Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer

Progress, challenges, and future perspectives of robot-assisted natural orifice specimen extraction surgery for colorectal cancer: a review

With the continuous advancements in precision medicine and the relentless pursuit of minimally invasive techniques, Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery (NOSES) has emerged. Compared to traditional surgical methods, NOSES better embodies the principles of minimally invasive surgery, making scar-free operations possible. In recent years, with the progress of science and technology, Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery has been widely applied in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Robotic surgical systems, with their clear surgical view and high operational precision, have shown significant advantages in the treatment process. To further improve the therapeutic outcomes for colorectal cancer patients, some scholars have attempted to combine robotic technology with NOSES. However, like traditional open surgery or laparoscopic surgery, the use of the robotic platform presents both advantages and limitations. Therefore, this study reviews the current research status, progress, and controversies regarding Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery for colorectal cancer, aiming to provide clinicians with more options in the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer.

Robotic colorectal resections are associated with less postoperative pain, decreased opioid use, and earlier return to work as compared to the laparoscopic approach

While robotic and laparoscopic surgeries are both minimally invasive in nature, they are intrinsically different approaches and it is critical to understand outcome differences between the two. Studies evaluating pain outcomes and opioid requirement differences between the robotic and laparoscopic colorectal resections are conflicting and often underpowered. In this retrospective, cohort study, we compare postoperative opioid requirements, reported as morphine milligram equivalents (MME), postoperative average and highest pain scores across postoperative days (POD) 0-5, and return to work in patients who underwent robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal resections. The sample size was selected based on power calculations. Daily pain scores and MME were used as outcomes in linear mixed effect models with unstructured covariance between time points. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust for imbalances. Patients in the robotic group required significantly less opioids as measured by MME on all postoperative days (p = 0.004), as well as lower average and highest daily pain scores for POD 0-5 (p = 0.02, and p = 0.006, respectively). In a linear mixed-effects model, robotic resections were associated with a decrease in average pain scores by 0.36 over time (p = 0.03) and 35 fewer MME requirements than the laparoscopic group (p = 0.0004). Patients in the robotic arm had earlier return to work (2.1 vs 3.8 days, p = 0.036). The robotic approach to colorectal resections is associated with significantly less postoperative pain, decreased opioid requirements, and earlier return to work when compared to laparoscopy, suggesting that the robotic platform provides important clinical advantages over the laparoscopic approach.

Artificial intelligence: revolutionizing robotic surgery: review

Robotic surgery, known for its minimally invasive techniques and computer-controlled robotic arms, has revolutionized modern medicine by providing improved dexterity, visualization, and tremor reduction compared to traditional methods. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into robotic surgery has further advanced surgical precision, efficiency, and accessibility. This paper examines the current landscape of AI-driven robotic surgical systems, detailing their benefits, limitations, and future prospects. Initially, AI applications in robotic surgery focused on automating tasks like suturing and tissue dissection to enhance consistency and reduce surgeon workload. Present AI-driven systems incorporate functionalities such as image recognition, motion control, and haptic feedback, allowing real-time analysis of surgical field images and optimizing instrument movements for surgeons. The advantages of AI integration include enhanced precision, reduced surgeon fatigue, and improved safety. However, challenges such as high development costs, reliance on data quality, and ethical concerns about autonomy and liability hinder widespread adoption. Regulatory hurdles and workflow integration also present obstacles. Future directions for AI integration in robotic surgery include enhancing autonomy, personalizing surgical approaches, and refining surgical training through AI-powered simulations and virtual reality. Overall, AI integration holds promise for advancing surgical care, with potential benefits including improved patient outcomes and increased access to specialized expertise. Addressing challenges and promoting responsible adoption are essential for realizing the full potential of AI-driven robotic surgery.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgical Techniques

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal resections in patients with inflammatory bowel disease [IBD].

METHODS

Comparative studies of robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal resections in patients with IBD were included. The primary outcome was total post-operative complication rate. Secondary outcomes included operative time, conversion to open surgery, anastomotic leaks, intra-abdominal abscess formation, ileus occurrence, surgical site infection, re-operation, re-admission rate, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using a random-effects model and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

Eleven non-randomized studies [n = 5566 patients] divided between those undergoing robotic [n = 365] and conventional laparoscopic [n = 5201] surgery were included. Robotic platforms were associated with a significantly lower overall post-operative complication rate compared with laparoscopic surgery [p = 0.03]. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with a significantly shorter operative time [p = 0.00001]. No difference was found in conversion rates to open surgery [p = 0.15], anastomotic leaks [p = 0.84], abscess formation [p = 0.21], paralytic ileus [p = 0.06], surgical site infections [p = 0.78], re-operation [p = 0.26], re-admission rate [p = 0.48], and 30-day mortality [p = 1.00] between the groups. Length of hospital stay was shorter following a robotic sub-total colectomy compared with conventional laparoscopy [p = 0.03].

CONCLUSION

Outcomes in the surgical management of IBD are comparable between traditional laparoscopic techniques and robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery, demonstrating the safety and feasibility of robotic platforms. Larger studies investigating the use of robotic technology in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis separately may be of benefit with a specific focus on important IBD-related metrics.

[Robotic Colorectal Surgery: Analysis of the First Three Years of Activity in a Hospital of the Portuguese National Health Service]

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly accepted and used in colorectal surgery. Several studies report that robotic surgery may provide advantages over 'conventional' laparoscopy, namely in rectal surgery. This paper provides an account of the first three years of experience with robotic surgery in the Unidade de Patologia Colorretal of the Unidade Local de Saúde S. José.

METHODS

Variables were defined to develop a prospective database containing the data of consecutive patients operated by three internationally certified colorectal surgeons using the Da Vinci Xi® system between November 2019 and October 2022. The database was converted into an anonymized version that was used for this study. The analysis was performed on the data of all the patients operated during this period.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were included, 47 male, median age 70 years, and median BMI 26 kg/m2 . ASA score was II in 53.7% and III in 41.3% of pa- tients. Of the total, 97.6% had malignant or potentially malignant disease. Operative procedures consisted of 34 colectomies proximal to the splenic flexure, 20 distal colectomies and 26 anterior resections. There were two synchronous resections of liver metastases. Early perioperative outcomes and histopathological results were analyzed: median operative time: 300 minutes; median estimated blood loss: 50 mL; conversion rate: 2.5%; median days until first bowel movement: three days; median length of hospital stay: six days; complication rate: 20%, of which 5% were Clavien III and 0% Clavien IV/V; anastomotic leak rate: 2.5%; 30-day readmission rate: 1.3%; median lymph nodes resected: 20; R0 resection rate: 100%; mesorectal integrity rate: 95,8% complete/near complete.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that the adoption of robotic colorectal surgery in our center was safe and resulted in similar or improved short-term clinical outcomes and histopathological results when compared to those described in the literature.

Differences in the Difficulty of Accessing Various 3-Dimensional Locations Under Mirror-Image Conditions During Laparoscopic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colon surgery frequently requires performing maneuvers under mirror-images conditions; the complexity differs depending on the surgical site location in the abdominal cavity. However, no previous reports have examined this.

METHODS

Eleven surgeons participated in this study. Operations were performed on 25 points placed at the bottom and sides of a laparoscopic training box under mirror-image conditions. The mean time-point required to operate at each point and variation between surgeons were evaluated.

RESULTS

When the right hand was used, time-points to touch the right side-superficial ends were 0.50 to 0.58 and 0.27 to 0.45 for the other sites. With the left hand, time-points to touch the left side-superficial ends were 0.58 to 0.63 and 0.28 to 0.51 for the other sites, indicating that the most difficult manipulation was at the proximal site of the surgical port. The variation in the difficulty according to the spots increased with a decrease in the surgeon's experience (right hand, r =-0.248; left hand, r =-0.491).

CONCLUSIONS

In performing laparoscopic surgery under mirror-image conditions, the technical difficulty varies by location, and operating in locations close to the forceps port is the most difficult.

European Robotic Surgery Consensus (ERSC): Protocol for the development of a consensus in robotic training for gastrointestinal surgery trainees

BACKGROUND

The rapid adoption of robotic surgical systems across Europe has led to a critical gap in training and credentialing for gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons. Currently, there is no existing standardised curriculum to guide robotic training, assessment and certification for GI trainees. This manuscript describes the protocol to achieve a pan-European consensus on the essential components of a comprehensive training programme for GI robotic surgery through a five-stage process.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In Stage 1, a Steering Committee, consisting of international experts, trainees and educationalists, has been established to lead and coordinate the consensus development process. In Stage 2, a systematic review of existing multi-specialty robotic training curricula will be performed to inform the formulation of key position statements. In Stage 3, a comprehensive survey will be disseminated across Europe to capture the current state of robotic training and identify potential challenges and opportunities for improvement. In Stage 4, an international panel of GI surgeons, trainees, and robotic theatre staff will participate in a three-round Delphi process, seeking ≥ 70% agreement on crucial aspects of the training curriculum. Industry and patient representatives will be involved as external advisors throughout this process. In Stage 5, the robotic training curriculum for GI trainees will be finalised in a dedicated consensus meeting, culminating in the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document.

REGISTRATION DETAILS

The study protocol has been registered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/br87d/).

Effect of Robotic Inferior Mesenteric Artery Ligation Level on Low Anterior Resection Syndrome in Rectum Cancer

Background: Life expectancy of patients with rectal cancer is increasing day by day with innovative treatments. Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), which disrupts the comfort of life in these patients, has become a serious problem. We aimed to evaluate the effect of high ligation (HL) and low ligation (LL) techniques on LARS in rectal cancer surgery performed with the robotic method. Materials and Methods: The data of patients diagnosed with mid-distal rectal cancer between 2016 and 2021 who underwent robotic low anterior resection by the same team in the same center with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided into two groups as those who underwent HL and LL procedures. Preoperative, 8 weeks after neoadjuvant treatment, 3 and 12 months after ileostomy closure were evaluated. Results: A total of 84 patients (41 HL, 43 LL) were included in the study. There was no statistically significant difference between the demographic characteristics and pathology data of the patients. Although there was a decrease in LARS scores after neoadjuvant treatment, there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups at 3 and 12 months after ileostomy closure (P: .001, P: .015). Conclusions: In patients who underwent robotic low anterior resection, there is a statistically significant difference in the LARS score in the first 1 year with the LL technique compared with that of the HL technique, and the LL technique has superiority in reducing the development of LARS between the two oncologically indistinguishable methods.

Colorectal procedures with the novel Hugo™ RAS system: training process and case series report from a non-robotic surgical team

BACKGROUND

The landscape of robotic surgery is evolving with the emergence of new platforms. However, reports on their applicability in different surgical fields are still limited and come from teams with robotics experience. This study aims to describe the training process for colorectal surgery with the Hugo™ RAS system of a robotics-inexperienced surgical team and present the initial patient series.

METHODS

The training process is depicted, and data from the first 10 consecutive patients operated on for colorectal conditions with the Hugo™ RAS system by a surgical team with no prior experience in robotic surgery were prospectively recorded and analysed.

RESULTS

The team received intensive training in robotic surgery and specifically in the Hugo™ RAS system previously to the first case. Between May 2023 and December 2023, 10 patients underwent colorectal procedures: 5 right colectomies, 3 sigmoid resections, 1 high rectal resection and 1 ventral mesh rectopexy. The first case was proctored by an expert. Median docking time was 14 min and median total operative time was 185 min. The only technical difficulty during the procedures was occasional clashing of robotic arms. None had to be converted, and no intraoperative or postoperative morbidity was recorded. Hospital stays ranged from 2 to 4 days. A median of 21 lymph nodes were yielded in the operations for malignant conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Common colorectal procedures can be safely performed using the Hugo™ RAS platform. Prior experience in robotic surgery is not a necessary requirement, but following a structured training program is essential.

Opinion, uptake and current practice of robot-assisted upper gastrointestinal and oesophagogastric surgery in the UK: AUGIS national survey results

INTRODUCTION

The uptake of upper gastrointestinal (GI) robotic surgery in the United Kingdom (UK), and Europe more widely, is expanding rapidly. This study aims to present a current snapshot of the practice and opinions of the upper GI community with reference to robotic surgery, with an emphasis on tertiary cancer (oesophagogastric) resection centres.

METHODS

An electronic survey was circulated to the UK upper GI surgical community via national mailing lists, social media and at an open-invitation conference on robotic upper GI surgery in January 2023. The survey included questions on surgeons' current practice or planned adoption (if any) of robotics at individual and unit level, and their opinions on robotic upper GI surgery in general. Priority ranking and Likert-scale response options were used.

RESULTS

In total, 81 respondents from 43 hospitals were included. Thirty-four resectional centres responded, including 30 of 31 (97%) recognised upper GI cancer centres in England. Respondents reported performing robotic surgery in 21 of 34 (61.8%) resectional centres, with a median of 65 procedures per centre performed at the time of the survey (range 0-500, interquartile range 93.75). Every centre without a robotic programme expressed a desire or had active plans to implement one. Respondents ranked surgeon ergonomics as the most important reason for pursuing robotics, followed by improvements in patient outcomes and oncological efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic upper GI practice is nascent but rapidly growing in the UK with plans for uptake in almost all tertiary centres. There is growing opinion that this is likely to become the predominant surgical approach in future with benefits to both patients and surgeons. This snapshot offers a point of reference to all stakeholders in upper GI surgery.

Survival Trends Among Adolescents and Young Adults Diagnosed With Cancer in the United States: Comparisons With Children and Older Adults

PURPOSE

Although data from 1975 to 1997 revealed a gap in cancer survival improvement in adolescents and young adults (AYAs; 15-39 years) compared with children and older adults, more recent studies have reported improvements in AYA cancer survival overall. The current analysis provides an update of 5-year relative survival and cancer survival trends among AYAs compared with children and older adults.

METHODS

We obtained data from the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program for 17 regions to obtain recent (2010-2018) 5-year relative survival estimates by cancer type, stage, sex, and race/ethnicity by age group. In addition, we calculated 5-year relative survival trends during 2000-2014.

RESULTS

Across 33 common AYA cancers, AYAs and children had high 5-year relative survival (86%) and experienced similar survival improvements over time (average absolute change: AYAs, 0.33%; children 0.36%). Among AYAs, 73% of cancers had improvement in 5-year relative survival since 2000. Despite this overall progress, we identified cancers where survival was worse in AYAs than younger or older patients and cancers that have had either a lack of improvement (osteosarcoma and male breast) or decreases in survival (cervical and female bladder) over time. Furthermore, males had inferior survival to females for all cancers, except Kaposi sarcoma and bladder cancer, and non-Hispanic Black/African American AYAs experienced worse survival than other racial/ethnic groups for many cancers considered in this study.

CONCLUSION

Future studies should focus on identifying factors affecting survival disparities by age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Differences in biology, clinical trial enrollment, delivery of treatment according to clinical guidelines, and supportive and long-term survivorship care may account for the survival disparities we observed and warrant further investigation.

Suctionable Gauze Ball Operated by the Console Surgeon Overcomes Wet Scenes during Robotic Rectal Surgery

Although robotic rectal resections are now widely performed, there are few robotic suction tools that can be easily used by console surgeons. It can therefore be difficult to maintain a clear visual field in the pelvis when there is effusion and bleeding from either a highly advanced cancer or from preoperative cancer treatment. In this report, we introduce our unique surgical technique that uses a soft catheter with a small gauze ball attached, inserted through the assistant port. This simple and inexpensive "instrument" can be used by the console surgeon as a retractor as well as a reliable suction device to secure their view of the operative field in the pelvis. This technique can be used in a narrow surgical field and does not rely on an assistant surgeon, making it potentially applicable to all types of surgery.

Risk factors and clinical significance of subcutaneous emphysema after robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal surgery: a single-center experience

Subcutaneous emphysema (SE) is a complication of laparoscopic surgery, potentially resulting in severe respiratory failure. No reports to date have focused on SE during robot-assisted (RA) rectal surgery. We aimed to reveal the risk factors and clinical significance of SE after RA/laparoscopic rectal surgery. We retrospectively reviewed 221 consecutive patients who underwent RA/laparoscopic rectal surgery. The occurrence of SE was evaluated on postoperative radiographs. Laparoscopic surgery was performed in 120 patients and RA in 101. SE developed in 55 (24.9%) patients. Logistic regression analysis identified RA surgery (odds ratio [OR]: 4.89, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.13-11.22, p < 0.001), higher age (OR: 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.11, p < 0.001), lower body mass index (BMI) (OR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.67-0.93, p = 0.004), thinner subcutaneous layer (OR: 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.98, p = 0.02), and lateral lymph node dissection (OR: 9.43, 95% CI 2.44-36.42, p < 0.001) as risk factors for SE. Maximum end-tidal CO2 was significantly higher in the SE than the non-SE cohort (p < 0.001). There was no difference in postoperative complication rate or length of hospital stay. Lower BMI (OR: 0.79, 95% CI 0.62-0.97, p = 0.02) and thinner subcutaneous layer (OR: 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.97, p = 0.01) were predictive factors in the RA cohort. SE occurs more frequently in RA compared with laparoscopic surgery. SE has a modest impact on short-term outcomes, but may occasionally cause severe problems. The indication of RA surgery should be considered carefully in high-risk elderly patients.

Total neoadjuvant therapy in rectal cancer: the evidence and expectations

Current management of locally advanced rectal cancer achieves high cure rates, distant metastatic spread being the main cause of patients' death. Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) employs (chemo)radiotherapy and combined chemotherapy prior to surgery to improve the treatment outcomes. TNT has been shown to reduce significantly distant metastases, increase disease-free survival by 5 - 10% in 3 years, and finally also overall survival (≈ 5% in 7 years). It proved to double the rate of pathologic complete responses, making it an attractive strategy for non-operative management to avoid permanent colostomy in patients with distal tumors. In addition, it endorses adherence to the therapy due to better tolerance and, potentially, shortens its overall duration. A number of questions related to TNT remain currently unresolved including the indications, preferred radiotherapy and chemotherapy regimens, their sequence, timing of surgery, and role of adjuvant therapy. A stratified approach may be the optimal way to go.

Safety and feasibility of robotic surgery for colon cancer patients with previous abdominal surgery: a propensity score-matching analysis

Robotic surgery is widely used in gastrointestinal surgery. While the application of robotic surgery for colon cancer patients with previous abdominal surgery (PAS) remains controversial for the fear of intra-abdominal adhesions. This study was aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of robotic colectomy for patients with PAS. The medical records of colon cancer patients who underwent robotic surgery at our hospital from June 2015 to August 2020 were extracted and analyzed. Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was implemented to minimize selection bias. We compared perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications between the patients with PAS or with no PAS (NPAS). A total of 79 patients (PAS group) and 348 patients (NPAS group) were included in our study. After PSM, 79 patients of PAS group and 79 patients of NPAS group were selected for further analysis. We did not find statistical difference in operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph nodes retrieved, length of hospital stay and hospital costs between the two groups. No difference was noted in the incidence of postoperative complications, conversion to open surgery and mortality between the two groups. According to the results of multivariate analysis, PAS was not identified as risk factor for postoperative complications. Left hemicolectomy and perioperative transfusion were associated with postoperative complications. PAS did not negatively affect the outcomes of robotic colectomy. After individually preoperative assessment, robotic surgery could be performed feasibly and safely for colon cancer patients with PAS.

Colorectal Cancer: Disease Process, Current Treatment Options, and Future Perspectives

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the deadliest malignancies in the US, ranking fourth after lung, prostate, and breast cancers, respectively, in general populations. It continues to be a menace, and the incidence has been projected to more than double by 2035, especially in underdeveloped countries. This review seeks to provide some insights into the disease progression, currently available treatment options and their challenges, and future perspectives. Searches were conducted in the PubMed search engine in the university's online library. The keywords were "Colorectal Cancer" AND "disease process" OR "disease mechanisms" OR "Current Treatment" OR "Prospects". Selection criteria were original articles published primarily during the period of 2013 through 2023. Abstracts, books and documents, and reviews/systematic reviews were filtered out. Of over 490 thousand articles returned, only about 800 met preliminary selection criteria, 200 were reviewed in detail, but 191 met final selection criteria. Fifty-one other articles were used due to cross-referencing. Although recently considered a disease of lifestyle, CRC incidence appears to be rising in countries with low, low-medium, and medium social demographic indices. CRC can affect all parts of the colon and rectum but is more fatal with poor disease outcomes when it is right-sided. The disease progression usually takes between 7-10 years and can be asymptomatic, making early detection and diagnosis difficult. The CRC tumor microenvironment is made up of different types of cells interacting with each other to promote the growth and proliferation of the tumor cells. Significant advancement has been made in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Notable approaches include surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and cryotherapy. Chemotherapy, including 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and leucovorin, plays a significant role in the management of CRC that has been diagnosed at advanced stages. Two classes of monoclonal antibody therapies have been approved by the FDA for the treatment of colorectal cancer: the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitor, e.g., bevacizumab (Avastin®), and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, e.g., cetuximab (Erbitux®) and panitumumab (Verbitix®). However, many significant problems are still being experienced with these treatments, mainly off-target effects, toxic side effects, and the associated therapeutic failures of small molecular drugs and the rapid loss of efficacy of mAb therapies. Other novel delivery strategies continue to be investigated, including ligand-based targeting of CRC cells.

Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approaches to Treat Colorectal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review of Literature

Surgery is usually required to treat colorectal cancer (CRC). Medical technology has advanced, providing various approaches to tackle this disease. Different surgeries are available, such as laparoscopic surgery, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, and robotic surgery. Laparoscopic surgery has several benefits including reduced blood loss and shorter recovery time. It can also improve lung function and minimize complications. However, it requires more time to perform and has a higher risk of complications during the procedure. Robotic surgery provides a three-dimensional view of the surgical area allowing for greater precision in rectal surgeries and access to difficult-to-reach pelvic regions. This method utilizes robotics technology which reduces surgical time and speeds up recovery for patients. There are various surgical options available for treating CRC; however, laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery offer unique advantages despite their own drawbacks. As technology continues to evolve, medical techniques will continue improving existing methods while providing new options resulting in better outcomes for patients. Compared to laparoscopy, robotic surgery has a lower rate of operative conversions and a shorter learning curve. However, it also has some drawbacks, such as a longer docking time, lack of tactile sensation, and higher cost. Therefore, the choice of surgical method should depend on patient characteristics, surgeon preference and expertise, and available resources. Currently, specialized centers offer robotic surgeries which are more expensive and take longer compared to open and laparoscopic approaches. Nonetheless, they are considered safe and feasible when compared to traditional surgery. Short-term outcomes for robotic surgeries are better, while long-term postoperative complication rates remain similar. However, there is a need for additional well-defined randomized control trials conducted across multiple centers to validate the use of robotic surgery over open and laparoscopic approaches. Improving patient care and outcomes is the objective of this comprehensive literature overview on surgical approaches for CRC.

Impact of routine preoperative 18 FDG PET/CT on the surgical management of primary colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

Determine the usefulness of [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (¹⁸ FDG-PET/CT) in the preoperative setting of colorectal cancer (CRC), assessing its impact on changes in management strategy.

METHODS

Retrospective study of CRC patients who underwent preoperative ¹⁸ FDG-PET/CT and CT staging scans in a single referral center. The agreement between ¹⁸ FDG-PET/CT, contrast-enhanced CT, and colonoscopy for the surgical location was compared using the κ coefficient. Maximum standardized uptake (SUV_max ) value was obtained. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-five patients were included. ¹⁸ FDG-PET/CT improved tumor localization in 84.6% (165/195) of cases (κ value 0.798, p < 0.001), thus correcting endoscopic errors 69.7% (30/43) of the time. In patients with incomplete colonoscopies, ¹⁸ FDG-PET/CT detected synchronous tumors in 2.5% (5/195) patients, overlooked by CT staging scans. Based on extracolonic ¹⁸ FDG-uptake, the second primary malignancy was diagnosed in 7(3.6%,7/195) patients and total accuracy for lymph node and distant metastasis was 66.1% and 98.4%, respectively. The treatment plan was altered in 30 (15.4%, 30/196) patients. There was a significant association between the SUV_max and tumor size (odds ratio [OR] 4.254, p = 0.003) and the depth of tumor invasion (OR 1.696, p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on its ability to aid in preoperative evaluation and definitively alter surgical treatment planning, ¹⁸ FDG-PET/CT should be further evaluated in primary CRC.

Robotic colorectal resection in combination with a multimodal enhanced recovery program - results of the first 100 cases

PURPOSE

In Germany, colorectal robot-assisted surgery (RAS) has found its way and is currently used as primary technique in colorectal resections at our clinic. We investigated whether RAS can be extensively combined with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) in a large prospective patient group.

METHODS

Using the DaVinci Xi surgical robot, all colorectal RAS from 09/2020 to 01/2022 were incorporated into our ERAS® program. Perioperative data were prospectively recorded using a data documentation system. The extent of resection, duration of the operation, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate, and postoperative short-term results were analyzed. We documented the postoperative duration of Intermediate Care Unit (IMC) stay and major and minor complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, anastomotic leak rate, reoperation rate, hospital-stay length, and ERAS® guideline adherence.

RESULTS

One hundred patients (65 colon and 35 rectal resections) were included (median age: 69 years). The median durations of surgery were 167 min (colon resection) and 246 min (rectal resection). Postoperatively, four patients were IMC-treated (median stay: 1 day). In 92.5% of the colon and 88.6% of the rectum resections, no or minor complications occurred postoperatively. The anastomotic leak rate was 3.1% in colon and 5.7% in rectal resection. The reoperation rate was 7.7% (colon resection) and 11.4% (rectal resection). The hospital stay length was 5 days (colon resection) and 6.5 days (rectal resection). The ERAS® guideline adherence rate was 88% (colon resection) and 82.6% (rectal resection).

CONCLUSION

Patient perioperative therapy per the multimodal ERAS® concept is possible without any problems in colorectal RAS, leading to low morbidity and short hospital stays.

A Review of Robotic Surgery in Colorectal Surgery

Colorectal surgery is a treatment for colorectal lesions. Technological advancements have given the rise to robotic colorectal surgery, a procedure that limits excessive blood loss via 3D pin-point precision capabilities during surgeries. The aim of this study is to review robotic surgery in colorectal treatment procedures in order to dictate its ultimate merits. This is a literature review utilising PubMed and Google Scholar; it only includes case studies and case reviews related to robotic colorectal surgeries. Literature reviews are excluded. We incorporated abstracts from all articles and full publications were examined to compare the benefits of robotic surgery in colorectal treatments. The number of articles reviewed was 41 literature spanning from 2003 to 2022. We found that robotic surgeries yielded finer marginal resections, greater amounts of lymph node resections and earlier recovery of bowel functions. The patients also spent less time in hospital after surgery. The obstacles on the other hand are it costs longer operative hours and further training, which is expensive. Studies show robotic approach is a choice for treating rectal cancer. However further studies would be needed to conclude the best approach. This is especially true with patients treated for anterior colorectal resections. Based on the evidence it's safe to say that the upsides outweigh the downsides, but advancements and further research in robotic colorectal surgeries are still necessary to reduce operative hours and cost. Surgical societies should also take the initiative and set up effective training programmes for colorectal robotic surgeries, as trained physicians result in better treatment outcomes.

Patient experiences of left-sided colorectal resection by robotic, conventional laparoscopic and open approaches: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery (RS) is increasingly employed in colorectal surgical practice, widening the range of surgical techniques offered to patients. We investigated the perceptions of patients with colorectal cancer in relation to RS, open surgery (OS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), to identify ideas or assumptions which, in the context of shared surgeon-patient decision-making, may affect the resultant choice of surgical technique. We also investigated salient factors affecting patients' perioperative experience, including those of RS patients, to guide improvements in care and preoperative patient preparation.

METHODS

This study was conducted on patients who underwent resection of left-sided colorectal cancer at a large UK teaching hospital from November 2020 to July 2021. Purposive sampling was used to ensure a roughly equal proportion of patients who underwent RS, CLS and OS. The patients included in the study participated in semi-structured interviews six weeks postoperatively. The interview schedule allowed discussion around patients' experience of their surgery and postoperative recovery, and their perceptions of surgical techniques. Interview transcripts were coded manually using inductive thematic analysis, and analyst triangulation was employed to refine coding schemes and ensure reliability of emerging themes.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were recruited to the study; RS n = 9 (median age 69 [range 60-80] years); CLS n = 10 (median age 72 [range 32-82] years; OS n = 8 (median age 71 [range 60-75] years). Patients understood the technological benefits of RS but were concerned by a risk of technological failure causing patient harm. OS was understood to be associated with more pain and longer recovery than RS or CLS. Patients perceived CLS to be more technically challenging compared with OS. Less pain and smaller wounds than expected were significant positive factors in the experience of RS and CLS patients specifically. Complications and emotional impact were significant factors in the experience of all groups, for which many patients felt underprepared.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients generally have a positive view of RS and technical innovation in surgery. Concerns mostly centred around failure of technology. Many patients felt unprepared for significant factors in their perioperative experience. Surgeons and healthcare providers should be prepared to address patients' perceptions and expectations of colorectal surgery preoperatively.

Essential updates 2020/2021: Advancing precision medicine for comprehensive rectal cancer treatment

In the paradigm shift related to rectal cancer treatment, we have to understand a variety of new emerging topics to provide appropriate treatment for individual patients as precision medicine. However, information on surgery, genomic medicine, and pharmacotherapy is highly specialized and subdivided, creating a barrier to achieving thorough knowledge. In this review, we summarize the perspective for rectal cancer treatment and management from the current standard-of-care to the latest findings to help optimize treatment strategy.

Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic left colectomy for radical treatment of colon cancer: a retrospective analysis in a consecutive series of 211 patients

Background

Robotic surgery has been widely used in the radical treatment of colonic cancer. However, it is unclear what advantages the robotic approach offers over other approaches in left colectomy. This study aims to explore the advantage of robotic surgery in left colectomy by comparing open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients with radical left colectomy for colon cancer who were admitted to the Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, from November 2012 to November 2017. Two hundred eleven patients included were divided into the open surgery group (OS, n=49), laparoscopic surgery group (LS, n=92), and robotic surgery group (RS, n=70) according to surgical techniques. The clinicopathologic data were collected for clinical outcome assessment. Finally, the clinical value of RS in radical left colectomy was further evaluated by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

Results

Three groups were similar in demographics and clinical characteristics. Compared with OS, LS and RS groups had better intraoperative and perioperative clinical outcomes. Moreover, the RS group exhibited the minimum operative times, length of stay (LOS), and evaluated blood loss. LS and RS also exhibited less perioperative and postoperative long-term complications. Three groups showed similar postoperative pathological outcomes. The overall survival and disease-free survival were also similar among the three groups (all P > 0.05). Cox regression analysis showed surgical approach was not a prognostic factor for overall survival (P = 0.671) and disease-free survival (P = 0.776). PSM analysis of RS and LS by clinical characteristics showed RS showed shorter operation time (P < 0.001) and LOS for patients without complications (P = 0.005). However, no significant differences were found in perioperative and long-term postoperative complications, pathological outcomes, overall survival, and disease-free survival.

Conclusions

Among three techniques for radical left colectomy, LS and RS had significant advantages over OS in short-term clinical outcomes, and no significant differences were found in overall, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and distant metastasis incidence. Moreover, RS shows better perioperative clinical outcomes but without compromising survival compared with LS.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-022-02796-8.

The Senhance Surgical System in Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review

The Senhance Surgical System allows for infrared eye tracking, haptic feedback, and an adjustable upright seat allowing for improved ergonomics. This systematic review was designed with the aim of reviewing the current literature pertaining to the use of the Senhance Surgical System in colorectal surgery. Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they evaluated adults undergoing colorectal surgery with the Senhance Surgical System. The primary outcome was intraoperative efficacy; as defined by operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and conversion. A DerSimonian and Laird inverse variance random-effects meta-analysis was used to generate overall effect size estimates and narrative review was provided for each outcome. Six observational studies with 223 patients (mean age: 63.7, 41.2% female, mean BMI: 24.4 kg/m²) were included. The most common indication for surgery was colorectal cancer (n = 180, 80.7%) and the most common operation was anterior resection (n = 72, 32.3%). Meta-analyses demonstrated a pooled total operative time of 229.8 min (95% CI 189.3-270.4, I² = 0%), console time of 141.3 min (95% CI 106.5-176.1, I² = 0%), and docking time of 10.8 min (95% CI 6.4-15.2, I² = 0%). The pooled EBL was 37.0 mL (95% CI 24.7-49.2, I² = 20%). Overall, there were nine (4.0%) conversions to laparoscopy/laparotomy. The Senhance Surgical System has an acceptable safety profile, reasonable docking and console times, low conversion rates, and an affordable case cost across a variety of colorectal surgeries. Further prospective, comparative trials with other robotic surgical platforms are warranted.

Incomplete lymphatic sealing around the inferior mesenteric artery is a risk factor for chylous ascites in robotic rectal cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Compared with laparoscopic surgery (LS), robotic surgery (RS) is considered to have acceptable outcomes in rectal cancer, but few reports have focused on chylous ascites in RS. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and etiology of chylous ascites after RS.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 291 patients with rectal cancer who underwent RS (n = 165) or LS (n = 126) with high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA). Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare the two groups.

RESULTS

\Dissection around the IMA was achieved using ultrasonic coagulating shears in most LS cases, and monopolar scissors in most RS cases, sometimes using bipolar vessel sealing device or bipolar forceps. The incidence of chylous ascites was 12.2% in RS and 4.1% in LS after PSM (P = .037). When limited to the RS group, multivariate analysis identified absence of lymphatic sealing at the left side of the IMA and shorter operative time as independent risk factors for chylous ascites. Except for duration of drain placement, no outcomes differed significantly with or without chylous ascites. One patient with chylous ascites developed later infection and required antibiotic treatment.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of chylous ascites is significantly higher in RS than in LS, and RS with incomplete lymphatic sealing around the IMA is a risk factor for chylous ascites in rectal cancer. Although outcomes for patients with chylous ascites were acceptable, adequate lymphatic sealing during dissection around the IMA is crucial to prevent chylous ascites in RS.

Consensus-led recommendations defining practical principles of achieving optimal surgical outcomes in robotic colorectal surgery in the Asia-Pacific region

Recent innovations within the field of robotic surgery have particular relevance to colorectal surgery. Although a robotic approach has been associated with satisfactory outcomes, there remains a wide variation in levels of adoption. In particular, this study focuses on patient positioning, docking, and table placement, with the intent of understanding the strength of opinion of colorectal surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region to the practical application of these developments to achieve optimal surgical outcomes. Using a modified Delphi methodology, a steering group of colorectal surgeons with experience in robotic surgery from across the Asia-Pacific region identified 35 consensus statements. An online 4-point Likert scale questionnaire was distributed to surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region using convenience sampling. Respondents were excluded from further analysis if they did not perform colorectal surgery or had no experience in robotic surgery. A total of 140 responses (71.8% response rate) were received between August and October 2021. 22 statements attained a very high degree of agreement (≥ 90%). High agreement (< 90% and ≥ 75%) was achieved in another 12, and one failed to meet the consensus threshold (< 75%). A set of five recommendations were developed based on these results. The high levels of agreement demonstrate recognition amongst colorectal surgeons within the Asia-Pacific region of the potential advantage of recent improvements in robotic surgery technology to further improve surgical outcomes. The recommendations may inform a set of practical principles to help standardise the use of colorectal robotic surgery, which may also be relevant to other surgical fields.

Robotic and laparoscopic surgical procedures for colorectal cancer

The study aims to investigate perioperative indices and immediate outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgical interventions in colorectal cancer patients. The study included 163 patients [90 (55.2%) females and 73 (44.8%) males, aged 67.46 ± 6.72 years, on average] who had surgery for morphologically checked colorectal cancer. Of those, 101 patients had laparoscopic surgery (Group 1), and 62 patients had robot-assisted surgery (Group 2). The study found that the safety profile of both robot and laparoscopic procedures for colorectal cancer is comparable. The total complication rate in the laparoscopic group was 6.9% (in 7 patients), in the robot-assisted group-11.3% (in 7 patients) (χ² = 0.93, p = 0.34). Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer is a promising direction for improving patients' level and quality of care with this oncological pathology.

The clinical impact of robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery associated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has been performed in various fields, especially in the pelvic cavity. However, little is known about the utility of robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery associated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). We herein report the clinical impact of robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery associated with RARP.

METHODS

We experienced five cases of robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery associated with RARP. One involved robot-assisted laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection with en bloc prostatectomy for T4b rectal cancer, and one involved robot-assisted laparoscopic intersphincteric resection combined with RARP for synchronous rectal and prostate cancer. The remaining three involved robot-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection (RaLAR) after RARP. For robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, the da Vinci Xi surgical system was used.

RESULTS

We could perform planned robotic rectal cancer surgery in all cases. The median operation time was 529 min (373-793 min), and the median blood loss was 307 ml (32-1191 ml). No patients required any transfusion in the intra-operative or immediate peri-operative period. The circumferential resection margin was negative in all cases. There were no complications of grade ≥III according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and no conversions to conventional laparoscopic or open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery associated with RARP is feasible in patients with rectal cancer. The long-term surgical outcomes remain to be further evaluated.

Postoperative complications after robotic resection of colorectal cancer: An analysis based on 5-year experience at a large-scale center

BACKGROUND

As a common gastrointestinal malignancy, colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a serious health threat globally. Robotic surgery is one of the future trends in surgical treatment of CRC. Robotic surgery has several technical advantages over laparoscopic surgery, including 3D visualization, elimination of the fulcrum effect, and better ergonomic positioning, which together lead to better surgical outcomes and faster recovery. However, analysis of independent factors of postoperative complications after robotic surgery is still insufficient.

AIM

To analyze the incidence and risk factors for postoperative complications after robotic surgery in patients with CRC.

METHODS

In total, 1040 patients who had undergone robotic surgical resection for CRC between May 2015 and May 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative complications were categorized according to the Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification, and possible risk factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 1040 patients who had undergone robotic surgery for CRC, the overall, severe, local, and systemic complication rates were 12.2%, 2.4%, 8.8%, and 3.5%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and level III American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P = 0.006) were independent risk factors for overall complications. Multivariate analysis identified multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and comorbidities (P = 0.029) as independent risk factors for severe complications (C-D grade III or higher). Regarding local complications, multiple organ resection (P = 0.002) and multiple bowel resection (P = 0.027) were independent risk factors. Multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and level III ASA score (P = 0.007) were independent risk factors for systemic complications. Additionally, sigmoid colectomy had a lower incidence of overall complications (6.4%; P = 0.006) and local complications (4.7%; P = 0.028) than other types of colorectal surgery.

CONCLUSION

Multiple organ resection, level III ASA score, comorbidities, and multiple bowel resection were risk factors for postoperative complications, with multiple organ resection being the most likely.

Chylous ascites has a higher incidence after robotic surgery and is associated with poor recurrence-free survival after rectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Postoperative chylous ascites is an infrequent condition after colorectal surgery and is easily treatable. However, its effect on the long-term oncological prognosis is not well established. This study aimed to investigate the short-term and long-term impact of chylous ascites treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by rectal cancer surgery and to evaluate the incidence of chylous ascites after different surgical approaches.

METHODS

A total of 898 locally advanced rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery between January 2010 and December 2018 were included. The clinicopathological data and outcomes of the patients with chylous ascites were compared with those of the patients without chylous ascites. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). To balance baseline confounders between groups, propensity score matching (PSM) was performed for each patient with a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Chylous ascites was detected in 3.8% (34/898) of the patients. The incidence of chylous ascites was highest after robotic surgery (6.9%, 6/86), followed by laparoscopic surgery (4.2%, 26/618) and open surgery (1.0%, 2/192, P = 0.021). The patients with chylous ascites had a significantly higher number of lymph nodes harvested (15.6 vs. 12.8, P = 0.009) and a 3-day longer postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.017). The 5-year RFS rate was 64.5% in the chylous ascites group, which was significantly lower than the rate in the no chylous ascites group (79.9%; P = 0.007). The results remained unchanged after PSM was performed. The chylous ascites group showed a nonsignificant trend towards a higher peritoneal metastasis risk (5.9% vs. 1.6%, P = 0.120). Univariate analysis and multivariate analysis confirmed chylous ascites (hazard ratio= 3.038, P < 0.001) as an independent negative prognostic factor for RFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the higher incidence of chylous ascites after laparoscopic and robotic surgery and its adverse prognosis, we recommend sufficient coagulation of the lymphatic tissue near the vessel origins, especially during minimally invasive surgery.

Technological implementation in General Surgery services in Spain. National survey and results

Technology is one of the pillars of surgery in the 21st century and is a key factor in achieving better surgical results. The current surgical process involves not only surgical techniques, but also a very high degree of specialisation and the knowledge and use of techniques and devices from other fields. In Spain, there are no studies published at a national level in this regard. From the Minimally Invasive Surgery and Technological Innovation section of the Spanish Association of Surgeons we have designed a study whose main objective is to evaluate the degree of technological implantation in the specialty of General Surgery in Spain, as well as to analyze the devices available in the different centres of the country. We propose to make a detailed description of the applications of these devices and techniques by areas of interest, pointing out the pathologies and procedures in which this technology is used.

Technological implementation in General Surgery services in Spain. National survey and results

Technology is one of the pillars of surgery in the 21st century and is a key factor in achieving better surgical results. The current surgical process involves not only surgical techniques, but also a very high degree of specialisation and the knowledge and use of techniques and devices from other fields. In Spain, there are no studies published at a national level in this regard. From the Minimally Invasive Surgery and Technological Innovation section of the Spanish Association of Surgeons we have designed a study whose main objective is to evaluate the degree of technological implantation in the specialty of General Surgery in Spain, as well as to analyze the devices available in the different centres of the country. We propose to make a detailed description of the applications of these devices and techniques by areas of interest, pointing out the pathologies and procedures in which this technology is used.