A safety study of transumbilical single incision versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Yanan Wang, Ruoyan Liu, Ze Zhang, Qi Xue, Jun Yan, Jiang Yu, Hao Liu, Liying Zhao, Tingyu Mou, Haijun Deng, Guoxin Li, Yanan Wang, Ruoyan Liu, Ze Zhang, Qi Xue, Jun Yan, Jiang Yu, Hao Liu, Liying Zhao, Tingyu Mou, Haijun Deng, Guoxin Li

Abstract

Background: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is an emerging minimally invasive surgery to reduce abdominal incisions. However, despite the increasing clinical application of SILS, no evidence from large-scale, randomized controlled trials is available for assessing the feasibility, short-term safety, oncological safety, and potential benefits of SILS compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for colorectal cancer.

Methods/design: This is a single-center, open-label, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial. A total of 198 eligible patients will be randomly assigned to transumbilical single incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS plus one) group or to a CLS group at a 1:1 ratio. Patients ranging in age from 18 to 80 years with rectosigmoid cancer diagnosed as cT1-4aN0-2 M0 and a tumor size no larger than 5 cm are considered eligible. The primary endpoint is early morbidity, as evaluated by an independent investigator. Secondary outcomes include operative outcomes (operative time, estimated blood loss, and incision length), pathologic outcomes (tumor size, length of proximal and distal resection margins, and number of harvested lymph nodes), postoperative inflammatory and immune responses (white blood cells [WBC], neutrophil percentage [NE %], C-reactive protein [CRP], interleukin-6 [IL-6], and tumor necrosis factor-α [TNF-α]), postoperative recovery (time to first ambulation, flatus, liquid diet, soft diet, and duration of hospital stay), pain intensity, body image and cosmetic assessment, 3-year disease free survival (DFS), and 5-year overall survival (OS). Follow-up visits are scheduled for 1 and 3 months after surgery, then every 3 months for the first 2 years and every 6 months for the next 3 years.

Discussion: This trial will provide valuable clinical evidence for the objective assessment of the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of SILS plus one compared with CLS for the radical resection of rectosigmoid cancer. The hypothesis is that SILS plus one is feasible for the radical resection of rectosigmoid cancer and offers short-term safety and long-term oncological safety comparable to that of CLS, and that SILS plus one offers better cosmetic results and faster convalescence compared to CLS.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02117557 (registered on 16 April 2014).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Time schedule and flow of participants
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Operative position and single-incision multichannel device. a The patient is placed in a lithotomy position. The surgeon stands at the patient’s right side with the first assistant at the left side, while the camera operator stands beside the patient’s right shoulder with the monitor placed beside the patient’s left leg. b The homemade multichannel device comprises a soft tissue retractor and a surgical glove
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Trocar positions and surgical procedure for the experimental intervention group. a, b Trocars and instrument positions for single incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery (SILS plus one). c Ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery and vein. d The distal rectum is dissected by inserting a linear stapling device through the surgeon’s dominant operation channel
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Trocar positions and surgical procedure for the control intervention group. a, b Trocars and instrument positions for conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). c Ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery and vein. d The distal rectum is dissected by inserting a linear stapling device through the surgeon’s dominant operation channel
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Specimen measurement. a Macroscopic quality of the complete mesocolic excision. b Length of the proximal and distal dissection margins. c Tumor diameter

References

    1. Yun JA, Yun SH, Park YA, Huh JW, Cho YB, Kim HC, et al. Oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy for colon cancer. Ann Surg. 2015
    1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65:87–108. doi: 10.3322/caac.21262.
    1. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:2050–9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa032651.
    1. Hewett PJ, Allardyce RA, Bagshaw PF, Frampton CM, Frizelle FA, Rieger NA, et al. Short-term outcomes of the Australasian randomized clinical study comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer The ALCCaS Trial. Ann Surg. 2008;248:728–38. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31818b7595.
    1. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365:1718–26. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66545-2.
    1. Ng SS, Lee JF, Yiu RY, Li JC, Hon SS, Mak TW, et al. Laparoscopic-assisted versus open total mesorectal excision with anal sphincter preservation for mid and low rectal cancer: a prospective, randomized trial. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:297–306. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3187-x.
    1. Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown JM, Guillou PJ. Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1638–45. doi: 10.1002/bjs.7160.
    1. Colon Cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group. Buunen M, Veldkamp R, Hop WC, Kuhry E, Jeekel J, et al. Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:44–52. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70310-3.
    1. Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, Anvari M, Stryker SJ, Beart RW, Jr, et al. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg. 2007;246:655–62. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318155a762.
    1. Park SJ, Lee KY, Kang BM, Choi SI, Lee SH. Initial experience of single-port laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon cancer. World J Surg. 2013;37:652–6. doi: 10.1007/s00268-012-1882-8.
    1. Champagne BJ, Papaconstantinou HT, Parmar SS, Nagle DA, Young-Fadok TM, Lee EC, et al. Single-incision versus standard multiport laparoscopic colectomy: a multicenter, case-controlled comparison. Ann Surg. 2012;255:66–9. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182378442.
    1. Kim SJ, Ryu GO, Choi BJ, Kim JG, Lee KJ, Lee SC, et al. The short-term outcomes of conventional and single-port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2011;254:933–40. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318237826b.
    1. Takemasa I, Uemura M, Nishimura J, Mizushima T, Yamamoto H, Ikeda M, et al. Feasibility of single-site laparoscopic colectomy with complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer: a prospective case-control comparison. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1110–8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3284-x.
    1. Kim CW, Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, Min BS, Kang J, et al. Oncologic outcomes of single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid colon cancer: a propensity-score matching analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:924–30. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4039-1.
    1. Lim SW, Kim HJ, Kim CH, Huh JW, Kim YJ, Kim HR. Umbilical incision laparoscopic colectomy with one additional port for colorectal cancer. Tech Coloproctol. 2013;17:193–9. doi: 10.1007/s10151-012-0900-z.
    1. Hamabe A, Takemasa I, Uemura M, Nishimura J, Mizushima T, Ikeda M, et al. Feasibility of single-port laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon and rectal cancers and preoperative assessment of operative difficulty. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18:977–85. doi: 10.1007/s11605-014-2463-y.
    1. Kawamata F, Homma S, Minagawa N, Kawamura H, Takahashi N, Taketomi A. Comparison of single-incision plus one additional port laparoscopy-assisted anterior resection with conventional laparoscopy-assisted anterior resection for rectal cancer. World J Surg. 2014;38:2716–23. doi: 10.1007/s00268-014-2642-8.
    1. Edge SBBD, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A, editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. 7. New York: Springer; 2010.
    1. Wang Y, Xiong W, Lan X, Zhang J, Chen T, Liu H, et al. Suprapubic single incision laparoscopic appendectomy. J Surg Tes. 2015;193:577–82.
    1. Park JS, Kang SB, Kim DW, Lee KH, Kim YH. Laparoscopic versus open resection without splenic flexure mobilization for the treatment of rectum and sigmoid cancer: a study from a single institution that selectively used splenic flexure mobilization. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2009;19:62–8. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e318196cdb0.
    1. Chaudhary B, Glancy D, Dixon AR. Laparoscopic surgery for recurrent ileocolic Crohn’s disease is as safe and effective as primary resection. Colorectal Dis. 2011;13:1413–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2010.02511.x.
    1. West NP, Morris EJ, Rotimi O, Cairns A, Finan PJ, Quirke P. Pathology grading of colon cancer surgical resection and its association with survival: a retrospective observational study. Lancet Oncol. 2008;9:857–65. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70181-5.
    1. Kondrup J, Rasmussen HH, Hamberg O, Stanga Z, Ad Hoc ESPEN Working Group Nutritional risk screening (NRS 2002): a new method based on an analysis of controlled clinical trials. Clin Nutr. 2003;22:321–36. doi: 10.1016/S0261-5614(02)00214-5.
    1. Gustafsson UO, Scott MJ, Schwenk W, Demartines N, Roulin D, Francis N, et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colonic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS ®) Society recommendations. Clin Nutr. 2012;31:783–800. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2012.08.013.
    1. Joshi GP, Bonnet F, Kehlet H, PROSPECT collaboration Evidence-based postoperative pain management after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:146–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03062.x.
    1. Miller E. The World Health Organization analgesic ladder. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2004;49:542–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2004.08.021.
    1. Kin C, Rhoads KF, Jalali M, Shelton AA, Welton ML. Predictors of postoperative urinary retention after colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:738–46. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e318280aad5.
    1. Neville A, Lee L, Antonescu I, Mayo NE, Vassiliou MC, Fried GM, et al. Systematic review of outcomes used to evaluate enhanced recovery after surgery. Br J Surg. 2014;101:159–70. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9324.
    1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology-colon cancer. Version 2.2015. . Accessed 10 June 2015.
    1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology-Rectal Cancer. Version 2.2015 [database on the Internet]. Available from: . Accessed: Accessed 10 June 2015.
    1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–76. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365.
    1. Gujral S, Conroy T, Fleissner C, Sezer O, King PM, Avery KN, et al. Assessing quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer: An update of the EORTC quality of life questionnaire. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43:1564–73. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2007.04.005.
    1. Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, Jr, O’Leary MP, Bruskewitz RC, Holtgrewe HL, Mebust WK, et al. The American Urological Association symptom index for benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol. 1992;148:1549–57.
    1. Kwag SJ, Kim JG, Oh ST, Kang WK. Single incision vs conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid colon cancer: a case-matched study. Am J Surg. 2013;206:320–5. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2012.11.007.
    1. Marks JH, Montenegro GA, Shields MV, Frenkel JL, Marks GJ. Single-port laparoscopic colorectal surgery shows equivalent or better outcomes to standard laparoscopic surgery: results of a 190-patient, 7-criterion case-match study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:1492–9. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3830-1.
    1. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–13. doi: 10.1097/.
    1. Bond MR, Pilowsky I. Subjective assessment of pain and its relationship to the administration of analgesics in patients with advanced cancer. J Psychosom Res. 1966;10:203–8. doi: 10.1016/0022-3999(66)90064-X.
    1. Dunker MS, Stiggelbout AM, van Hogezand RA, Ringers J, Griffioen G, Bemelman WA. Cosmesis and body image after laparoscopic-assisted and open ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease. Surg Endosc. 1998;12:1334–40. doi: 10.1007/s004649900851.
    1. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) Version 4.0. . Accessed 10 June 2015.
    1. Strasberg SM, Linehan DC, Hawkins WG. The accordion severity grading system of surgical complications. Ann Surg. 2009;250:177–86. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181afde41.
    1. ICH International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) adopts consolidated guideline on good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use. Int Dig Health Legis. 1997;48:231–4.
    1. World Medical Association World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013;310:2191–4. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053.
    1. The ‘SILVERMAN1’ trial single incision laparoscopic versus existing resection (minimal access) for neoplasia (SILVERMAN 1). . Accessed 10 June 2015.
    1. Multicenter single-port colectomy. . Accessed 10 June 2015.
    1. Osborne AJ, Lim J, Gash KJ, Chaudhary B, Dixon AR. Comparison of single-incision laparoscopic high anterior resection with standard laparoscopic high anterior resection. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:329–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03178.x.
    1. Seymour RA. The use of pain scales in assessing the efficacy of analgesics in post-operative dental pain. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1982;23:441–4. doi: 10.1007/BF00605995.
    1. Boutron I, Moher D, Altman DG, Schulz KF, Ravaud P. Extending the CONSORT statement to randomized trials of nonpharmacologic treatment: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:295–309. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-148-4-200802190-00008.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner