Laparoscopy Yields Increased Surgical Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer

Commentary
Video

Laparoscopy may reduce the degree of pain or length of hospital stay compared with open surgery for patients with colorectal cancer.

Surgical treatment with laparoscopy or robotic tools has become the standard of care for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), according to Gregory Charak, MD.

In a conversation with CancerNetwork®, Charak, a board-certified colorectal surgeon at Palisades Medical Center and Hackensack University Medical Center of Hackensack Meridian Health, highlighted laparoscopy as a key advancement in the surgical management of CRC, which has produced improvements related to hospital stay durations and pain for patients compared with other techniques. He also discussed factors he considered for selecting the use of laparoscopy over standard open surgery.

In most cases, laparoscopic or robotic surgery are the preferred modalities that Charak offers, as they appear to confer the best surgical outcomes while minimizing trauma for patients. However, he said he may still consider the use of open surgery depending on factors such as the size of the patient’s tumor.

Transcript:

Probably in the last 20 years, the biggest advance surgically has been moving to minimally invasive techniques. Laparoscopy and robotics have become more or less the standard of care with our approach to cancer surgery whenever possible. That makes for better outcomes for our patients.

Long story short, whenever possible, we attempt to do laparoscopic surgery or robotic surgery—the 2 are interchangeable—to get the best outcome for our patients with the least trauma. At the end of the day, what you’re doing to the tissues inside the body is the same. To a certain extent, the invasiveness is the same. The degree of pain and the length of hospital stay can be improved with minimally invasive techniques. If open surgery is required to cure cancer, for example, because of the size of the tumor or other factors, we don’t hesitate to do surgery that way either. We do whatever is best for the patient in that situation.

Recent Videos
Jose Sandoval Sus, MD, discussed standard CAR T-cell therapies in patients across multiple high-risk lymphoma indications.
Elucidating nonresponses to bispecific T-cell engagers may be an important research consideration in the multiple myeloma field.
Barriers to access and financial toxicities are challenges that must be addressed for CAR T-cell therapies in LBCL, according to Jose Sandoval Sus, MD.
Fixed treatment durations with bispecific antibodies followed by observation may help in mitigating infection-related AEs, according to Shebli Atrash, MD.
Epistemic closure, broad-scale distribution, and insurance companies are the 3 largest obstacles to implementing new peritoneal surface malignancy care guidelines into practice.
Shebli Atrash, MD, stated that MRD should be considered carefully as an end point, given potential recurrence despite MRD negativity.
“This is something where this is written by the trainees, for the trainees, and, of course, for all the other clinicians who take care of patients,” said Kiran Turaga, MD, MPH.
“Everyone—patients, doctors—we all want the same thing. We want [patients] to live longer,” said Kiran Turaga, MD, MPH, on patients with peritoneal surface malignancies.
Related Content