two surgical approaches. Therefore, transvaginal NOSES is worthy of our implementation and promotion.
BackgroundThe aim of the study was to develop and validate a nomogram for predicting cancer-specific survival (CSS) in lymph- node- positive rectal cancer patients after radical proctectomy.MethodsIn this study, we analyzed data collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2004 and 2015. In addition, in a 7:3 randomized design, all patients were split into two groups (development and validation cohorts). CSS predictors were selected via univariate and multivariate Cox regressions. The nomogram was constructed by analyzing univariate and multivariate predictors. The effectiveness of this nomogram was evaluated by concordance index (C-index), calibration plots, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Based on the total score of each patient in the development cohort in the nomogram, a risk stratification system was developed. In order to analyze the survival outcomes among different risk groups, Kaplan–Meier method was used.ResultsWe selected 4,310 lymph- node- positive rectal cancer patients after radical proctectomy, including a development cohort (70%, 3,017) and a validation cohort (30%, 1,293). The nomogram correlation C-index for the development cohort and the validation cohort was 0.702 (95% CI, 0.687–0.717) and 0.690 (95% CI, 0.665–0.715), respectively. The calibration curves for 3- and 5-year CSS showed great concordance. The 3- and 5-year areas under the curve (AUC) of ROC curves in the development cohort were 0.758 and 0.740, respectively, and 0.735 and 0.730 in the validation cohort, respectively. Following the establishment of the nomogram, we also established a risk stratification system. According to their nomogram total points, patients were divided into three risk groups. There were significant differences between the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (p< 0.05).ConclusionsAs a result of our research, we developed a highly discriminatory and accurate nomogram and associated risk classification system to predict CSS in lymph-node- positive rectal cancer patients after radical proctectomy. This model can help predict the prognosis of patients with lymph- node- positive rectal cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.