Surgery for cancer carries concerns of tumor dissemination related to tumor manipulation, tumor violation, and wound seeding. Minimally invasive surgery is now standard for several benign conditions, such as symptomatic cholelithiasis and surgical therapy of gastroesophageal reflux. With the minimally invasive surgery explosion of the 1990s, virtually every procedure traditionally performed via laparotomy has been performed successfully with laparoscopic methods, including pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer. Shortly after the first descriptions of laparoscopic-assisted colectomy, reports of port-site tumor recurrences surfaced, raising concerns of using pneumoperitoneum-based surgery for malignancy. This review covers the development of laparoscopic surgery for cancer. Historical perspectives elucidate factors that helped shape the current state of the art. Theoretical concerns are discussed regarding surgery-induced immune suppression and its potential effects on tumor recurrence with both open and laparoscopic approaches. The concerns of laparoscopic port-site wound metastases are addressed, with a critical evaluation of the literature. Finally, a technical discussion of laparoscopic-assisted resections of hepatic and pancreatic tumors details patient selection, operative approach, and existing data for these operations.
Surgical therapy for solid tumors of the abdomen and retroperitoneum carries a history replete with dogma and folklore. Concerns of tumors spreading during surgery are often shared by patients and surgeons. Various measures have been devised to minimize contamination and dissemination of neoplastic cells during solid tumor surgery. Minimally invasive approaches to resection of solid tumors are growing exponentially. Along with these new approaches, new anxieties have been expressed regarding oncologic outcomes for these patients, as reports of port-site metastases and widespread tumor dissemination have surfaced.
Fueled by market interests and improvements in technical skills and instrumentation, potential applications for minimally invasive surgery exploded during the 1990s. Interestingly, centers of excellence for tumor surgery did not keep pace with the laparoscopy boom, primarily due to early reports of tumor dissemination and port-site metastases.[1-4] Associations were drawn between CO2 pneumoperitoneum and wound recurrence, and progress stalled. Furthermore, oncologic surgical training was relatively devoid of instructors familiar with minimally invasive methods.
Results of several recent large retrospective series and prospective trials have allayed initial concerns that laparoscopic approaches result in inferior cancer outcome.[5-7] Graduating surgical residents are assisting with more advanced laparoscopic procedures, and momentum for minimally invasive techniques for cancer surgery has grown. This article reviews historical, theoretical, and technical aspects of laparoscopic resection of solid tumors.
Surgery and Cancer: Fact vs Myth
Before examining how laparoscopy impacts cancer outcome, it is necessary to review the associations of standard surgical therapy (ie, laparotomy) and malignancy. It is a common concern that surgery can promote tumor spread.[8] This view is shared both by laypersons and health-care professionals, and is supported by some animal and human data for primary and metastatic disease.
Animal data provide some fascinating examples. Partial hepatectomy can stimulate growth of experimentally delivered hepatic metastases. It is postulated that preexisting micrometastases in the remnant liver, which under normal circumstances remain relatively dormant, are subject to growth factors expressed during liver regeneration and are thus stimulated to multiply.[9-11]
Another example comes from the groundbreaking work of Judah Folkman. Circulating proteins (endostatin and angiostatin) produced by primary flank tumors (Lewis lung carcinoma) in mice, which suppress growth of lung metastases, were identified.[12] In this model, removal of the flank tumor results in growth of lung lesions, which can be reversed by administering exogenous, purified endostatin. While human trials have not confirmed these preclinical findings, the implications of these discoveries are dramatic for cancer surgery.
Human data are less conclusive on the topic of surgery and cancer recurrence. Most reports are retrospective and subject to many confounding variables. For example, a recent report on recurrence following surgical therapy for breast cancer showed that 27% of premenopausal women with node-positive disease experienced recurrence or progression within 10 months of surgery, which was significantly greater than in node-negative or postmenopausal women.[13] The authors of this report conclude that a sudden acceleration of the metastatic process by surgery could explain these risk dynamics.
Several mechanical aspects of operation, the most obvious being careless technique with inadequate tumor handling and incomplete resection, are implicated in promoting tumor growth and recurrence. Dissemination of tumor cells from the primary lesion via lymphovascular channels is associated with reduced survival in many tumor models.[14-16] Furthermore, intraoperative tumor manipulation can increase the number of circulating tumor cells in the bloodstream.[17] As such, several maneuvers have been described to minimize this occurrence. Vascular ligation prior to manipulation of tumor-bearing organs was first proposed in 1967 by Dr. Rupert Turnbull, with his description and retrospective reporting of the "no touch" technique.[18] Although prospective evidence does not support improvement in cancer outcome using the "no touch" technique for colorectal cancer,[19] recent reports recommend similar ideology for pancreatic cancer[18,20] and liver cancer.[21,22]
Other commonly used methods to minimize tumor recurrence include irrigating with sterile water to lyse potentially free-floating cancer cells in the peritoneal cavity, changing surgical instruments after each use to avoid cross contamination, and placing wound protectors for specimen extraction.[23] Table 1 lists several theories on how surgery may negatively influence cancer outcome, as well as measures suggested to improve outcome. Surgeons that routinely treat solid tumors of the abdomen use some or all of these techniques to limit tumor spread during operation, despite a lack of level I evidence supporting the benefit of such practices.
In addition to mechanical factors and circulating growth factors, alterations to the host immune system as a result of surgical stress are thought to negatively impact tumor recurrence. The associations between immune function, cancer, laparotomy, and laparoscopy are discussed later in this article.
The author has no significant financial interest or other relationship with the manufacturers of any products or providers of any service mentioned in this article.
1. O'Rourke N, Price PM, Kelly S, et al: Tumour inoculation during laparoscopy. Lancet 342:7, 1993.
2. Keate RF, Shaffer R: Seeding of hepatocellular carcinoma to peritoneoscopy insertion site. Gastrointest Endosc 38:203-204, 1992.
3. Berends FJ, Kazemier G, Bonjer HJ, et al: Subcutaneous metastases after laparoscopic colectomy. Lancet 344:2, 1994.
4. Alexander RJ, Jaques BC, Mitchell KG: Laparoscopically assisted colectomy and wound recurrence. Lancet 341:249-250, 1993.
5. Shoup M, Brennan MF, Karpeh MS, et al: Port site metastasis after diagnostic laparoscopy for upper gastrointestinal tract malignancies: An uncommon entity. Ann Surg Oncol 9:632-636, 2002.
6. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group: A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050-2059, 2004.
7. Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, et al: Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: Short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6:477-484, 2005.
8. Gansler T, Henley SJ, Stein K, et al: Sociodemographic determinants of cancer treatment health literacy. Cancer 104:653-660, 2005.
9. Panis Y, Ribeiro J, Chretien Y, et al: Dormant liver metastases: An experimental study. Br J Surg 79:221-223, 1992.
10. Picardo A, Karpoff HM, Ng B, et al: Partial hepatectomy accelerates local tumor growth: Potential roles of local cytokine activation. Surgery 124:57-64, 1998.
11. Jarnagin WR, Delman K, Kooby D, et al: Neoadjuvant interleukin-12 immunogene therapy protects against cancer recurrence after liver resection in an animal model. Ann Surg 231:762-771, 2000.
12. O'Reilly MS, Holmgren L, Shing Y, et al: Angiostatin: A novel angiogenesis inhibitor that mediates the suppression of metastases by a Lewis lung carcinoma. Cell 79:315-328, 1994.
13. Baum M, Demicheli R, Hrushesky W, et al: Does surgery unfavourably perturb the "natural history" of early breast cancer by accelerating the appearance of distant metastases? Eur J Cancer 41:508-515, 2005.
14. Kooby DA, Suriawinata A, Klimstra DS, et al: Biologic predictors of survival in node-negative gastric cancer. Ann Surg 237:828-835, 2003.
15. Vauthey JN, Lauwers GY, Esnaola NF, et al: Simplified staging for hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 20:1527-1536, 2002.
16. Mirza AN, Mirza NQ, Vlastos G, et al: Prognostic factors in node-negative breast cancer: A review of studies with sample size more than 200 and follow-up more than 5 years. Ann Surg 235:10-26, 2002.
17. Weitz J, Kienle P, Lacroix J, et al: Dissemination of tumor cells in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 4:343-348, 1998.
18. Turnbull RB Jr, Kyle K, Watson FR, et al: Cancer of the colon: The influence of the no-touch isolation technic on survival rates. Ann Surg 166:420-427, 1967.
19. Nelson H, Petrelli N, Carlin A, et al: Guidelines 2000 for colon and rectal cancer surgery. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:583-596, 2001.
20. Hirota M, Shimada S, Yamamoto K, et al: Pancreatectomy using the no-touch isolation technique followed by extensive intraoperative peritoneal lavage to prevent cancer cell dissemination: A pilot study. JOP 6:143-151, 2005.
21. Lai EC, Fan ST, Lo CM, et al: Anterior approach for difficult major right hepatectomy. World J Surg 20:314-317, 1996.
22. Liu CL, Fan ST, Lo CM, et al: Anterior approach for major right hepatic resection for large hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg 232:25-31, 2000.
23. Ramirez PT, Wolf JK, Levenback C: Laparoscopic port-site metastases: Etiology and prevention. Gynecol Oncol 91:179-189, 2003.
24. Stellato TA: History of laparoscopic surgery. Surg Clin North Am 72:997-1002, 1992.
25. Vecchio R, MacFayden BV, Palazzo F: History of laparoscopic surgery. Panminerva Med 42:87-90, 2000.
26. Bagley CM Jr, Thomas LB, Johnson RE, et al: Diagnosis of liver involvement by lymphoma: Results in 96 consecutive peritoneoscopies. Cancer 31:840-847, 1973.
27. Moll FH, Marx FJ: A pioneer in laparoscopy and pelviscopy: Kurt Semm (1927-2003). J Endourol 19:269-271, 2005.
28. Cuschieri A: Laparoscopic management of cancer patients. J R Coll Surg Edinb 40:1-9, 1995.
29. Warshaw AL, Tepper JE, Shipley WU: Laparoscopy in the staging and planning of therapy for pancreatic cancer. Am J Surg 151:76-80, 1986.
30. Cuschieri A: Minimally invasive surgery: Hepatobiliary-pancreatic and foregut. Endoscopy 32:331-344, 2000.
31. Jacobs M, Verdeja JC, Goldstein HS: Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:144-150, 1991.
32. Thomas L: Discussion of Cellular and Humoral Aspects of the Hypersensitive State. New York, Hoeber-Harper, 1959.
33. Penn I: Tumors of the immunocom-promised patient. Ann Rev Med 39:63-73, 1988.
34. Da Costa ML, Redmond HP, Bouchier-Hayes DJ: Increased tumor establishment and growth after laparotomy vs laparoscopy. Arch Surg 131:1003, 1996.
35. Kanno J, Wakikawa A, Utsuyama M, et al: Effect of restraint stress on immune system and experimental B16 melanoma metastasis in aged mice. Mech Ageing Dev 93:107-117, 1997.
36. Ben-Eliyahu S: The promotion of tumor metastasis by surgery and stress: Immunological basis and implications for psychoneuroimmunology. Brain Behav Immun 17(suppl 1):S27-S36, 2003.
37. Ben-Eliyahu S, Page GG, Yirmiya R, et al: Evidence that stress and surgical interventions promote tumor development by suppressing natural killer cell activity. Int J Cancer 80:880-888, 1999.
38. Fink PF: The role of cytokines as mediators of the inflammatory response, in Townsend CM, Beauchamp RD, Evers BM (eds): Sabiston Textbook of Surgery, pp 28-44. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, 2001.
39. Redmond HP, Watson RW, Houghton T, et al: Immune function in patients undergoing open vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 129:1240-1246, 1994.
40. Roumen RM, van Meurs PA, Kuypers HH, et al: Serum interleukin-6 and C reactive protein responses in patients after laparoscopic or conventional cholecystectomy. Eur J Surg 158:541-544, 1992.
41. Carey PD, Wakefield CH, Thayeb A, et al: Effects of minimally invasive surgery on hypochlorous acid production by neutrophils. Br J Surg 81:557-560, 1994.
42. Trokel MJ, Bessler M, Treat MR, et al: Preservation of immune response after laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 8:1385-1387, 1994.
43. Kloosterman T, von Blomberg BM, Borgstein P, et al: Unimpaired immune functions after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 115:424-428, 1994.
44. Brune IB, Wilke W, Hensler T, et al: Normal T lymphocyte and monocyte function after minimally invasive surgery. Surg Endosc 12:1020-1024, 1998.
45. Brune IB, Wilke W, Hensler T, et al: Downregulation of T helper type 1 immune response and altered pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory T cell cytokine balance following conventional but not laparoscopic surgery. Am J Surg 177:55-60, 1999.
46. Herberman RB, Ortaldo JR: Natural killer cells: Their roles in defenses against disease. Science 214:24-30, 1981.
47. Brittenden J, Heys SD, Ross J, et al: Natural killer cells and cancer. Cancer 77:1226-1243, 1996.
48. Taketomi A, Shimada M, Shirabe K, et al: Natural killer cell activity in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A new prognostic indicator after hepatectomy. Cancer 83:58-63, 1998.
49. Pollock RE, Lotzova E, Stanford SD: Surgical stress impairs natural killer cell programming of tumor for lysis in patients with sarcomas and other solid tumors. Cancer 70:2192-2202, 1992.
50. Glaser R, Kiecolt-Glaser J: Stress-associated depression in cellular immunity: Implications for acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Brain Behav Immun 1:107-112, 1987.
51. Leung KL, Tsang KS, Ng MH, et al: Lymphocyte subsets and natural killer cell cytotoxicity after laparoscopically assisted resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma. Surg Endosc 17:1305-1310, 2003.
52. Fujii K, Izumi K, Sonoda K, et al: Less impaired cell-mediated immune response in the murine peritoneal cavity after CO(2) pneumoperitoneum. Surg Today 33:833-838, 2003.
53. Lee SW, Feingold DL, Carter JJ, et al: Peritoneal macrophage and blood monocyte functions after open and laparoscopic-assisted cecectomy in rats. Surg Endosc 17:1996-2002, 2003.
54. Neuhaus SJ, Watson DI, Ellis T, et al: Metabolic and immunologic consequences of laparoscopy with helium or carbon dioxide insufflation: A randomized clinical study. ANZ J Surg 71:447-452, 2001.
55. Kim WW, Jeon HM, Park SC, et al: Comparison of immune preservation between CO2 pneumoperitoneum and gasless abdominal lift laparoscopy. JSLS 6:11-15, 2002.
56. Iuppa A, Petralia GA, Sciuto A, et al: Abdominal wall metastasis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma following laparoscopy. Ann Ital Chir 67:265-269, 1996.
57. Vukasin P, Ortega AE, Greene FL, et al: Wound recurrence following laparoscopic colon cancer resection. Results of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Laparoscopic Registry. Dis Colon Rectum 39(10 suppl):S20-S23, 1996.
58. Jacobi CA, Ordemann J, Bohm B, et al: The influence of laparotomy and laparoscopy on tumor growth in a rat model. Surg Endosc 1:618-621, 1997.
59. Lee SW, Southall J, Allendorf J, et al: Traumatic handling of the tumor independent of pneumoperitoneum increases port site implantation rate of colon cancer in a murine model. Surg Endosc 12:828-834, 1998.
60. Southall JC, Lee SW, Allendorf JD, et al: Colon adenocarcinoma and B-16 melanoma grow larger following laparotomy vs. pneumoperitoneum in a murine model. Dis Colon Rectum 41:564-569, 1998.
61. Allendorf JD, Bessler M, Horvath KD, et al: Increased tumor establishment and growth after open vs laparoscopic bowel resection in mice. Surg Endosc 12:1035-1038, 1998.
62. Bouvy ND, Marquet RL, Jeekel H, et al: Impact of gas(less) laparoscopy and laparotomy on peritoneal tumor growth and abdominal wall metastases [see comment]. Ann Surg 224:694-700, 1996.
63. Lee SW, Southall JC, Allendorf JD, et al: Tumor proliferative index is higher in mice undergoing laparotomy vs. CO2 pneumoperitoneum. Dis Colon Rectum 42:477-481, 1999.
64. Leung KL, Kwok SP, Lam SC, et al: Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: Prospective randomised trial. Lancet 363:1187-1192, 2004.
65. Monson JR, Darzi A, Carey PD, et al: Prospective evaluation of laparoscopic-assisted colectomy in an unselected group of patients. Lancet 340:831-833, 1992.
66. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, et al: Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: A randomised trial. Lancet 359:2224-2229, 2002.
67. Feliciotti F, Paganini AM, Guerrieri M, et al: Results of laparoscopic vs open resections for colon cancer in patients with a minimum follow-up of 3 years. Surg Endosc 16:1158-1161, 2002.
68. Hartley JE, Mehigan BJ, MacDonald AW, et al: Patterns of recurrence and survival after laparoscopic and conventional resections for colorectal carcinoma. Ann Surg 232:181-186, 2000.
69. Franklin ME Jr, Rosenthal D, Abrego-Medina D, et al: Prospective comparison of open vs. laparoscopic colon surgery for carcinoma. Five-year results. Dis Colon Rectum 39(10 suppl):S35-S46, 1996.
70. Fleshman JW, Nelson H, Peters WR, et al: Early results of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Retrospective analysis of 372 patients treated by Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST) Study Group. Dis Colon Rectum 39(10 suppl):S53-S58, 1996.
71. Franklin ME Jr, Gonzalez JJ Jr: Laparoscopic placement of hepatic artery catheter for regional chemotherapy infusion: Technique, benefits, and complications. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 12:398-407, 2002.
72. Reich H, McGlynn F, DeCaprio J, et al: Laparoscopic excision of benign liver lesions. Obstet Gynecol 78:956-958, 1991.
73. Melendez JA, Arslan V, Fischer ME, et al: Perioperative outcomes of major hepatic resections under low central venous pressure anesthesia: Blood loss, blood transfusion, and the risk of postoperative renal dysfunction. J Am Coll Surg 187:620-625, 1998.
74. Pringle J: Notes on the arrest of hepatic hemorrhage due to trauma. Ann Surg 48:541, 1908.
75. Kooby DA, Fong Y: Laparoscopic liver surgery, in Soper NJ, Swanstrom LL, Eubanks SW (eds): Mastery of Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgery, pp 342-354. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005.
76. Fong Y, Jarnagin W, Conlon KC, et al: Hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection: lessons from an initial experience. Arch Surg 135:854-859, 2000.
77. Buell JF, Thomas MJ, Doty TC, et al: An initial experience and evolution of laparoscopic hepatic resectional surgery. Surgery 136:804-811, 2004.
78. Walsh N: Improvements in liver resections stretch boundaries. Surgery News 1(11):1, 2005.
79. Gagner M, Pomp A: Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy. Surg Endosc 8:408-410, 1994.
