A laparoscopic colectomy in colorectal-cancer patients is usually associated with a high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of injection of long-acting 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonist for the reduction of PONV in patients with colorectal cancer.

A total of 48 patients scheduled to undergo a laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer were randomized in a double-blinded fashion. Patients were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups and assigned to receive either 0.3 mg of ramosetron intravenously (group A, n = 25) or 2 mL of normal saline (placebo) (group B, n = 22) immediately after the operation. The incidence of PONV, the nausea severity scale score, the visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain, the total amount of patient-controlled analgesia used, the recovery of bowel function, and morbidities were assessed at 1 hour and at 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery.

The baseline and the operative characteristics were similar between the groups (P > 0.05). The number of cases without PONV (complete response) was higher for group A (ramosetron) than group B (normal saline): 24 hours after surgery, 92.0% (23 of 25) for group A versus 54.5% (12 of 22) for group B; 48 hours after surgery, 92% (23 of 25) for group A versus 81.8% (18 of 22) for group B (both P < 0.05). No serious adverse events occurred.

Postoperative ramosetron injection is effective for the prevention of PONV after a laparoscopic colectomy in colorectal-cancer patients.

The impact of previous abdominal surgery (PAS) on surgical outcomes from laparoscopic and robot surgeries is inconclusive. This study aimed to investigate the impact of PAS on perioperative outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.

From March 2007 to February 2014, a total of 612 and 238 patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic surgeries, respectively. Patients were divided into 3 groups: those who did not have a PAS (NPAS), those who had a major PAS, and those who had a minor PAS. We further divided the patients so that our final groups for analysis were: patients with NPAS (n = 478), major PAS (n = 19), and minor PAS (n = 115) in the laparoscopy group, and patients with NPAS (n = 202) and minor PAS (n = 36) in the robotic surgery group.

In the laparoscopy group, no differences in the conversion rates between the 3 groups were noted (NPAS = 1.0% vs. major PAS = 0% vs. minor PAS = 1.7%, P = 0.701). In the robotic surgery group, the conversion rate did not differ between the NPAS group and the minor PAS group (1.0% vs. 2.8%, P = 0.390). Among the groups, neither the operation time, blood loss, days to soft diet, length of hospital stay, nor complication rate were affected by PAS.

PAS did not jeopardize the perioperative outcomes for either laparoscopic or robotic colorectal surgeries. Therefore, PAS should not be regarded as an absolute contraindication for minimally invasive colorectal surgeries.

This study compared a subtotal colectomy to self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) insertion as a bridge to surgery for patients with left colon-cancer obstruction.

Ninety-four consecutive patients with left colon-cancer obstruction underwent an emergency subtotal colectomy or elective SEMS insertion between January 2007 and August 2014. Using prospectively collected data, we performed a retrospective comparative analysis on an intention-to-treat basis.

A subtotal colectomy and SEMS insertion were attempted in 24 and 70 patients, respectively. SEMS insertion technically failed in 5 patients (7.1%). The mean age and rate of obstruction in the descending colon were higher in the subtotal colectomy group than the SEMS group. Sex, underlying disease, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and pathological stage showed no statistical difference. Laparoscopic surgery was performed more frequently in patients in the SEMS group (62 of 70, 88.6%) than in patients in the subtotal colectomy group (4 of 24, 16.7%). The overall rate of postoperative morbidity was higher in the SEMS group. No Clavien-Dindo grade III or IV complications occurred in the subtotal colectomy group, but 2 patients (2.9%) died from septic complications in the SEMS group. One patient (4.2%) in the subtotal colectomy group had synchronous cancer. The total hospital stay was shorter in the subtotal colectomy group. The median number of bowel movements in the subtotal colectomy group was twice per day at postoperative 3–6 months.

A subtotal colectomy for patients with obstructive left-colon cancer is a clinically and oncologically safer, 1-stage, surgical strategy compared to SEMS insertion as a bridge to surgery.

The laparoscopic colectomy is avoided principally because of its technical difficulty, steep learning curve, and increased operative time. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is an alternative technique that addresses these problems while preserving the short-term benefits of a laparoscopic colectomy. Our study was aimed to describe the characteristics of patients admitted due to left-sided colon and rectal cancer for HALS.

A prospectively maintained database was used to identify patients who underwent HALS at the Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, from July 1, 2009, to October 1, 2012.

One hundred-three HALS colorectal resections were performed. The patients' mean age was 64 ± 13.4 years. There were 46 male and 57 female patients. The body mass index was 27.3 ± 5.8 kg/m². Forty-three patients (41.8%) had experienced prior abdominal surgery. The mean HALS time was 105 minutes (range, 55-85 minutes). The conversion rate was 2.7% (3/103). The median of return of gastrointestinal function was 2.5 days (range, 2.2-4.5 days). The median length of hospital stay was 9 days. The postoperative complication and mortality rates were 10.7% and 0.97%, respectively. Four incisional hernias (3.9%) were seen at a mean follow-up of 7.0 ± 3.4 months. None of the patients had a trocar or a hand-port site recurrence.

A HALS colorectal resection is a safe and effective technique, and it provides all the benefits of minimally invasive surgery.

Laparoscopy continues to be increasingly adopted for elective colorectal resections. However, its role in an emergency setting remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between laparoscopic and open colectomies performed for emergency colorectal conditions.

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent emergency laparoscopic colectomies for various surgical conditions was performed. These patients were matched for age, gender, surgical diagnosis and type of surgery with patients who underwent emergency open colectomies.

Twenty-three emergency laparoscopic colectomies were performed from April 2006 to October 2011 for patients with lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding (6), colonic obstruction (4) and colonic perforation (13). The hand-assisted laparoscopic technique was utilized in 15 cases (65.2%). There were 4 (17.4%) conversions to the open technique. The operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (175 minutes vs. 145 minutes, P = 0.04), and the duration of hospitalization was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6 days vs. 7 days, P = 0.15). The overall postoperative morbidity rates were similar between the two groups (P = 0.93), with only 3 patients in each group requiring postoperative surgical intensive-care-unit stays or reoperations. There were no mortalities. The cost analysis did not demonstrate any significant differences in the procedural (P = 0.57) and the nonprocedural costs (P = 0.48) between the two groups.

Emergency laparoscopic colectomy in a carefully-selected patient group is safe. Although the operative times were longer, the postoperative outcomes were comparable to those of the open technique. The laparoscopic group did not incur a higher cost.