Пути развития миниинвазивной хирургии колоректального рака (обзор литературы)

Колоректальный рак остается одной из наиболее значимых онкологических проблем. Хирургическое лечение является ключевым компонентом радикального лечения, а его развитие связано с внедрением и совершенствованием миниинвазивных технологий. В обзоре анализируются три основных направления улучшения результатов лечения колоректального рака: онкологические, непосредственные и функциональные результаты. Рассматривается эволюция от лапароскопии к роботической и трансанальной хирургии, обсуждаются преимущества и ограничения каждого метода, включая данные крупных рандомизированных исследований. Особое внимание уделено стратегиям снижения частоты несостоятельности анастомоза, таким как интраоперационная оценка перфузии с помощью индоцианина зеленого, интракорпоральное анастомозирование и минидоступы для извлечения препарата. Освещены современные подходы к органосохраняющим операциям при раке прямой кишки. Перспективы развития связываются с дальнейшей миниатюризацией, интеграцией искусственного интеллекта, умных инструментов и персонализацией хирургического лечения.

1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660.

2. Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, et al. COlon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (COLOR). Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2005;6(7):477–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(05)70221-7.

3. Nelson H, Sargent D, Wieand HS, et al. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(20):2050–2059. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa032651.

4. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1718–1726. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66545-2.

5. Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, et al. Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97(11):1638–1645. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7160.

6. Kang SB, Park JW, Jeong SY, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(7):637–645. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70131-5.

7. Völkel V, Draeger T, Gerken M, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic vs. open colon cancer resection: a high-quality population-based analysis in a Southern German district. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(10):4138–4147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6158-4.

8. Jafari MD, Wexner SD, Martz JE, et al. Perfusion assessment in laparoscopic left-sided/anterior resection (PILLAR II): a multiinstitutional study. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(1):82–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.09.015.

9. De Nardi P, Elmore U, Maggi G, et al. Intraoperative angiography with indocyanine green to assess anastomosis perfusion in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resection: results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2020;34(1):53–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06730-0.

10. Ris F, Liot E, Buchs NC, et al. Near-Infrared Anastomotic Perfusion Assessment Network VOIR. Multicentre phase II trial of near-infrared imaging in elective colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2018;105(10):1359–1367. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.10844.

11. Lee JE, Joh YG, Yoo SH, et al. Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2011;27(2):64–70. https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2011.27.2.64.

12. Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the acosog z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314(13):1346–1355. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.10529.

13. Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, et al. ALaCaRT investigators. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314(13):1356–1363. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.12009.

14. Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(7):767–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70205-0.

15. van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, et al. COlorectal cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection II (COLOR II) Study Group. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(3):210–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70016-0.

16. Bonjer HJ, Koedam TWA, Bootsma BT, et al. Laparoscopic vs open resection for rectal cancer: long-term oncologic results of the COLOR II randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2021;156(8):692–700.

17. Park JW, Kang SB, Hao J, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): 10-year follow-up of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;6(7):569–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00094-7.

18. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, et al. Effect of roboticassisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318(16):1569–1580. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.7219.

19. Prete FP, Pezzolla A, Prete F, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2018;267(6):1034–1046. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002523.

20. Law WL, Zhang C, Cheng L, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dis Colon Rectum. 2021;64(9):1055–1064.

21. Zou J, Zhu H, Tang Y, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Surg. 2025;25:86. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-025-02805-z.

22. Ma B, Gao P, Song Y, et al. Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and perioperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:380. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2428-5.

23. Wasmuth HH, Faerden AE, Myklebust TÅ, et al. Transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer has been suspended in Norway. Br J Surg. 2020;107(1):121–130. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.11459.

24. Deijen CL, Vasmel JE, de Lange-de Klerk ESM, et al. COLOR (COlon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection) study group. Ten-year outcomes of a randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colon cancer. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(6):2607– 2615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5270-6.

25. Whiteford MH, Denk PM, Swanström LL. Feasibility of radical sigmoid colectomy performed as natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) using transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(10):1870–1874. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9552-x.

26. Walker KG, Bell SW, Rickard MJ, et al. Anastomotic leakage is predictive of diminished survival after potentially curative resection for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):255–259. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133186.81222.08.

27. Burden ST, Gibson DJ, Lal S, et al. Pre-operative oral nutritional supplementation with dietary advice versus dietary advice alone in weight-losing patients with colorectal cancer: single-blind randomized controlled trial. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2017;8(3):437–446. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12170.

28. Dhatariya K, Levy N, Kilvert A, et al. Joint British Diabetes Societies. NHS Diabetes guideline for the perioperative management of the adult patient with diabetes. Diabet Med. 2012;29(4):420–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03582.x.

29. Nguyen GC, Elnahas A, Jackson TD. The impact of preoperative steroid use on short-term outcomes following surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. J Crohns Colitis. 2014;8(12):1661– 1667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crohns.2014.07.007.

30. Güenaga KF, Matos D, Wille-Jørgensen P. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;2011(9):CD001544. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001544.pub4.

31. Vignali A, Gianotti L, Braga M, et al. Altered microperfusion at the rectal stump is predictive for rectal anastomotic leak. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43(1):76–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237248.

32. Shen X, Zhou C, Hua Q, et al. Impact of operation duration on short-term and long-term prognosis in patients undergoing radical colorectal surgery. J Cancer. 2022;13(4):1160– 1167. https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.65817.

33. Boni L, Fingerhut A, Marzorati A, et al. Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography during laparoscopic low anterior resection: results of a case-matched study. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(4):1836–1840. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5181-6.

34. Choy PYG, Bissett IP, Docherty JG, et al. Stapled versus handsewn methods for ileocolic anastomoses. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2007;3:1–20.

35. Ricciardi R, Roberts PL, Marcello PW, et al. Anastomotic leak testing after colorectal resection: what are the data? Arch Surg. 2009;144(5):407–411. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2009.43.

36. Lustosa SA, Matos D, Atallah AN, Castro AA. Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Sao Paulo Med J. 2002;120(5):132–136. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1516-31802002000500002.

37. Anthis AHC, Hu X, Matter MT, et al. Chemically stable, strongly adhesive sealant patch for intestinal anastomotic leakage prevention. Adv Funct Mater. 2021;31:2007099.

38. Diana M, Noll E, Diemunsch P, et al. Enhanced-reality video fluorescence: a real-time assessment of intestinal viability. Ann Surg. 2014;259(4):700–707. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31828d4ab3.

39. Urbanavičius L, Pattyn P, de Putte DV, Venskutonis D. How to assess intestinal viability during surgery: a review of techniques. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;3(5):59–69. https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v3.i5.59.

40. Taha-Mehlitz S, Wentzler L, Angehrn F, et al. Machine learning-based preoperative analytics for the prediction of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery: a swiss pilot study. Surg Endosc. 2024;38(7):3672–3683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-10926-4.

41. Guo J, Yang D, Zhang B, et al. The safety of Pfannenstiel incision for specimen extraction in laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2024;19(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2023.134194.

42. Lee L, Abou-Khalil M, Liberman S, et al. Incidence of incisional hernia in the specimen extraction site for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: systematic review and metaanalysis. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(12):5083–5093. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5573-2.

43. Takeda Y, Goto K, Kamada T, et al. Postoperative pain and incisional hernia of specimen extraction sites for minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery: comparison of periumbilical midline incision versus pfannenstiel incision. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025;14(8):2697. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14082697.

44. Wei P, Li Y, Gao J, et al. Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Dig Surg. 2024;41(5–6):224– 244. https://doi.org/10.1159/000541373.

45. Hajibandeh S, Hajibandeh S, Mankotia R, et al. Metaanalysis of randomised controlled trials comparing intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: upgrading the level of evidence. Updates Surg. 2021;73(1):23–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-020-00948-7.

46. Emile SH, Elfeki H, Shalaby M, et al. Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive right colectomy: an updated systematic review and metaanalysis. Tech Coloproctol. 2019;23(11):1023–1035. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-019-02079-7.

47. Marchesi F, Pinna F, Percalli L, et al. Totally laparoscopic right colectomy: theoretical and practical advantages over the laparoassisted approach. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23(5):418–424. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2012.0420.

48. Мельников П.В., Черниковский И.Л., Каннер Д.А. и др. Безопасность интракорпоральных анастомозов при правосторонних гемиколэктомиях на этапе прохождения кривой обучения. Хирургия и онкология. 2020;10:37–42. https://doi.org/10.17650/2686-9594-2020-10-1-37-42.

49. Guan X, Liu Z, Longo A, et al. International Alliance of NOSES. International consensus on natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterol Rep. 2019;7(1):24–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/gastro/goy055.

50. Brincat SD, Lauri J, Cini C. Natural orifice versus transabdominal specimen extraction in laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: meta-analysis. BJS Open. 2022;6(3):zrac074. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrac074.

51. Glynne-Jones R, Wyrwicz L, Tiret E, et al. ESMO guidelines committee. Rectal cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2017;28(l– 4):22–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx224.

52. Saito Y, Uraoka T, Yamaguchi Y, et al. A prospective, multicenter study of 1111 colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissections (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;72(6):1217–1225. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.08.004.

53. Karniadakis I, Papadakos SP, Argyroy A, et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus transanal endoscopic microsurgery for the treatment of rectal polyps: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1097/MEG.0000000000002996.

54. Naughton AP, Ryan ÉJ, Bardon CT, et al. Endoscopic management versus transanal surgery for early primary or early locally recurrent rectal neoplasms-a systematic review andmeta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2020;35(12):2347–2359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-020-03715-7.

55. Rullier E, Vendrely V, Asselineau J, et al. Organ preservation with chemoradiotherapy plus local excision for rectal cancer: 5-year results of the GRECCAR 2 randomised trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;5(5):465– 474. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30410-8.

56. Bujko K, Rutkowski A, Chang GJ, et al. Is the 1-cm rule of distal bowel resection margin in rectal cancer based on clinical evidence? A Systematic Review. Indian J Surg Oncol. 2012;3(2):139–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-012-0158-y.

57. Rullier E, Denost Q, Vendrely V, et al. Low rectal cancer: classification and standardization of surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56(5):560–567. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0b013e31827c4a8c.

58. Martin ST, Heneghan HM, Winter DC. Systematic review of outcomes after intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2012;99(5):603–612. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8677.