Natural Orifice Endosonographic Colposuspension With Rectopexy for Combined Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: We describe a natural orifice technique for simultaneous endoluminal lateral suspension of apical vaginal wall and rectal prolapse fixation with ultrasound and fluoroscopic assistance. IMPACT OF INNOVATION: The technique is minimally invasive, can be performed under regional anaesthesia, and avoids laparotomy or use of a mesh in addition to preserving the uterus. TECHNOLOGY MATERIALS AND METHODS: This technique involves suprapubic transvaginal ventral suture colposuspension, fixation of the anterior rectal wall to the undersurface of the anterior abdominal wall and tack fixation of the posterior rectal wall to the underlying sacral promontory through a submucosal tunnel performed endoscopically with fluoroscopic and ultrasound assistance. PRELIMINARY RESULTS: Seven patients with a mean age of 63 years were followed between 3 to 11 months. CONCLUSIONS: This is a novel minimally invasive transluminal procedure that repairs concomitant rectal and vaginal prolapse in the same sitting. FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Improvement in the instrument design and incorporation of endoluminal robotic systems will enhance the technical ease. The study needs validation in larger series of patients with longer follow-up.

Current status of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer.

GOALS: To define the current role of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. BACKGROUND: Perhaps in no other field has so much controversy been generated by laparoscopy as in its application to curative resection of cancer of the colon and rectum. The main controversy centers around the oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resections. The 3 major issues are: the adequacy of oncologic resection, recurrence rates and patterns, and the long-term survival. STUDY: A review of published data by search of Medline database with focus on clinical studies. RESULTS: Laparoscopic colectomy is feasible and safe. Modest benefits in the quality of life are observed. Same oncologic resection can be performed laparoscopically with no adverse influence on the recurrence rates. In particular, wound recurrences are not a specific complication of laparoscopic technique. At least equivalent survival is obtained by laparoscopic colectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopy does not seem to adversely affect chance of cure of colorectal cancer.

Prospective comparison of laparoscopic vs. open resections for colorectal adenocarcinoma over a ten-year period.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to define the long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer. METHODS: We analyzed our experience via a prospective, nonrandomized, longitudinal cohort study. The period of study extended from April 1991 to May 2001. Laparoscopic resection was offered selectively in the absence of a large mass, invasion into abdominal wall or adjacent organs, and multiple prior abdominal operations. Every laparoscopic resection performed with curative intent for adenocarcinoma was included. Twenty percent of patients whose procedures were converted to open resection were included in the laparoscopic-resection group because of intention to treat. Oncologic outcome measures of this group were compared with a computerized, case-matched, open-resection group, the case-matching variables being age, gender, site of primary tumor (colon vs. rectum), and TNM stage. The laparoscopic-resection group was followed up prospectively, and data were updated regularly. The follow-up techniques consisted of a combination of office visits, telephone calls, and the United States Social Security Death Index database. RESULTS: The laparoscopic-resection group consisted of 172 patients with a mean age of 67 (range, 27-85) years. The open-resection group consisted of 172 patients with a mean age of 69 (range, 30-90) years. Mean follow-up was 52 (range, 3-128) months. Complete (100 percent) follow-up data were available. The TNM stage distribution was 63 Stage I (37 percent), 51 Stage II (30 percent), 47 Stage III (27 percent), and 11 Stage IV (6 percent) tumors for the laparoscopic-resection group and 65 Stage I (38 percent), 48 Stage II (28 percent), 51 Stage III (29 percent), and 8 Stage IV (5 percent) tumors for patients in the open-resection group (P = 0.75, not significant). Thirty-day mortality was 1.2 percent (2 deaths) in the laparoscopic-resection group and 2.4 percent (4 deaths) in the open-resection group (P > 0.05, not significant). Early and late complication incidences were comparable. Local recurrence was observed in three patients (1.7 percent) in the laparoscopic resection group with the primary tumor in the colon and in three patients (1.7 percent) with the primary tumor in the rectum, for a total incidence of local recurrence in the laparoscopy group of 3.5 percent (6 patients). In the open-resection group, local recurrence was observed in two patients (1.2 percent) among those with primary tumor site in the colon and in three patients (1.7 percent) in the group with primary tumor in the rectum, for a total incidence of local recurrence in the open-resection group of 2.9 percent (5 patients). One of the local recurrences in the laparoscopy group occurred in the port/extraction site, for an incidence of 0.6 percent. Metastasis occurred in 18 patients (10.5 percent) in the open group and in 21 (12.2 percent) in the laparoscopy group. Stage-for-stage overall five-year survival rates were similar in the two groups. The Kaplan-Meier statistical analysis performed for colonic vs. rectal primary adenocarcinoma confirmed that TNM stage for stage-overall survival was similar in the laparoscopic and open-resection groups (log-rank P = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the drawbacks of a nonrandomized study, no adverse long-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic resections for colorectal cancer were observed in a single center's experience during a ten-year period.