Robotic-assisted proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease: a case-matched comparison of laparoscopic and robotic technique

Navigating Progress: 8-Year Single-Center Experience With Minimally Invasive Proctectomy and IPAA

BACKGROUND

IPAA has become the criterion standard for treating ulcerative colitis, familial adenomatous polyposis, and selected cases of Crohn's colitis. Robotic surgery promises improved postoperative outcomes and decreased length of stay. However, few studies have evaluated the benefits of robotic IPAA compared to laparoscopy.

OBJECTIVE

To compare short-term 30-day postoperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy with IPAA and diverting loop ileostomy.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study from a single, high-volume center.

SETTINGS

Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (tertiary referral center for IBD).

PATIENTS

All adult patients undergoing minimally invasive proctectomy with IPAA and diverting loop ileostomy between January 2015 and April 2023.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Thirty-day complications, hospital length of stay, estimated blood loss, conversion rate, 30-day readmission, and 30-day reoperation.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventeen patients were included in the study; 107 underwent robotic proctectomy with IPAA and diverting loop ileostomy, whereas 110 had laparoscopic proctectomy with IPAA and diverting loop ileostomy. Operating time was significantly longer in the robotic group (263 ± 38 vs 228 ± 75 minutes, p < 0.0001). The robotic group also had lower estimated blood loss (81.5 ± 77.7 vs 126.8 ± 111.0 mL, p = 0.0006) as well as fewer conversions (0% vs 8.2%, p = 0.003). Patients in the robotic group received more intraoperative fluids (3099 ± 1140 vs 2472 ± 996 mL, p = 0.0001). However, there was no difference in length of stay, 30-day morbidity, 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation, rate of diverting loop ileostomy closure at 3 months, and surgical IPAA complication rate after ileostomy closure.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design, single-center study, potential bias because of the novelty of the robotic approach, and lack of long-term and quality-of-life outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic proctectomy with IPAA and diverting loop ileostomy may offer advantages in terms of estimated blood loss and conversion rate while maintaining the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. Further research is needed to evaluate long-term outcomes. See Video Abstract .

NAVEGANDO EL PROGRESO EXPERIENCIA DE OCHO AOS EN UN SOLO CENTRO CON PROCTECTOMA MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA Y ANASTOMOSIS ANALBOLSA ILEAL

ANTECEDENTES:La anastomosis anal-bolsa ileal (IPAA) se ha convertido en el estándar de oro para el tratamiento de la colitis ulcerosa, la poliposis adenomatosa familiar y casos seleccionados de colitis de Crohn. La cirugía robótica promete mejores resultados posoperatorios y una menor duración de la estancia hospitalaria. Sin embargo, pocos estudios han evaluado los beneficios de la IPAA robótica en comparación con la laparoscopia.OBJETIVO:Comparar los resultados postoperatorios a corto plazo a 30 días de la proctectomía robótica versus laparoscópica con IPAA e ileostomía en asa de derivación.DISEÑO:Estudio observacional retrospectivo de un único centro de gran volumen.AJUSTES:Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota (centro terciario de referencia para EII).PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes adultos sometidos a proctectomía mínimamente invasiva con IPAA y DLI entre Enero de 2015 y Abril de 2023.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS:Complicaciones a los 30 días, duración de la estancia hospitalaria, pérdida de sangre estimada, tasa de conversión, reingreso a los 30 días y reoperación a los 30 días.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron en el estudio 217 pacientes; 107 se sometieron a proctectomía robótica con IPAA y DLI, mientras que 110 se sometieron a proctectomía laparoscópica con IPAA y DLI. El tiempo operatorio fue significativamente mayor en el grupo robótico (263 ± 38 minutos versus 228 ± 75 minutos, p < 0,0001); la pérdida de sangre estimada (EBL) fue menor en el grupo robótico (81,5 ± 77,7 ml versus 126,8 ± 111,0 ml, p = 0,0006), así como el número de conversiones (0% versus 8,2%, p = 0,003). Los pacientes del grupo robótico recibieron más líquidos intraoperatorios (3099 ± 1140 ml versus 2472 ± 996 ml, p = 0,0001). Sin embargo, no hubo diferencias en la duración de la estancia hospitalaria, la morbilidad a los 30 días, el reingreso a los 30 días, la reoperación a los 30 días, la tasa de cierre del DLI a los tres meses y la tasa de complicaciones quirúrgicas de la IPAA después del cierre de la ileostomía.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo, estudio unicéntrico, posible sesgo debido a la novedad del enfoque robótico, falta de resultados a largo plazo y de calidad de vida.CONCLUSIONES:La proctectomía robótica con IPAA y DLI puede ofrecer ventajas en términos de EBL y tasa de conversión, manteniendo al mismo tiempo los beneficios de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva. Se necesita más investigación para evaluar los resultados a largo plazo. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

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.

The Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Current Trends and Future Directions

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) provides superior results in the surgical treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). There exist various minimally invasive procedures, each possessing its own set of benefits and drawbacks. This literature review outlines these methodologies and underscores their importance in enhancing the outcomes of patients with IBD. A grand total of 192 studies were carefully chosen and succinctly summarized. Conventional multiport laparoscopy is the most widely used MIS for IBD, with single-incision laparoscopy showing even better results. Robotic surgery offers comparable results but at higher costs and longer operation times. In the future, there will be widespread acceptance of single-incision laparoscopy and robotic surgery due to improved training and reduced expenses. Further research into the technology's utility in different IBD presentations could increase its usage.

National trends and feasibility of a robotic surgical approach in the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease

BACKGROUND

Research on the utilization of robotic surgical approaches in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. The aims of this study were to identify temporal trends in robotic utilization and compare the safety of a robotic to laparoscopic operative approach in patients with IBD.

METHODS

Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for IBD were identified using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database (2013-2021). Temporal trends of robotic utilization were assessed from 2013 to 2021. Primary (30-day overall and serious morbidity) and secondary (unplanned conversion to open) outcomes were assessed between 2019 and 2021, when robotic utilization was highest. Multivariable logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

The use of a robotic approach for colectomies and proctectomies increased significantly between 2013 and 2021 (p < 0.001), regardless of disease type. A total of 6016 patients underwent MIS for IBD between 2019 and 2021. 2234 (37%) patients had surgery for UC [robotic 430 (19.3%), lap 1804 (80%)] and 3782 (63%) had surgery for CD [robotic 500 (13.2%), lap 3282 (86.8%)]. For patients with UC, there was no difference in rates of overall morbidity (22.6% vs. 20.7%, p = 0.39), serious morbidity (11.4% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.60) or conversion to open (1.5% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.38) between the laparoscopic and robotic approaches, respectively. There was no difference in overall morbidity between the two groups in patients with CD (lap 14.0% vs robotic 16.4%, p = 0.15), however the robotic group exhibited higher rates of serious morbidity (7.3% vs. 11.2%, p < 0.01), shorter LOS (3 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001) and lower rates of conversion to an open procedure (3.8% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.02). Adjusted analysis showed similar results.

CONCLUSION

The use of the robotic platform in the surgical management of IBD is increasing and is not associated with an increase in 30-day overall morbidity compared to a laparoscopic approach.

Procedure-Specific Risks of Robotic Simultaneous Resection of Colorectal Cancer and Synchronous Liver Metastases

An estimated 25% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with distant metastases at the time of diagnosis, the most common site being the liver. Controversy exists regarding the safety of a simultaneous versus staged approach to resections in these patients, but reports have shown that minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approaches can mitigate morbidity. This is the first study utilizing a large national database to investigate colorectal and hepatic procedure-specific risks in robotic simultaneous resections for CRC and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP targeted colectomy, proctectomy, and hepatectomy files, 1,550 patients were identified who underwent simultaneous resections of CRC and CRLM from 2016-2020. Of these patients, 311 (20%) underwent resections by an MIS approach, defined as an either laparoscopic (n = 241, 78%) or robotic (n = 70, 23%). Patients who underwent robotic resections had lower rates of ileus compared to those who had an open surgery. The robotic group had similar rates of 30-day anastomotic leak, bile leak, hepatic failure, and post operative invasive hepatic procedures compared to both the open and laparoscopic groups. The rate of conversion to open was significantly lower for robotic compared to laparoscopic group (9% vs. 22%, p = 0.012). This report is the largest study to date of robotic simultaneous CRC and CRLM resections reported in the literature and supports the safety and potential benefits of this approach.

Short-term outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery: a propensity score match study

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery offers improved short-term outcomes over open surgery but can be technically challenging. Robotic surgery has been increasingly used for IPAA surgery, but there is limited evidence supporting its use. This study aims to compare the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic IPAA procedures.

METHODS

All consecutive patients receiving laparoscopic and robotic IPAA surgery at 3 centres, from 3 countries, between 2008 and 2019 were identified from prospectively collated databases. Robotic surgery patients were propensity score matched with laparoscopic patients for gender, previous abdominal surgery, ASA grade (I, II vs III, IV) and procedure performed (proctocolectomy vs completion proctectomy). Their short-term outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

A total of 89 patients were identified (73 laparoscopic, 16 robotic). The 16 patients that received robotic surgery were matched with 15 laparoscopic patients. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the investigated short-term outcomes. Length of stay trend was higher for laparoscopic surgery (9 vs 7 days, p = 0.072) CONCLUSION: Robotic IPAA surgery is safe and feasible and offers similar short-term outcomes to laparoscopic surgery. Length of stay may be lower for robotic IPAA surgery, but further larger scale studies are required in order to demonstrate this.

An early experience in robotic ileoanal pouch surgery with robotic intracorporeal single-stapled anastomosis (RiSSA) at a tertiary referral centre

AIM

A robotic approach to ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery offers advantages over other approaches in terms of precision, improved access to the pelvis and less muscular fatigue for the surgeon. The integrity of the anastomosis is also fundamental to successful IPAA surgery. The robotic platform can permit intracorporeal suturing deep within the pelvis to create a single-stapled, double purse-string anastomosis, which may reduce the risk of anastomotic complications. This study describes the safety and early outcomes of robotic intracorporeal single-stapled anastomosis (RiSSA) amongst patients operated consecutively at a tertiary centre immediately before and following the pandemic.

METHOD

A retrospective study of prospectively collected data analysing the outcome of patients undergoing robotic IPAA between 2019 and 2022 was conducted. All procedures were performed with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System (with a hand-assisted suprapubic incision to fashion the pouch). All pouch-anal anastomoses were performed using a double purse-string, single-stapled (RiSSA) method. Demographic, clinical and outcome data were collected.

RESULTS

Twenty consecutive patients (nine with ulcerative colitis and 11 with familial adenomatous polyposis) were included with a median age of 25 years (range 16-52); 18 had American Society of Anesthesiologists classification II, and mean body mass index was 24 kg/m² (range 18.1-34.3). Nine patients (eight ulcerative colitis and one familial adenomatous polyposis) had undergone prior subtotal colectomy and therefore underwent restorative proctectomy with IPAA. Eleven patients underwent restorative proctocolectomy. All procedures were completed robotically. The median length of stay was 9 days (5-49). There were no unplanned admissions to intensive care and no deaths. Three patients were readmitted following hospital discharge for (i) an ileus managed conservatively, (ii) small bowel obstruction managed conservatively and (iii) small bowel obstruction due to constriction at the stoma site necessitating surgery. There were two additional reoperations both for drain complications, one for drain removal and one for drain erosion. On mobilization of the pouch in the latter case, an anastomotic defect was observed. In total, 19/20 patients underwent RiSSA without postoperative anastomotic problems.

DISCUSSION

RiSSA offers a safe and feasible alternative technique to other minimally invasive approaches with low rates of anastomosis-related complications.

Pediatric colorectal robotic surgery

Robotic colorectal surgery allows adult and pediatric surgeons to overcome the technical limitations of laparoscopic surgery. It also provides improved ergonomics in the field of surgery. Robotic surgery has several advantages in colorectal operations that require complex minimally invasive skills including anorectal malformations, Hirschsprung disease, and inflammatory bowel disease. In this section, we discuss the key aspects of colorectal surgery where robotic instrumentation seems ideal.

Sexual Dysfunction in Female Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Overview

Sexual dysfunction is common among females with inflammatory bowel disease and may result in issues involving intimacy, sexual activity, and satisfaction, as well both the formation and preservation of personal relationships. Risk factors for sexual dysfunction include select surgical interventions, medications, mental illnesses, and IBD-related intestinal and extraintestinal comorbidities. In addition, certain demographic factors such as age, disease type and activity may influence the severity of sexual dysfunction. Evaluation of sexual dysfunction may include the use of validated sexual functioning questionnaires, a brief mental health assessment, initial inquiry into vulvovaginal or perineal symptoms, and a gynecologic and GI-focused physical exam. An interdisciplinary care team involving IBD specialists, obstetrician-gynecologists, pelvic floor physical therapists, and primary care physicians may be best suited to provide optimal care and treatment recommendations for patients with sexual dysfunction. Options for management often include pelvic floor physical therapy, biofeedback, and mental health support. Further research is necessary to delineate the impact of IBD activity on sexual dysfunction, to determine if health outcome differences exist depending on surgical approaches utilized during J-pouch operations, and finally to evaluate the care and perceptions of patients with IBD who identify as sexual and gender minorities.

Robotic Surgery for the Ileal Pouch

BACKGROUND

A robotic approach to total colectomy/proctectomy and ileal pouch reconstruction would seem to be a sensible use of the platform's enhanced reach, visualization, and dexterity.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to discuss current published data for robotic ileal pouch surgery.

STUDY SELECTION

The study selection included a paucity of published data to date, representing early learning curves and case series with small numbers.

CONCLUSIONS

Current robotic platforms may offer advantages, particularly in the low pelvis beyond what is found with a laparoscopic approach.

Robotic-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Proctectomy with Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis: An Analysis of Clinical and Financial Outcomes from a Tertiary Referral Center

Background: Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery is gaining popularity, but limited data are available on the safety, efficacy, and cost of robotic-assisted restorative proctectomy with the construction of an ileal pouch and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC). Methods: A retrospective study was conducted comparing consecutively performed robotic-assisted and laparoscopic proctectomy with IPAA between 1 January 2016 and 31 September 2021. In total, 67 adult patients with medically refractory UC without proven dysplasia or carcinoma underwent surgery: 29 operated robotically and 38 laparoscopically. Results: There were no differences between both groups regarding postoperative complications within 30 days according to Clavien-Dindo classification’ grades 1−5 (51.7% vs. 42.1%, p = 0.468) and severe grades 3b−5 (17.2% vs. 10.5%, p = 0.485). Robotic-assisted surgery was associated with an increased urinary tract infection rate (n = 7, 24.1% vs. n = 1, 2.6%; p = 0.010) and longer operative time (346 ± 65 min vs. 281 ± 66 min; p < 0.0001). Surgery costs were higher when operated robotically (median EUR 10.377 [IQR EUR 4.727] vs. median EUR 6.689 [IQR EUR 3.170]; p < 0.0001), resulting in reduced total inpatient profits (median EUR 110 [IQR EUR 4.971] vs. median EUR 2.853 [IQR EUR 5.386]; p = 0.001). Conclusion: Robotic-assisted proctectomy with IPAA can be performed with comparable short-term clinical outcomes to laparoscopy but is associated with a longer duration of surgery and higher surgery costs. As experience increases, some advantages may become evident regarding operative time, postoperative recovery, and length of stay. The robotic procedure might then become cost-efficient.

Combining staged laparoscopic colectomy with robotic completion proctectomy and ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) in ulcerative colitis for improved clinical and cosmetic outcomes: a single-center feasibility study and technical description

Robotic proctectomy has been shown to lead to better functional outcomes compared to laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer. However, in ulcerative colitis (UC), the potential value of robotic proctectomy has not yet been investigated, and in this indication, the operation needs to be adjusted to the total colectomy typically performed in the preceding 6 months. In this study, we describe the technique and analyze outcomes of a staged laparoscopic and robotic three-stage restorative proctocolectomy and compare the clinical outcome with the classical laparoscopic procedure. Between December 2016 and May 2021, 17 patients underwent robotic completion proctectomy (CP) with ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) for UC. These patients were compared to 10 patients who underwent laparoscopic CP and IPAA, following laparoscopic total colectomy with end ileostomy 6 months prior by the same surgical team at our tertiary referral center. 27 patients underwent a 3-stage procedure for refractory UC (10 in the lap. group vs. 17 in the robot group). Return to normal bowel function and morbidity were comparable between the two groups. Median length of hospital stay was the same for the robotic proctectomy/IPAA group with 7 days [median; IQR (6–10)], compared to the laparoscopic stage II with 7.5 days [median; IQR (6.25–8)]. Median time to soft diet was 2 days [IQR (1–3)] vs. 3 days in the lap group [IQR 3 (3–4)]. Two patients suffered from a major complication (Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3a) in the first 90 postoperative days in the robotic group vs. one in the laparoscopic group. Perception of cosmetic results were favorable with 100% of patients reporting to be highly satisfied or satisfied in the robotic group. This report demonstrates the feasibility of a combined laparoscopic and robotic staged restorative proctocolectomy for UC, when compared with the traditional approach. Robotic pelvic dissection and a revised trocar placement in staged proctocolectomy with synergistic use of both surgical techniques with their individual advantages will likely improve overall long-term functional results, including an improved cosmetic outcome.

Robotic multiquadrant colorectal procedures: A single-center experience and a systematic review of the literature

Purpose

Robotic surgery has been progressively implemented for colorectal procedures but is still limited for multiquadrant abdominal resections. The present study aims to describe our experience in robotic multiquadrant colorectal surgeries and provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature investigating the outcomes of robotic total proctocolectomy (TPC), total colectomy (TC), subtotal colectomy (STC), or completion proctectomy (CP) compared to laparoscopy.

Methods

At our institution 16 consecutive patients underwent a 2- or 3-stage totally robotic total proctocolectomy (TPC) with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. A systematic review of the literature was performed to select studies on robotic and laparoscopic multiquadrant colorectal procedures. Meta-analyses were used to compare the two approaches.

Results

In our case series, 14/16 patients underwent a 2-stage robotic TPC for ulcerative colitis with a mean operative time of 271.42 (SD:37.95) minutes. No conversion occurred. Two patients developed postoperative complications. The mean hospital stay was 8.28 (SD:1.47) days with no readmissions. Mortality was nil. All patients underwent loop-ileostomy closure, and functional outcomes were satisfactory. The literature appraisal was based on 23 retrospective studies, including 736 robotic and 9,904 laparoscopic multiquadrant surgeries. In the robotic group, 36 patients underwent STC, 371 TC, 166 TPC, and 163 CP. Pooled data analysis showed that robotic TC and STC had a lower conversion rate (OR = 0.17;95% CI, 0.04–0.82; p = 0.03) than laparoscopic TC and STC. The robotic approach was associated with longer operative time for TC and STC (MD = 104.64;95% CI, 18.42–190.87; p = 0.02) and TPC and CP (MD = 38.8;95% CI, 18.7–59.06; p = 0.0002), with no differences for postoperative complications and hospital stay. Reports on urological outcomes, sexual dysfunction, and quality of life were missing.

Conclusions

Our experience and the literature suggest that robotic multiquadrant colorectal surgery is safe and effective, with low morbidity and mortality rates. Nevertheless, the overall level of evidence is low, and functional outcomes of robotic approach remain largely unknown.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier: CRD42022303016.

Equivalency of short-term perioperative outcomes after open, laparoscopic and robotic ileal anal pouch anastomosis. Does procedure complexity override operative approach?

Background

Ileal pouch anal anastomosis is the treatment of choice for patients with chronic ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis undergoing a proctocolectomy and desiring bowel continuity. It is a technically complex operation associated with significant morbidity and may be performed by an open, laparoscopic, or robotic approach. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the comparative perioperative outcomes between these 3 techniques outside of institutional studies.

Methods

The NSQIP targeted proctectomy data set was used to identify patients who underwent open, laparoscopic, and robotic ileal pouch anal anastomosis between 2016 and 2019. Thirty-day outcomes between different surgical approaches were compared using univariate and multivariable analysis.

Results

During the study period, 1,067 open, 971 laparoscopic, and 341 robotic ileal pouch anal anastomosis were performed. The most frequent indications were inflammatory bowel disease (64%), malignancy (18%), and familial adenomatous polyposis (7%). Mean age of the cohort was 43 ± 15 years with 43% female and 76% with body mass index ≤ 30 kg/m². Overall morbidity was 26.8% for the entire cohort with 4% anastomotic leak, 6% reoperation, 21% ileus, and 21% readmission rate. After adjusting for available confounders, operative approach was not associated with better short-term outcomes, including length of stay, overall morbidity, anastomotic leak, reoperation, incidence of ileus, and 30-day readmissions.

Conclusion

Ileal pouch anal anastomosis continues to be associated with significant postoperative morbidity regardless of operative approach. Patient-related advantages in terms of perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic and robotic platforms compared to open surgery are less pronounced in complex operations such as ileal pouch anal anastomosis.

•

Ileal anal pouch anastomosis is a technically complex operation associated with significant postoperative 30-day morbidity.

•

Postoperative morbidity is similar between open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches.

•

In complex operations such as ileal anal pouch anastomosis, the short-term perioperative advantages of minimally invasive approaches may not be clinically evident.

Robotic Surgery for Ulcerative Colitis

Subtotal colectomy (STC) or total proctocolectomy (TPC) and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) performed in two or three stages remain the procedure of choice for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Minimally invasive laparoscopic approaches for STC and IPAA have been established for over a decade, having been shown to reduce postoperative pain, length of stay, and improve fertility. However "straight-stick" laparoscopy has ergonomic and visual disadvantages in the pelvis, which may contribute to IPAA failure. The robotic platform was developed to overcome these limitations. Robotic STC is associated with lower conversion rates and earlier return of bowel function with acceptably longer operative time (mean, 28 minutes) than laparoscopic STC. The robotic approach has also been shown in case series to be safe in urgent settings. Robotic IPAA is associated with lower blood loss and length of stay than laparoscopic IPAA. Robotic TPC/IPAA has been shown in small case series to be safe and feasible despite longer operating times.

Laparoscopic robotic-assisted restorative proctocolectomy and ileal J-pouch-anorectal anastomosis in children

PURPOSE

Total proctocolectomy with ileal J-pouch-anorectal anastomosis (IPAA) remains the preferred surgical treatment for ulcerative colitis (UC) in children. Considering the well-known advantages of minimally invasive approach, and its main application for the deep pelvis, robotic surgery may be used in UC reconstructive procedures. The aim of the study is to report our experience with Robotic IPAA in children.

METHODS

Single surgeon experience on Robotic IPAA were prospectively included. Data on patient demographics, surgical details, complications, and length of stay (LOS), were collected.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were included. Median age was 13.2 years, median body weight 45 kg. Median operative time was 240 min. Median LOS was 7 days and mean follow-up time 1 year. No intraoperative complication occurred. Five postoperative complications happened: 3 minors treated conservatively (CD I-II), 2 majors needing reintervention under anesthesia (CD IIIb). No mortality was observed.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary experience reveals that Robotic IPAA is a safe and feasible option for the surgical treatment of UC in children. A bigger patient sample and a long-term follow-up are needed to confirm our findings.

Robotic Surgery in Crohn's Disease

Surgery for Crohn's disease presents unique challenges secondary to the inflammatory nature of the disease. While a minimally invasive approach to colorectal surgery has consistently been associated with better patient outcomes, adoption of laparoscopy in Crohn's disease has been limited due to these challenges. Robotic assisted surgery has the potential to overcome these challenges and allow more complex patients to undergo a minimally invasive operation. Here we describe our approach to robotic assisted surgery for terminal ileal Crohn's disease.

Robotic versus laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA): a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal-pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) is a curative and cancer preventative procedure in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). It can be technically difficult laparoscopically, and hence the robotic platform has been suggested as a way to enable minimally invasive surgery in more patients. This systematic review examines robotic proctectomy or proctocolectomy with IPAA. A limited meta-analysis was performed on data comparing the robotic approach to laparoscopy.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane database for case series of robotic IPAA procedures and studies comparing the robotic to laparoscopic or open procedures. Data examined includes operating time, conversion to open, length of stay, complications, blood loss, return of bowel function, reoperation rate and functional outcomes.

RESULTS

Five non-randomised studies compared robotic to laparoscopic techniques; one compared robotic to open surgery and three case series are included. Operating time was significantly longer in robotic cases. Estimated blood loss was significantly less in three of four studies which reported this; hospital stay was significantly less in two. There were nonsignificant reductions in complications and readmission rates. Pooled analysis of four papers with adequate data showed a nonstatistically significant trend to less complications in robotic procedures. Three studies assessed functional and quality of life outcomes, with little difference between the platforms.

CONCLUSIONS

Available data suggests that the robotic platform is safe to use for IPAA procedures. There is minimal evidence for clinical advantages, but with little data to base decisions and significant potential for improvements in technique and cost-effectiveness, further use of the platform for this operation is warranted. It is vital that this occurs within an evaluation framework.

Sexual Dysfunction in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: What the Specialist Should Know and Ask

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic condition that globally affects the health of people who suffer from it, deteriorating their quality of life (QoL). An aspect rarely explored by healthcare providers is the influence of the disease on the sexual functioning of individuals. This discretion is mainly due to an unconscious resistance when asking our patients about their sexual functioning because of a lack of knowledge and skills to tackle this topic or disinterest on the part of professionals, and fear or shame on the part of patients. Sexual function is a constant concern in IBD patients that has been reflected in several studies, especially if we consider that the prevalence of sexual dysfunction (SD) in IBD is higher than that reported in the general population. The etiology of SD in patients with IBD remains unclear but is likely to be multifactorial, where biological, psychosocial, and disease-specific factors are involved. Currently, there are no formal recommendations in the IBD clinical guidelines on how to manage SD in these patients. The use of validated clinical scales could improve the detection of SD and allow the treatment of the underlying causes in order to improve the QoL of patients with IBD. This review aims to illustrate the different aspects involved in SD in IBD patients and the importance of the participation of a multidisciplinary team in the early detection and treatment of SD at different stages of the disease.

Subtotal colectomy in ulcerative colitis—long term considerations for the rectal stump

BACKGROUND

The initial operation of choice in many patients presenting as an emergency with ulcerative colitis is a subtotal colectomy with end ileostomy. A percentage of patients do not proceed to completion proctectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis.

AIM

To review the existing literature in relation to the significant long-term complic-ations associated with the rectal stump, to provide an overview of options for the surgical management of remnant rectum and anal canal and to form a consolidated guideline on endoscopic screening recommendations in this cohort.

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for papers containing recommendations for endoscopy surveillance in rectal remnants in ulcerative colitis. A secondary narrative review was carried out exploring the medical and surgical management options for the retained rectum.

RESULTS

For rectal stump surveillance guidelines, 20% recommended an interval of 6 mo to a year, 50% recommended yearly surveillance 10% recommended 2 yearly surveillance and the remaining 30% recommended risk stratification of patients and different screening intervals based on this. All studies agreed surveillance should be carried out via endoscopy and biopsy. Increased vigilance is needed in endoscopy in these patients. Literature review revealed a number of options for surgical management of the remnant rectum.

CONCLUSION

The retained rectal stump needs to be surveyed endoscopically according to risk stratification. Great care must be taken to avoid rectal perforation and pelvic sepsis at time of endoscopy. If completion proctectomy is indicated the authors favour removal of the anal canal using an intersphincteric dissection technique.

[Minimally invasive and robot-assisted surgery for chronic inflammatory bowel disease : Current status and evidence situation]

The majority of cases of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) can be treated by minimally invasive surgery. The advantages of standard laparoscopic approaches compared to open surgery with respect to short-term and long-term outcome parameters have been adequately proven with evidence level 1 for ileocecal resection in Crohn's disease. For many other indications there are at least several larger registry or case-control studies that have shown advantages for laparoscopy. For robot-assisted surgery the feasibility has principally been demonstrated for IBD, whereby at least for ulcerative colitis limited data suggest comparable results to the standard laparoscopic approach. Single port approaches have so far not been able to demonstrate any relevant advantages in IBD surgery. Major advantages for transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) for performing restorative proctocolectomy could not be demonstrated in two larger case-controlled studies but it was at least shown to be a comparable alternative to standard laparoscopy. Overall, it seems unlikely that the recently described new laparoscopic approaches will result in measurable advantages for the patient in comparison to standard laparoscopy as the access trauma is not significantly changed. In general, the indications to perform minimally invasive surgery must always be based on the basic principles of IBD surgery and contraindications have to be considered in individual cases as the advantages of laparoscopic approaches are levelled out in the long run.

Cerebral oxygenation in 45-degree trendelenburg position for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a single-center, open, controlled pilot study

BACKGROUND

Within the last decade, robotically-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has become the standard for treating localized prostate cancer, causing a revival of the 45° Trendelenburg position. In this pilot study we investigated effects of Trendelenburg position on hemodynamics and cerebral oxygenation in patients undergoing RALP.

METHODS

We enrolled 58 patients undergoing RALP and 22 patients undergoing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) (control group) in our study. Demographic patient data and intraoperative parameters including cerebral oxygenation and cerebral hemodynamics were recorded for all patients. Cerebral function was also assessed pre- and postoperatively via the Mini Mental Status (MMS) exam. Changes in parameters during surgery were modelled by a mixed effects model; changes in the MMS result were evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

Preoperative assessment of patient characteristics, standard blood values and vital parameters revealed no difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying a 45° Trendelenburg position causes no difference in postoperative brain function, and does not alter cerebral oxygenation during a surgical procedure lasting up to 5 h. Further studies in larger patient cohorts will have to confirm these findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trial Registry; DRKS00005094; Registered 12th December 2013-Retrospectively registered; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00005094 .

Men With Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Sexual Function, Fertility, Medication Safety, and Prostate Cancer

Half of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are men, yet less attention has been focused on their sexual issues despite higher rates of sexual dysfunction and infertility than the general population. Depression and IBD disease activity are the most consistently reported risk factor for sexual dysfunction among men with IBD. Methotrexate and sulfasalazine have been rarely associated with impotence. Sulfasalazine reversibly reduces male fertility. No other medications used in IBD significantly affect fertility in humans. There is no increase in adverse fetal outcomes among offspring of fathers with IBD. Patients with IBD seem to be at a higher risk for prostate cancer; therefore, screening as recommended for high-risk patients should be considered.

Robotic Colorectal Surgery

The role of robotics in colon and rectal surgery has been established as an important and effective tool for the surgeon. Its inherent technologies have provided for increased visualization and ease of dissection in the minimally invasive approach to surgery. The value of the robot is apparent in the more challenging aspects of colon and rectal procedures, including the intracorporeal anastomosis for right colectomies and the low pelvic dissection for benign and malignant diseases.

[Robotic Assisted Proctocolectomy with Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis in a Case of Suspected Hereditary Polyposis]

BACKGROUND

Various forms of hereditary polyposis have been described in the literature. Classical familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is a rare, autosomal dominantly inherited disease which is caused by a germline mutation in the adenomatous polyposis coli gene (APC). Patients with this diagnosis successively develop multiple polyps of the colon. Left untreated, FAP almost inevitably leads to malignant transformation.

INDICATION

We present the case of a 37-year-old patient with histologically confirmed, stenotic adenocarcinoma of the descending colon and an initially suspected hereditary polyposis due to multiple polyps in the descending and sigmoid colon.

METHODS

The video describes the preoperative imaging as well as endoscopic findings and demonstrates the technique of a two-stage, robotically assisted proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) and the creation of a temporary loop ileostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

With respect to the surgical treatment of classic FAP, restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with ileal J-pouch construction can be regarded as an established standard procedure, despite controversy regarding various technical aspects. Minimally invasive strategies should be considered as an equivalent option compared to conventional techniques.

DIAGNOSTIC AND MANAGEMENT APPROACH TO POUCHITIS IN INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE

In patients with ulcerative colitis refractory to medical therapy, total proctocolectomy and posterior ileal-anal pouch anastomosis is the standard surgical therapy. One of the possible complications is pouchitis. Depending on the duration of the symptoms, it can be classified as acute, recurrent, or chronic. The latter, according to the response to therapy, can be defined as antibiotic-dependent or refractory. The treatment of pouchitis is based on the use of antibiotics and probiotics. Thiopurine and biological therapy have been suggested in patients with refractory pouchitis. Special care should be taken in the endoscopic surveillance of these patients, especially if they present risk factors such as dysplasia or previous colorectal cancer, primary sclerosing cholangitis or ulcerative colitis for more than 10 years.

Minimally Invasive Surgery in Complex Crohn's Disease

Minimally invasive approaches are safe, feasible, and often recommended as the initial choice in the surgical management of Crohn's disease. However, a consensus has not been reached as the ideal approach in the surgical treatment of complex and recurrent Crohn's disease. Laparoscopy may provide advantages such as shorter length of stay and decreased postoperative pain and result in less adhesion formation in patients with complex disease. Robotic techniques may be beneficial in selected patients for completion proctectomy, providing better visualization in the narrow pelvis and increased dexterity. Decision of surgical technique should be made on a case-by-case basis.

The Role of Laparoscopic, Robotic, and Open Surgery in Uncomplicated and Complicated Inflammatory Bowel Disease

The incidence of inflammatory bowel disease is increasing and despite advances in medical therapy, patients continue to require operations for complications of their disease. Minimally invasive surgical options have impacted postoperative morbidity dramatically with reduction of pain, length of stay and adhesion formation, but additionally, this population of patients are not only concerned with successful operative therapy but also the ability to return to their lifestyle and cosmetics. Laparoscopic and robotic surgery for Crohn's disease has proven to benefit patients with ileocolic or colonic disease, however complicated disease with phlegmon, abscess or fistulae is best served with a hybrid approach. Ulcerative colitis treatment has seen advancements with laparoscopic and robotic platforms, however the benefits of minimally invasive surgery must be balanced with producible and durable outcomes.

Short-term postoperative outcomes following robotic versus laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis are equivalent

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approaches have become the standard of care for ileal pouch-anal anastomoses (IPAA). There are few reports comparing outcomes following a laparoscopic versus robotic approach. Our aim was to determine if there were any differences in the 30-day postoperative outcomes following IPAA performed laparoscopically versus robotically.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all laparoscopic and robotic IPAA performed between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2018 was carried out. Patients included were adult patients who underwent a proctectomy and IPAA utilizing either a laparoscopic or robotic approach. Data collected included patient demographics, operative variables, and 30-day postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients had a minimally invasive IPAA; 58 were performed laparoscopically and 74 robotically. Less than half the patients were female (n = 55; 41.7%) with a median age of 37 years (range 18-68 years). The majority of patients had a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (n = 103; 78.0%) with medically refractory disease (n = 87; 65.9%). A greater proportion of patients in the laparoscopic cohort had a prolonged length of stay (n = 27; 46.6% versus n = 18; 24.3%; p < 0.001) and a two-stage approach (n = 56; 96.6% versus n = 37; 50%; p < 0.001), but there were no differences in the rates between the laparoscopic versus robotic cohorts of superficial surgical site infection (6.9% versus 6.8%; p = 0.99), peripouch abscess (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), anastomotic leak (6.9% versus 2.7%; p = 0.21), pelvic abscess (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), and pelvic sepsis (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), readmission (24.1% versus 17.6%; p = 0.35) or reoperation (6.9% versus 5.4%; p = 0.72). On multivariable analysis, only male sex remained predictive of prolonged length of stay, and a robotic approach trended toward a decreased rate of prolonged length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic and robotic IPAA have equivalent postoperative morbidity underscoring the safety of the continued expansion of the robotic platform for pouch surgery.

Close rectal dissection in benign diseases of the rectum: A review

PURPOSE

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard resectional strategy for rectal cancer to minimize loco-regional recurrence and optimize oncological outcomes. This plane is described by many as 'bloodless' but it does contain important pelvic neural plexuses and dissection may be close to the ureters and major vascular structures, particularly in inflammatory conditions of the distal colon and rectum. In such benign diseases a more conservative excision, so-called close rectal dissection, has been advocated to minimize damage to these structures.

METHODS

A review of the literature was conducted to document the evolution of this procedure. Contemporary literature was interrogated to ascertain how this approach is adopted in minimally invasive surgery. Post-operative outcomes are compared to those from TME surgery.

RESULTS

From early descriptions in 1956, this procedure has been adapted for use in laparoscopic surgery. It may be particularly useful in trans-anal mesorectal surgery. Reported benefits include reduced nerve injury and pelvic sepsis. However, this must be balanced against risks of mesorectal bleeding, rectal injury, and ongoing inflammation from the retained mesorectum.

CONCLUSION

Rectal surgery in inflammatory conditions is technically challenging. Close rectal dissection is an alternate approach available to colorectal surgeons in these cases to minimize pelvic morbidity and optimize postoperative outcomes.

Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of robotic colorectal resections for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic literature review

The purpose of this study was to assess outcome measures and cost-effectiveness of robotic colorectal resections in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The Cochrane Library, PubMed/Medline and Embase databases were reviewed, using the text "robotic(s)" AND ("inflammatory bowel disease" OR "Crohn's" OR "Ulcerative Colitis"). Two investigators screened abstracts for eligibility. All English language full-text articles were reviewed for specified outcomes. Data were presented in a summarised and aggregate form, since the lack of higher-level evidence studies precluded meta-analysis. Primary outcomes included mortality and postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included readmission rate, length of stay, conversion rate, procedure time, estimated blood loss and functional outcome. The tertiary outcome was cost-effectiveness. Eight studies (3 case-matched observational studies, 4 case series and 1 case report) met the inclusion criteria. There was no reported mortality. Overall, complications occurred in 81 patients (54%) including 30 (20%) Clavien-Dindo III-IV complications. Mean length of stay was 8.6 days. Eleven cases (7.3%) were converted to open. The mean robotic operating time was 99 min out of a mean total operating time of 298.6 min. Thirty-two patients (24.7%) were readmitted. Functional outcomes were comparable among robotic, laparoscopic and open approaches. Case-matched observational studies comparing robotic to laparoscopic surgery revealed a significantly longer procedure time; however, conversion, complication, length of stay and readmission rates were similar. The case-matched observational study comparing robotic to open surgery also revealed a longer procedure time and a higher readmission rate; postoperative complication rates and length of stay were similar. No studies compared cost-effectiveness between robotic and traditional approaches. Although robotic resections for inflammatory bowel disease are technically feasible, outcomes must be interpreted with caution due to low-quality studies.

[The technique of restorative proctocolectomy with ileal J‑pouch : Standards and controversies]

BACKGROUND

Restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) is the standard of care in the case of medically refractory disease and in neoplasia in ulcerative colitis (UC).

OBJECTIVES

This review aims at providing an overview of the current evidence on standards, innovations, and controversies with regard to the surgical technique of RPC.

RESULTS

RPC is the standard of care in the surgical management of UC refractory to medical treatment and in neoplasia. Due to its simplicity and good functional outcomes, the J‑pouch is the most used pouch design. RPC is usually performed as a two-stage procedure. In the presence of risk factors, a three-stage procedure should be performed. The technically more demanding mucosectomy and hand sewn anastomosis does not seem to result in a better oncologic outcome than stapled anastomosis. Functional results appear marginally better after stapled anastomosis, but the rectal cuff should not exceed 2 cm in this reconstruction. The laparoscopic approach is at least as good as the open approach. For the new, innovative surgical approaches such as robotics and transanal surgery, only feasibility but no advantages have yet been demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

The evidence in regard to controversial points remains limited.

Pouchitis after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis: Diagnosis, management, risk factors, and incidence

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has been the surgical treatment of choice for patients with ulcerative colitis who require surgery. Quality of life after this procedure is satisfactory in most cases; however, pouchitis is a troublesome condition involving inflammation of the ileal pouch. When a patient presents with symptoms of pouchitis, such as increased bowel movements, mucous and/or bloody exudates, abdominal cramps, and fever, endoscopy is essential for a precise diagnosis. The proximal ileum and rectal cuff, as well as the ileal pouch, should be endoscopically observed. The reported incidence of pouchitis ranges from 14% to 59%, and antibiotic therapy is the primary treatment for acute pouchitis. Chronic pouchitis includes antibiotic-dependent and refractory pouchitis. Intensive therapy including antitumor necrosis factor antibodies and steroids may be necessary for antibiotic-refractory pouchitis, and pouch failure may occur despite such intensive treatment. Reported risk factors for the development of pouchitis include presence of extraintestinal manifestations, primary sclerosing cholangitis, non-smoking, and postoperative non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug usage. In the present review, we focus on the diagnosis, endoscopic features, management, incidence, and risk factors of pouchitis in patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

Recent surgical advances in colorectal cancer excision: toward optimal outcomes

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer affecting both males and females in the western world. Despite all the developments in the current treatment of colorectal cancer, it is still continuing to be an important factor of patient morbidity and mortality worldwide. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for colorectal cancer. Over the last decade, there have been major changes and developments in the surgical treatment. Understanding the importance of the anatomy, technological advances in minimally invasive surgery and effects of chemoradiotherapy have changed the approaches to colorectal cancer treatment. Today, novel treatment strategies must be targeted not only minimally invasive approaches, but also aiming to increase patients’ quality of life without compromising the oncological principles.

Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Reoperative Abdomen or Pelvis

Laparoscopy has become widely accepted as the preferred surgical approach in the management of benign and malignant colorectal diseases. Once considered a relative contraindication in patients with prior abdominal surgery (PAS), as surgeons have continued to gain expertise in advanced laparoscopy, minimally invasive approaches have been increasingly incorporated in the reoperative abdomen and pelvis. Although earlier studies have described conversion rates, most contemporary series evaluating the impact of PAS in laparoscopic colorectal resection have reported equivalent conversion and morbidity rates between reoperative and non-reoperative cases, and series evaluating the impact of laparoscopy in reoperative cases have demonstrated improved short-term outcomes with laparoscopy. The data overall highlight the importance of case selection, careful preoperative preparation and planning, and the critical role of surgeons' expertise in advanced laparoscopic techniques. Challenges to the widespread adoption of minimally invasive techniques in reoperative colorectal cases include the longer learning curve and longer operative time. However, with the steady increase in adoption of minimally invasive techniques worldwide, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is likely to continue to be applied in the management of increasingly complex reoperative colorectal cases in an effort to improve patient outcomes. In the hands of experienced MIS surgeons and in carefully selected cases, laparoscopy is both safe and efficacious for reoperative procedures in the abdomen and pelvis, with measurable short-term benefits.

Minimally invasive surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: Review of current developments and future perspectives

Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) comprise a population of patients that have a high likelihood of both surgical treatment at a young age and repetitive operative interventions. Therefore surgical procedures need to aim at minimizing operative trauma with best postoperative recovery. Minimally invasive techniques have been one of the major advancements in surgery in the last decades and are nowadays almost routinely performed in colorectal resections irrespective of underlying disease. However due to special disease related characteristics such as bowel stenosis, interenteric fistula, abscesses, malnutrition, repetitive surgeries, or immunosuppressive medications, patients with IBD represent a special cohort with specific needs for surgery. This review summarizes current evidence of minimally invasive surgery for patients with Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis and gives an outlook on the future perspective of technical advances in this highly moving field with its latest developments in single port surgery, robotics and trans-anal techniques.

Short-term Outcome of Robot-assisted and Open IPAA: An Observational Single-center Study

BACKGROUND

The potential advantages of robot-assisted laparoscopy are being increasingly investigated, although data on its efficacy in benign colorectal surgery are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the early postoperative outcome in robot-assisted IPAA with open surgery procedures.

DESIGN

This was an observational study based on prospectively collected data obtained from chart reviews.

SETTING

The single-center data set covers patients operated on from January 13, 2004, to September 16, 2014, at a specialist center.

PATIENTS

Patients with ulcerative colitis undergoing IPAA surgery were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Study end points included the duration of operation, admission length, complications (Clavien-Dindo), reoperations, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Eighty-one robot-assisted and 170 open IPAA procedures were performed. The duration of operation was significantly longer for robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures (mean difference, 154 minutes; CI, 140-170). During a mean follow-up of 102 days, no significant differences in the distribution of complications were found (Spearman p = 0.12; p = 0.07), and no postoperative deaths occurred in either group. Postoperative admission length was shorter following robot-assisted procedures (mean difference, -1.9; CI, -3.5 to -0.3), whereas 40% of patients were readmitted, compared with 26% of patients who had open surgery (OR, 1.9; CI, 1.1-3.4). Pouch failure occurred in 3 patients (1 following robot-assisted laparoscopy; 2 following open surgery). On multivariate regression analyses, robot-assisted laparoscopy was associated with a significantly longer duration of operation (mean difference, 159 minutes; CI, 144-174), and more readmissions for any cause (OR, 2; CI, 1.1-3.7).

LIMITATIONS

This was a nonrandomized, single-center observational study.

CONCLUSION

In this implementation phase, robot-assisted IPAA surgery offers acceptable short-term outcomes. The limitations of this observational study call for randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up and exploration of functional results.

Robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Robotic approaches have become increasingly used for colorectal surgery. The aim of this study is to examine the safety and efficacy of robotic colorectal procedures in an adult population.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review of articles in both PubMed and Embase comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal procedures was performed. Clinical trials and observational studies in an adult population were included. Approaches were evaluated in terms of operative time, length of stay, estimated blood loss, number of lymph nodes harvested, and perioperative complications. Mean net differences and odds ratios were calculated to examine treatment effect of each group.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighteen articles were identified, and 17 met the inclusion criteria, representing 4,342 patients: 920 robotic and 3,422 in the laparoscopic group. Operative time for the robotic approach was 38.849 minutes longer (95% confidence interval: 17.944 to 59.755). The robotic group had lower estimated blood loss (14.17 mL; 95% confidence interval: -27.63 to -1.60), and patients were 1.78 times more likely to be converted to an open procedure (95% confidence interval: 1.24 to 2.55). There was no difference between groups with respect to number of lymph nodes harvested, length of stay, readmission rate, or perioperative complication rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic approach to colorectal surgery is as safe and efficacious as conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, it is associated with longer operative time and an increased rate of conversion to laparotomy. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are warranted to examine the cost-effectiveness of robotic colorectal surgery before it can be adopted as the new standard of care.

Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted colectomy and rectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Lately, the main technical innovations in the field of colorectal surgery have been the introduction of laparoscopic and robotic techniques; the aim of this study is to investigate the results and the advantages of these two surgical approaches.

METHODS

Twenty-two studies including 1652 laparoscopic and 1120 robotic-assisted resections were analyzed and categorized into right, left, and pelvic resections of the middle/low rectum, aiming to the following outcomes: operating time, blood loss, bowel function recovery, return to oral intake, morbidity, hospital stay, and costs.

RESULTS

The vast majority of the studies were non-randomized investigations (19/22 studies) enrolling small cohorts of patients (median 55.0 laparoscopic and 34.5 robotic-assisted group) with a mean age of 62.2-61.0 years. Funnel plot analysis documented heterogeneity in studies which combined cancers and benign diseases. Our meta-analysis demonstrated a significant difference in favor of laparoscopic procedures regarding costs and operating time (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.686 and 0.493) and in favor of robotic surgery concerning morbidity rate (odds ratio (OR) 0.763), although no benefits were documented when analyzing exclusively randomized trials. When we differentiated approaches by side of resections, a significant difference was found in favor of the laparoscopic group when analyzing operating time in left-sided and pelvic procedures (SMD 0.609 and 0.529) and blood loss in pelvic resections (SMD 0.339).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic techniques were documented as the shorter procedures, which provided lower blood loss in pelvic resections, while morbidity rate was more favorable in robotic surgery. However, these results could not be confirmed when we focused the analysis on randomized trials only.

Hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch--anal anastomosis

PURPOSE

Few studies have reported minimally invasive total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) for ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). We herein report a novel hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic technique for patients with FAP and UC.

METHODS

Between February 2010 and March 2014, six patients underwent hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic total proctocolectomy with IPAA. The abdominal colectomy was performed laparoscopically with hand assistance through a transverse suprapubic incision, also used to fashion the ileal pouch. The proctectomy was carried out with the da Vinci Surgical System. The IPAA was hand-sewn through a trans-anal approach. The procedure was complemented by a temporary diverting loop ileostomy.

RESULTS

The mean hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) time was 154.6 (±12.8) min whereas the mean robotic time was 93.6 (±8.1) min. In all cases, a nerve-sparing proctectomy was performed, and no conversion to traditional laparotomy was required. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 13.2 (±7.4) days. No anastomotic leakage was observed. To date, no autonomic neurological disorders have been observed with a mean of 5.8 (±1.3) bowel movements per day.

CONCLUSIONS

The hand-assisted hybrid laparoscopic-robotic approach to total proctocolectomy with IPAA has not been previously described. Our report shows the feasibility of this hybrid approach, which surpasses most of the limitations of pure laparoscopic and robotic techniques. Further experience is necessary to refine the technique and fully assess its potential advantages.

Laparoscopic total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis

AIM:

The aim was to study the feasibility of the laparoscopic approach in the management of ulcerative colitis, to assess the functional results at 1-year and to review of literature on the topic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

All patients presenting for surgical management of histopathologically proven ulcerative colitis during the study period were included in the study. All patients presenting in a non-emergency setting were offered a two-stage procedure (Group A). The first-stage consisted of laparoscopic total proctocolectomy (TPC) with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) with a diverting split end ileostomy. Ileostomy was closed in the second stage. For patients presenting in acute setting (Group B), the first-stage consisted of laparoscopic TPC with end ileostomy followed by IPAA with diverting split end ileostomy in the second-stage and finally ileostomy closure in the third-stage. The technique is described.

RESULTS:

A total of 31 cases underwent laparoscopic TPC-IPAA, of which 28 belonged to Group A and 3 were included in Group B. All surgeries were successfully completed laparoscopically without need for conversion. The average operating time was 375 min in Group A (range: 270–500 min) and 390 min in Group B (range: 250–480 min). Oral diet was resumed at a mean of 3.4 days (range: 1.5–6 days) and the mean hospital stay was 8.2 days (range: 4–26 days). Overall morbidity rate was 16.2%; re-operation rate was 9.7% while mortality was nil.

CONCLUSIONS:

Laparoscopic TPC-IPAA is feasible in acute as well as non-acute setting in patients needing surgical management of ulcerative colitis.

Minimally invasive surgery for inflammatory bowel disease

Surgical management of inflammatory bowel disease is a challenging endeavor given infectious and inflammatory complications, such as fistula, and abscess, complex often postoperative anatomy, including adhesive disease from previous open operations. Patients with Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis also bring to the table the burden of their chronic illness with anemia, malnutrition, and immunosuppression, all common and contributing independently as risk factors for increased surgical morbidity in this high-risk population. However, to reduce the physical trauma of surgery, technologic advances and worldwide experience with minimally invasive surgery have allowed laparoscopic management of patients to become standard of care, with significant short- and long-term patient benefits compared with the open approach. In this review, we will describe the current state-of the-art for minimally invasive surgery for inflammatory bowel disease and the caveats inherent with this practice in this complex patient population. Also, we will review the applicability of current and future trends in minimally invasive surgical technique, such as laparoscopic "incisionless," single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), robotic-assisted, and other techniques for the patient with inflammatory bowel disease. There can be no doubt that minimally invasive surgery has been proven to decrease the short- and long-term burden of surgery of these chronic illnesses and represents high-value care for both patient and society.