Microarray Analysis of Gene Expression Involved in Butyrate-Resistant Colorectal Carcinoma HCT116 Cells.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to chemotherapeutic agents is usually found in cancer stem cells (CSCs) and cancer stem-like cells that are often regarded as the target for cancer monitoring. However, the different patterns of their transcriptomic profiling is still unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to illustrate the transcriptomic profile of CSCs and butyrate-resistant colorectal carcinoma cells (BR-CRCs), by comparing them with parental colorectal cancer (CRC) cells in order to identify distinguishing transcription patterns of the CSCs and BR-CRCs. METHODS: Parental CRC cells HCT116 (HCT116-PT) were cultured and induced to establish the butyrate resistant cell model (HCT116-BR). Commercial enriching of the HCT116-CSCs were grown in a tumorsphere suspension culture, which was followed firstly by the assessment of butyrate tolerance using MTT and PrestoBlue. Then their gene expression profiling was analyzed by microarray. RESULTS: The results showed that both butyrate-resistant HCT116 cells (HCT116-BR) and HCT116-CSCs were more tolerant a butyrate effects than HCT116-PT cells. Differentially expressed gene profiles exhibited that IFI27, FOXQ1, PRF1, and SLC2A3 genes were increasingly expressed in CSCs, and were dramatically overexpressed in HCT116-BR cells when compared with HCT116-PT cells. Moreover, PKIB and LOC399959 were downregulated both in HCT116-CSCs and HCT116-BR cells. CONCLUSION: Our findings shed light on the transcriptomic profiles of chemoresistant CRC cells. This data should be useful for further study to provide guidelines for clinical prognosis to determine the guidelines for CRC treatment, especially in patients with chemoresistance and designing novel anti-neoplastic agents.

Loop ileostomy closure after laparoscopic versus open surgery: is there a difference?

BACKGROUND: Temporary loop ileostomy is commonly performed to protect the distal anastomosis during both open and laparoscopic colectomies. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of initial open and laparoscopic colorectal resection on the outcomes of ileostomy closure. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, all patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure from January 2008 to July 2012 were identified. The patients' demographics, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification, type of resection, approach (laparoscopic [LS] or open [OS] surgery), use of anti-adhesion barrier, and ileostomy closure outcomes were obtained from a chart review. The outcomes of ileostomy closure after LS and OS colorectal resections were compared using Chi-square for categorical variables and Student's t test for continuous variables. RESULTS: The study identified 351 patients with a mean age of 51 years: 145 patients (41.2%) in the LS group and 206 patients (58.8%) in the OS group. The most common procedures performed were total proctocolectomy with ileal J pouch anal anastomosis (109 patients: 49 LS, 60 OS) and restorative proctectomy (99 patients: 34 LS, 65 OS). At the time of ileostomy closure, the patients in the LS group had a significantly shorter mean operative time (LS 60.9 vs OS 82.6 min; p < 0.001) and a shorter hospital stay (LS 4.9 vs OS 5.8 days; p = 0.042). The overall complication rate was 20.1% (70 patients), and the rate in the OS group was significantly higher (p = 0.028). The most common complications were postoperative ileus (41 patients: 13 LS vs 28 OS) and enterocutaneous fistula (5 patients, all in the OS group). CONCLUSIONS: Loop ileostomy closure after laparoscopic colorectal surgery is associated with a significantly shorter operative time and hospital stay as well as a lower rate of postoperative complications. Superior outcomes after loop ileostomy closure lend further support to the use of laparoscopy.

Surgical treatment for colorectal cancer.

The rapid in development of surgical technology has had a major effect in surgical treatment of colorectal cancer. Laparoscopic colon cancer surgery has been proven to provide better short-term clinical and oncologic outcomes. However this quickly accepted surgical approach is still performed by a minority of colorectal surgeons. The more technically challenging procedure of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery is also on its way to demonstrating perhaps similar short-term benefits. This article reviews current evidences of both short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery, including the overall costs comparison between laparoscopic surgery and conventional open surgery. In addition, different surgical techniques for laparoscopic colon and rectal cancer are compared. Also the relevant future challenge of colorectal cancer robotic surgery is reviewed.

Laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection versus laparoscopic pull-through with coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancers: a comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Ultralow anterior resection for mid and distal rectal cancers has been reported routinely performed using either a laparoscopic ultralow anterior resection (LAR) or laparoscopic pull-through with coloanal anastomosis (LPT). This study evaluated the postoperative and functional outcomes. METHODS: Between January 2007 and December 2008, 40 consecutive patients had laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancers. The data were prospectively collected. RESULTS: There were 21 patients (21 men; mean age 61.2 ± 3.2 years standard error of the mean [SEM]) in the LAR group and 19 (16 men; mean age 61.4 ± 2.4 years SEM) in the LPT group. Tumor characteristics, adjuvant therapy given, mean follow-up (overall 33.5 ± 1.4 months SEM), intraoperative time, blood loss, mesorectum quality, conversion rate (LAR n = 2, LPT n = 1), pain score, time for ileostomy to function, subsequent incontinence scores, and complication rates (LAR n = 7, LPT n = 9) were not different between groups, but benign anastomotic strictures were higher after LPT (n = 4, LAR n = 0, P = .042). The latter was associated with chemoradiotherapy (P = .015). There were 2 systemic cancer recurrences both in the LPT group but no local recurrences to date. CONCLUSIONS: The LAR technique may have less risk of anastomotic strictures, particularly with adjuvant therapy. LPT may be considered selectively for a bulky distal rectal tumor in a small pelvis with comparable functional results.

Epidemiology, pathophysiology and medical management of postoperative ileus in the elderly.

As the population of the Western world ages, the number of major surgical procedures performed in the elderly population will by necessity increase. Within virtually every surgical specialty, studies have shown that patients should not be denied surgery on the basis of chronological age alone. It has recently been recognized that physiological age is far more important within the decision-making algorithm as to whether or not to proceed with major surgery in the septuagenarian and octogenarian populations and beyond. Not unexpectedly, not only the results of these operations, but also the associated morbidities, are similar in older and younger populations. Therefore, it is not surprising that postoperative ileus (POI) affects patients of all ages. POI is a multifactorial condition that is exacerbated by opioid analgesics, bed rest and other conditions that may be rather prevalent in the postoperative elderly patient. Therefore, as major surgical interventions are considered in this population, appropriate assessment and, ideally, correction of any physiological disturbances should be undertaken along with implementation of standardized enhanced recovery protocols. Ideally, through this combined approach, an appreciable impact can be made on reducing POI while controlling postoperative pain and limiting postoperative thromboembolic, cardiopulmonary, cerebral and infectious complications. This article reviews the potential impact of pharmacological agents, laparoscopy and other manoeuvres on POI in the elderly.

Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair.

Parastomal hernia is a common complication after stoma formation. Its reported incidence varies from 30% to 50%. Loop ileostomy has the lowest risk (0%-6.2%), followed by end ileostomy, and loop colostomy with a similar risk of 28% to 30%. End colostomy carries the highest risk for parastomal hernia of 48%. Even though most hernias occur within the first 2 years after stoma construction, the risk of herniation extends up to 20 years. Theoretically, parastomal hernia occurs as a result of mechanical factors, an intrinsic defect in collagen metabolism, and wound repair. Parastomal hernia is asymptomatic most of the time, but it may be associated with serious complications such as strangulation and perforation; hence, elective repair is mandatory for carefully selected cases and surgical approaches. Primary closure of the aponeurosis at the hernia site, either via peristomal approach or through midline incision, is a simple procedure, but it carries a recurrence rate of 38% to 100%. Stoma relocation may result in a zero recurrence rate at the same hernia site, but the risk of a parastomal hernia after new stoma formation is still expected. In addition, an incisional hernia at the previous colostomy site closure may also occur. Similar to other sites of hernia repair, prosthetic mesh has been used to reinforce the hernia defect intraperitoneally through open incision and recently via the laparoscopic approach. Mesh repair has demonstrated the lowest risk of recurrence for parastomal hernia of 0% to 33%.