Robotic-assisted ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease: outcomes from an early national experience

Robotic ambulatory colorectal resections: a systematic review

Colorectal surgery has progressed greatly via minimally invasive techniques, laparoscopic and robotic. With the advent of ERAS protocols, patient recovery times have greatly shortened, allowing for same day discharges (SDD). Although SDD have been explored through laparoscopic colectomy reviews, no reviews surrounding robotic ambulatory colorectal resections (RACrR) exist to date. A systematic search was carried out across three databases and internet searches. Data were selected and extracted by two independent reviewers. Inclusion criteria included robotic colorectal resections with a length of hospital stay of less than one day or 24 h. 4 studies comprising 136 patients were retrieved. 56% of patients were female and were aged between 21 and 89 years. Main surgery indications were colorectal cancer and recurrent sigmoid diverticulitis (43% each). Most patients had low anterior resections (48%). Overall, there was a 4% complication rate postoperatively, with only 1 patient requiring readmission due to postoperative urinary retention (< 1%). Patient selection criteria involved ASA score cut-offs, nutritional status, and specific health conditions. Protocols employed shared similarities including ERAS education, transabdominal plane blocks, early removal of urinary catheters, an opioid-sparing regime, and encouraged early oral intake and ambulation prior to discharge. All 4 studies had various follow-up methods involving telemedicine, face-to-face consultations, and virtual ward teams. RACrRs is safe and feasible in a highly specific patient population; however, further high-quality studies with larger sample sizes are needed to draw more significant conclusions. Several limitations included small sample size and the potential of recall bias due to retrospective nature of 2 studies.

Implementation of a robotic surgical practice in inflammatory bowel disease

Robotics adoption has increased in colorectal surgery. While there are well-established advantages and standardised techniques for cancer patients, the use of robotic surgery in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has not been studied yet. To evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic surgery for IBD patients. Prospectively data in IBD patients having robotic resection at Guy's and St Thomas' hospital. All resections performed by a single colorectal surgeon specialised in IBD, utilising DaVinci platform. July 2021 to January 2023, 59 robotic IBD cases performed, 14 ulcerative colitis (UC) and 45 Crohn's disease (CD). Average age; CD patients 35, UC 33 years. Average Body mass index (BMI); 23 for CD and 26.9 for UC patients. In total, we performed 31 ileo-caecal resections (ICR) with primary anastomosis (18 Kono-S anastomosis, 6 mechanical anastomosis and 7 ileo-colostomy), of those 4 had multivisceral resections (large bowel, bladder, ovary). Furthermore, 14 subtotal colectomy (1 emergency), 8 proctectomy, 3 panproctocolectomy and 3 ileoanal J pouch. 18 of the 45 patients (45.0%) with Crohn's disease had ongoing fistulating disease to other parts of the GI tract (small or large bowel). ICR were performed using different three ports position, depending on the anatomy established prior to surgery with magnetic resonance images (MRI). One patient had conversion to open due to anaesthetic problems and one patient required re-operation to refashion stoma. 98.0% cases completed robotically. Median Length of hospital stay (LOS) was 7 days for CD and 7 for UC cases, including LOS in patients on pre-operative parenteral nutrition. Robotic colorectal techniques can be safely used for patients with IBD, even with fistulating disease. Future research and collaborations are necessary to standardize technique within institutions.

Incisional hernia rates between intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease

PURPOSE

One-third of patients with Crohn's disease (CD) require multiple surgeries during their lifetime. So, reducing the incisional hernia rate is crucial. We aimed to define incisional hernia rates after minimally invasive ileocolic resection for CD, comparing intracorporeal anastomosis with Pfannenstiel incision (ICA-P) versus extracorporeal anastomosis with midline vertical incision (ECA-M).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort compares ICA-P versus ECA-M from a prospectively maintained database of consecutive minimally invasive ileocolic resections for CD performed between 2014 and 2021 in a referral center.

RESULTS

Of the 249 patients included: 59 were in the ICA-P group, 190 in the ECA-M group. Both groups were similar according to baseline and preoperative characteristics. Overall, 22 (8.8%) patients developed an imaging-proven incisional hernia: seven at the port-site and 15 at the extraction-site. All 15 extraction-site incisional hernias were midline vertical incisions [7.9%; p = 0.025], and 8 patients (53%) required surgical repair. Time-to-event analysis showed a 20% rate of extraction-site incisional hernia in the ECA-M group after 48 months (p = 0.037). The length of stay was lower in the intracorporeal anastomosis with Pfannenstiel incision group [ICA-P: 3.3 ± 2.5 vs. ECA-M: 4.1 ± 2.4 days; p = 0.02] with similar 30-day postoperative complication [11(18.6) vs. 59(31.1); p = 0.064] and readmission rates [7(11.9) vs. 18(9.5); p = 0.59].

CONCLUSION

Patients in the ICA-P group did not encounter any incisional hernias while having shorter hospital length of stay and similar 30-day postoperative complications or readmission compared to ECA-M. Therefore, more consideration should be given to performing intracorporeal anastomosis with Pfannenstiel incision during Ileocolic resection in patients with CD to reduce hernia risk.

Incisional Hernia rates between Intracorporeal and Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Minimally Invasive Ileocolic Resection for Crohn's disease.. [DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2591968/v1]

Purpose: One-third of patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) require multiple surgeries during their lifetime. So, reducing the incisional hernia rate is crucial. We aimed to define incisional hernia rates after minimally invasive ileocolic resection for CD, comparing intracorporeal anastomosis with Pfannenstiel incision (ICA-P) versus extracorporeal anastomosis with midline vertical incision (ECA-M). Methods: This retrospective cohort compares ICA-P versus ECA-M from a prospectively maintained database of consecutive minimally invasive ileocolic resections for CD performed between 2014 and 2021 in a referral center. Results: Of the 249 patients included: 59 were in the ICA-P group, 190 in the ECA-M group. Both groups were similar according to baseline and preoperative characteristics. Overall, 22 (8.8%) patients developed an imaging-proven incisional hernia: seven at the port-site and 15 at the extraction-site. All 15 extraction-site incisional hernias were midline vertical incisions [7.9%; p=0.025], and 8 patients (53%) required surgical repair. Time-to-event analysis showed a 20% rate of extraction-site incisional hernia in the ECA-M group after 48 months (p =0.037). The length of stay was lower in the intracorporeal anastomosis with Pfannenstiel incision group [ICA-P: 3.3±2.5 vs. ECA-M: 4.1±2.4 days; p=0.02] with similar 30-day postoperative complication [11(18.6) vs. 59(31.1); p=0.064] and readmission rates [7(11.9) vs. 18(9.5); p=0.59]. Conclusion: Patients in the ICA-P group did not encounter any incisional hernias while having shorter hospital length of stay and similar 30-day postoperative complications or readmission compared to ECA-M. Therefore, more consideration should be given to performing intracorporeal anastomosis with Pfannenstiel incision during Ileocolic resection in patients with CD to reduce hernia risk.

The Revival of Surgery in Crohn's Disease-Early Intestinal Resection as a Reasonable Alternative in Localized Ileitis

Crohn's disease (CD) represents a heterogeneous and complex disease with no curative therapeutic option available to date. Current therapy is mainly antibody-based focusing on the immune system while other treatment alternatives such as surgery are considered to be "last options". However, medical therapy for CD results in mild to severe side effects in a relevant amount of patients and some patients do not respond to the medication. Following that, quality of life is often significantly reduced in this patient cohort, thus, therapeutic alternatives are urgently needed. Updated evidence has revealed that surgery such as ileocecal resection (ICR) might be a potential therapeutic option in case of localized terminal ileitis since resection at early time points improves quality of life and significantly reduces the postoperative need for immunosuppressive medication with low rates of morbidity. In addition, new surgical approaches such as Kono-S anastomosis or inclusion of the mesentery result in significantly reduced rates of disease recurrence and reoperation. Based on the new evidence, the goal of this review is to provide an update on the role of surgery as a reasonable alternative to medical therapy in the interdisciplinary treatment of patients with CD.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis for robotic ileocolic resection in Crohn's disease

To date, there is no cohort in the literature focusing on the impact of the type of anastomosis in robotic ileocolonic resections for Crohn's Disease (CD). We aimed to compare short-term postoperative outcomes of robotic ileocolic resection for CD between patients who had intracorporeal (ICA) or extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). We retrospectively included all consecutive robotic ileocolonic resections for CD at our institution between 2014 and 2020. We compared baseline, perioperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes between ICA and ECA. The analysis included 89 patients: 71% underwent ICA and 29% ECA. Groups were similar in age, sex, body mass index, smoking, CD duration, Montreal classification, surgical history, and previous CD medical treatments. Return to bowel function was achieved sooner in the ICA group (ICA 1.6 ± 0.7 day, ECA 2.1 ± 0.8 days; p = 0.026) despite longer operative time (ICA 235 ± 79 min, ECA 172 ± 51 min; p < 0.001), but no statistical difference was found regarding ileus rate and length of stay. Overall, 30-day postoperative complication rate was 23.6% (ICA 22.2%, ECA 26.9%; p = 0.635). There were no abdominal septic complications, anastomotic leaks, or severe postoperative complications. In conclusion, robotic ileocolic resection for CD shows acceptable 30 days outcomes for both ICA and ECA. ICA was associated with a faster return to bowel function without impact on the length of stay or 30-day complications. Further studies are needed to confirm the benefits of ICA in the setting of ileocolic resections for CD.

Morbidly Obese Patients with Ileocolic Crohn's Disease May Benefit from Robotic Surgery

Background and Objectives:

Obesity is increasing as a comorbid condition for patients requiring surgery for Crohn’s disease. Minimally invasive colectomy is ideal for a patient with combined obesity and Crohn’s disease. However laparoscopic colon resection is associated with high operative conversion rates in these cases. Data examining the use of robotic surgery in the obese patient with Crohn’s disease is sparse.

Methods:

We examined the feasibility and outcomes of performing a minimally invasive colectomy using the Da Vinci robot in a prospective case series of morbidly obese patients with ileal Crohn’s disease.

Results:

A robotic ileocolectomy was performed in four morbidly obese patients with Crohn’s disease. There were no operative conversions or complications with a median length of stay of 3 days.

Conclusion:

A robotic approach is a promising minimally invasive surgical alternative to laparoscopic surgery for these complex patients.

[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.

Robotic Surgery in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND

Surgery is considered a cornerstone of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) treatment. In the last years, robotic surgery has seen an increase in adoption rates for both benign and malignant diseases.

OBJECTIVE

This work aims to review the current applications of robotic surgery in IBD.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Minimally-invasive techniques have been applied to the treatment of IBD for more than 20 years. Investments in surgical digital and robotic platforms are increasingly arising, with an estimate of getting doubled within the next 5 years. Robotic surgery represents the newest technology available to reduce the impact of surgery on patients affected by IBD, and may theoretically be even more effective than other minimally-invasive techniques given the lower rate of conversion to open surgery as compared to laparoscopy according to many large retrospective series. Data on robotic surgery applied to IBD are still scarce and initial experiences in high-volume centers from retrospective series suggested that robotic surgery may achieve similar results when compared to laparoscopy. A new wave of robotics incorporating artificial intelligence is awaited to empower the capability of IBD surgeon in terms of intraoperative decision-making beyond technical skill enhancement.

Robotic and laparoscopic surgical techniques in patients with Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Crohn's disease has historically been managed medically with sparing use of surgical resection. With the development of strictures or fistulas, surgical management such as an ileocecal resection may become necessary. Minimally invasive options such as laparoscopic and robotic-assisted techniques are alternatives to open surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of minimally invasive surgery for Crohn's disease.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database to select 5158 patients with Crohn's disease who underwent ileocecal resection (open, laparoscopic, or robotic-assisted). Preoperative, perioperative, and 30-day postoperative outcomes were compared between the groups using both univariate and multivariate logistical regression models. SAS was used for data analysis with p < 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

The three treatment groups (open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted ileocecal resection) had 30-day postoperative outcomes reported in NSQIP. The average BMI was 25 kg/m² and the average age was 41. The rate of anastomotic leaks was significantly higher in the open surgery group compared to the minimally invasive groups (p = 0.001). The open surgery group had a significantly higher reoperation rate (p = 0.0002) and wound infection rate (p < 0.0001). The robotic-assisted group had significantly longer operative times compared to the laparoscopic and open groups (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The decision to operate on a patient with Crohn's disease involves selecting an approach based on patient factors, surgeon preference, and availability of equipment. When evaluating the short-term postoperative outcomes in patients that have undergone ileocecal resection for management of Crohn's, minimally invasive techniques have had a lower incidence of wound infections, anastomotic leaks, and re-intervention in carefully selected patients. This retrospective review of a large national database demonstrates the efficacy of minimally invasive techniques in managing Crohn's disease in selected patients.

Meta-analysis of early bowel resection versus initial medical therapy in patient's with ileocolonic Crohn's disease

BACKGROUND

Early bowel resection (EBR) in ileocolonic Crohn's disease (CD) may be associated with more durable remission compared with initial medical therapy (IMT) even when biologic therapy is included.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of EBR versus IMT for ileocolonic CD METHODS: A systematic search was performed to identify studies that compared EBR (performed < 1 year from initial diagnosis) or IMT for the management of ileocolonic CD. Log hazard ratios (InHR) for relapse-free survival (RFS) and their standard errors were calculated from Kaplan-Meier plots and pooled using the inverse-variance method. Dichotomous variables were pooled as odds ratios (OR). Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) and Jadad scales.

RESULTS

A total of 7 studies with 1863 CD patients (EBR n = 581, 31.2%; IMT n = 1282, 68.8%) were eligible for inclusion. There was a moderate-to-high risk of bias. The median NOS was 8 (range 7-9). There was a reduced likelihood of overall (OR, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.34, 0.83; p = 0.005) and surgical (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.24, 0.91; p = 0.03) relapse with EBR. There was also a less requirement for maintenance biologic therapy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14, 0.42; p < 0.0001). Patients who underwent EBR had a significantly improved RFS than those who underwent IMT (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.52, 0.73; p < 0.001). There was no difference in morbidity (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.44, 6.36; p = 0.45) between the groups.

CONCLUSION

EBR may be associated with less relapse and need for maintenance biologic therapy than IMT. 'Upfront' or early resection may represent a reasonable and cost-effective alternative to biologic therapy, especially in biologic-resistant subpopulations.