UNASSIGNED: Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) combines the benefits of laparoscopic surgery with the tactile feedback from open surgery. In the current era of laparoscopic surgery, the significance of HALS as a technical transition has diminished. This study clarified the usefulness of HALS in restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) for ulcerative colitis (UC) in the era of laparoscopic surgery.
UNASSIGNED: The 212 patients who underwent RPC with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis between 2007 and 2023 were included in this study. The patients were divided into three groups, open surgery (OS), HALS, and conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAP), and their characteristics, surgical outcomes, surgical complications, and functional outcomes were compared.
UNASSIGNED: The number of surgical techniques was OS in 21 cases, HALS in 184 cases, and LAP in 7 cases. The number of surgeons was two for OS and HALS, and four for LAP, with OS and HALS having fewer surgeons than LAP. The length of the skin incision was 13, 7, and 3 cm for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, and the operation times was 250, 286, and 576 minutes for OS, HALS, and LAP, respectively, with LAP having the longest operation time. The postoperative complications and function did not differ markedly among the three groups.
UNASSIGNED: In RPC for UC, HALS involved fewer surgeons and a shorter operative time than LAP. Even in the era of laparoscopic surgery, HALS remains a useful option, especially when a shorter operation time is required or when the number of available surgeons is insufficient.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the results and 5- and 8-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS) in radical gastrectomy for advanced distal gastric cancer.
METHODS: A total of 124 patients admitted to our institution from May 2009 to April 2013 were randomly divided into a HALS group (n = 62) and a LAS group (n = 62). Postoperatively, 110 patients were followed for 5 and 8 years, and 14 patients were lost to follow-up. The 5- and 8-year OS and DFS rates of the groups were compared and analyzed.
RESULTS: The 5- and 8-year OS rates, respectively, were 38.8% and 19.4% in the HALS group and 38.3% and 15.3% in the LAS group (log-rank test, χ2 = 0.250). The 5- and 8-year DFS rates, respectively, were 23.1% and 10.6% in the HALS group and 19.3% and 11.6% in the LAS group (log-rank test, χ2 = 0.109). No significant differences were found.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with LAS, HALS radical gastrectomy for advanced distal gastric cancer had a lower conversion rate to open surgery, shorter surgical duration, and more thorough dissection of lymph nodes; 5- and 8-year OS and DFS rates were similar to those with LAS.

OBJECTIVE: Hand-assisted laparoscopic liver resection has the advantages of open and laparoscopic surgeries. There is still lack of comparison of surgical outcomes between hand-assistied laparoscopic liver resection (HALLR) and open liver resection (OLR). This study compared the surgical outcomes of the two approaches between well-matched patient cohorts.
METHODS: Patients who received liver resection during January 2014 and October 2017 in Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College were included in this retrospective study. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce selection bias between the two groups. Operation and short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the well matched groups.
RESULTS: During this period, 232 patients with a median age of 55.1 years old received OLR, while 49 patients with a median age of 54.7 years old received HALLR. Compared with HALLR group, OLR group has a higher proportion in male patients (190/232, 81.9% vs. 34/49, 69.4%, P=0.048) and lower albumin (43.2±4.5 vs. 44.8±3.7, P=0.020). After PSM, 49 patients from each group were included in the following analysis. Two groups were well balanced in their baseline characteristics, liver functions, preoperative treatments, abdominal surgery history, and surgical difficulty. None perioperative mortality was observed in both groups. Operation time and postoperative complications were similar in two groups (P=0.935, P=0.056). The HALLR group showed less bleeding amount (177.8±217.1 mL vs. 283.1±225.0 mL, P=0.003) and shorter postoperative stay period (6.9±2.2 d vs. 9.0±3.5 d, P=0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is feasible and safe for liver resection, including some difficult cases. HALLR can provide better bleeding control and faster recovery after surgery.

Although conventional laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is widely used today, there remain many technical challenges especially for right colon cancer in obese patients. Herein, we develop a novel hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) with complete mesocolic excision (CME), D3 lymphadenectomy, and a total \"no-touch\" isolation technique (HALS-CME) in right hemicolectomy to overcome these issues. According to previous clinic practice, this novel procedure is not only feasible and safe but has several technical merits. However, the feasibility, short-term minimally invasive virtues, long-term oncological superiority, and potential total \"no-touch\" isolation technique benefits of HALS-CME should be confirmed by a prospective randomized controlled trial.
This is a single-center, open-label, noninferiority, randomized controlled trial. Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to the HALS-CME group or to the laparoscopic surgery with CME, D3 lymphadenectomy, and total \"no-touch\" isolation technique (LAP-CME) group, or to conventional laparoscopic surgery with CME and D3 lymphadenectomy (cLAP) group at a 1:1:1 ratio using a centralized randomization list. Primary endpoints include safety, efficacy, and being oncologically clear, and 3-year disease-free, progression-free, and overall survival. Second endpoints include operative outcomes (operation time, blood loss, and incision length), pathologic evaluation (grading the plane of surgery, length of proximal and distal resection margins, distance between the tumor and the central arterial high tie, distance between the nearest bowel wall and the same high tie, area of mesentery resected, width of the chain of lymph-adipose tissue, length of the central lymph-adipose chain, number of harvested lymph nodes), and postoperative outcomes (pain intensity, postoperative inflammatory and immune responses, postoperative recovery).
This trial will provide valuable clinical evidence for the feasibility, safety, and potential total \"no-touch\" isolation technique benefits of HALS-CME for right hemicolectomy. The hypothesis is that HALS-CME is feasible for the radical D3 resection of right colon cancer and offers short-term safety and long-term oncological superiority compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02625272 . Registered on 8 December 2015.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate short-term clinical outcomes by comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) with open surgery for sigmoid colon cancer.
METHODS: Twenty-six patients who underwent a hand-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection (HAL-AR group) and 52 patients who underwent a conventional open anterior resection during the same period were enrolled (open group) in this study with a case-controlled design.
RESULTS: Pathologic parameters were similar between the two groups. The incidences of immediate postoperative leukocytosis were 38.5% in the HAL-AR group and 69.2% in the open group (P = 0.009). There were no significant differences between the two groups as to leukocyte count, hemoglobin, and hematocrits (P = 0.758, P = 0.383, and P = 0.285, respectively). Of the postoperative recovery indicators, first flatus, sips of water and soft diet started on postoperative days 3, 5, 7 in the HALS group and on days 4, 5, 6 in the open group showed statistical significance (P = 0.021, P = 0.259, and P = 0.174, respectively). Administration of additional pain killers was needed for 1.2 days in the HAL-AR group and 2.4 days in the open group (P = 0.002). No significant differences in the durations of hospital stay and the rates of postoperative complications were noted, and no postoperative mortality was encountered in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: The patients with sigmoid colon cancer who underwent a HAL-AR had a lower incidence of postoperative leukocytosis, less administration of pain killers, and faster first flatus than those who underwent open surgery. Clinical outcomes for patients\' recovery and pathology status were similar between the two groups. Therefore, a HAL-AR for sigmoid colon cancer is feasible and has the same benefit as minimally invasive surgery.