Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for middle and low rectal cancer (REAL): short-term outcomes of a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Cost-effectiveness of robotic compared with laparoscopic rectal resection. Results from the Spanish prospective national trial ROBOCOSTES

OBJECTIVE

The costs related to robotic surgery are known to be greater than those associated with laparoscopy. However, the potential for better outcomes of the former could lead to a cost-effectiveness advantage. The aim of this study is therefore to highlight the difference in cost-effectiveness between robotic and laparoscopic rectal resection.

METHODS

This is an observational, multicenter, national prospective study (ROBOCOSTES). From 2022, for 1 year, all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive rectal resection were included. Quality-adjusted life year and cost data were prospectively collected. The primary aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of robotic rectal resection and laparoscopic rectal resection . Secondary aims included clinical outcomes and quality of life.

RESULTS

Overall, 182 patients underwent rectal resection (152 anterior and 30 abdominoperineal excisions) at 14 centers, of whom 95 received robotic rectal resection and 87 laparoscopic rectal resection. Robotic rectal resection was associated with lesser blood loss (58.55 ± 51.68 vs 131.68 ± 191.92, P < .001), lower pain score at day 1 (-1.04 visual analog scale, P < .001) and day 7 (-0.81, P < .001) after surgery, and with fewer hospital readmissions (2.1% vs 15%, P = .005) compared with laparoscopic rectal resection. The overall costs of robotic rectal resection (including hospitalization) were 919.66 euros greater compared with laparoscopic rectal resection, but quality-adjusted life years in the robotic rectal resection group were better than laparoscopic approaches to rectal resection both at 30-day (0.8914 vs 0.8139) and 90-day (0.9573 vs 0.8740) follow-up. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 and 30,000 euros, there was an 84.38% and 89.36% probability that robotic rectal resection was more cost-effective than laparoscopic rectal resection.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that robotic rectal resection, even if associated with greater direct costs in the short term, outperforms laparoscopic rectal resection in terms of quality-adjusted life years and should therefore be preferred where available.

Rise in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer Is Associated With Adoption of Robotic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is associated with improved short-term outcomes and similar long-term oncologic outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer compared with open surgery. Although the robotic approach has ergonomic and technical benefits, how it has impacted the utilization of traditional laparoscopic surgery and minimally invasive surgery overall is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

Describe trends in open, robotic, and laparoscopic approaches for colorectal cancer resections and examine factors associated with minimally invasive surgery.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using data from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2020.

SETTING

Commission on Cancer-accredited US facilities.

PATIENTS

Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic colon or rectal adenocarcinoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Surgical approach rates (open, robotic, and laparoscopic).

RESULTS

We identified 475,001 patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma, of whom 192,237 (40.5%) underwent open surgery, 64,945 (13.7%) underwent robotic surgery, and 217,819 (45.9%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. For colon cancer, laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery use steadily increased, with a peak prevalence of 54.0% in 2016, and total minimally invasive surgery (robotic + laparoscopic) was performed more often than open surgery from 2013 through 2020. For rectal cancer, laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery had a peak prevalence of 37.2% in 2014 and declined from 2014 through 2020; robotic surgery prevalence increased throughout the study period (5.5% in 2010, 24.7% in 2015, and 48.8% in 2020). Minimally invasive surgery use increased in facilities performing robotic surgery every year during the study period. For both colon and rectal cancer, the use of open surgery decreased across all facilities throughout the study period.

LIMITATIONS

This study used the National Cancer Database, which may not be generalizable to non-Commission on Cancer institutions.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive surgery steadily increased across all facilities from 2010 through 2020. Open resections declined, laparoscopic resections plateaued, and robotic resections increased for colon and rectal cancer. Minimally invasive surgery increases may be driven by increases in robot-assisted surgery. See Video Abstract.

EL AUMENTO DE LA CIRUGA MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA PARA EL CNCER COLORRECTAL SE ASOCIA CON LA ADOPCIN A LA CIRUGA ROBTICA

ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía mínimamente invasiva se asocia con mejores resultados a corto plazo y resultados oncológicos similares a largo plazo para pacientes con cáncer colorrectal en comparación con la cirugía abierta. Aunque el abordaje robótico tiene beneficios ergonómicos y técnicos, no está claro cómo ha afectado la utilización de la cirugía laparoscópica tradicional y la cirugía mínimamente invasiva en general.OBJETIVO:Describir las tendencias en los abordajes abiertos, robóticos y laparoscópicos para las resecciones de cáncer colorrectal y examinar los factores asociados con la cirugía mínimamente invasiva.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo utilizando datos de la Base de Datos Nacional del Cáncer desde 2010 hasta 2020.ESCENARIO:Centros estadounidenses acreditados por la Comisión sobre el Cáncer.PACIENTES:Pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de colon o recto no metastásico.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Tasas de abordaje quirúrgico (abierto, robótico, laparoscópico).RESULTADOS:Identificamos 475.001 pacientes con diagnóstico de adenocarcinoma colorrectal no metastásico, de los cuales 192.237 (40,5%) se sometieron a cirugía abierta, 64.945 (13,7%) se sometieron a cirugía robótica y 217.819 (45,9%) se sometieron a cirugía laparoscópica. Para el cáncer de colon, el uso de cirugía mínimamente invasiva laparoscópica aumentó de manera constante, con una prevalencia máxima del 54,0% en 2016, y la cirugía mínimamente invasiva total (robótica + laparoscópica) se realizó con mayor frecuencia que la cirugía abierta desde 2013 hasta 2020. Para el cáncer de recto, la cirugía mínimamente invasiva laparoscópica tuvo una prevalencia máxima del 37,2% en 2014 y disminuyó desde 2014 hasta 2020; La prevalencia de la cirugía robótica aumentó durante el período de estudio (5,5 % en 2010, 24,7 % en 2015, 48,8 % en 2020). El uso de cirugía mínimamente invasiva aumentó en los centros que realizan cirugía robótica cada año durante el período de estudio. Tanto para el cáncer de colon como para el cáncer de recto, el uso de cirugía abierta disminuyó en todos los centros durante el período de estudio.LIMITACIONES:Se utilizó la base de datos nacional sobre el cáncer, que puede no ser generalizable a instituciones que no pertenecen a la Comisión sobre el Cáncer.CONCLUSIONES:La cirugía mínimamente invasiva aumentó de manera constante en todos los centros entre 2010 y 2020. Las resecciones abiertas disminuyeron, las resecciones laparoscópicas se estabilizaron y las resecciones robóticas aumentaron para el cáncer de colon y recto. Los aumentos de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva pueden estar impulsados por aumentos en la cirugía asistida por robot. (Traducción--Ingrid Melo ).

Imaging features and correlation with short-term prognosis in laparoscopic radical resection of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant tumor with high morbidity and mortality rates worldwide. With the development of medical imaging technology, imaging features are playing an increasingly important role in the prognostic evaluation of CRC. Laparoscopic radical resection is a common surgical approach for treating CRC. However, research on the link between preoperative imaging and short-term prognosis in this context is limited. We hypothesized that specific preoperative imaging features can predict the short-term prognosis in patients undergoing laparoscopic CRC resection.

AIM

To investigate the imaging features of CRC and analyze their correlation with the short-term prognosis of laparoscopic radical resection.

METHODS

This retrospective study conducted at the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shandong First Medical University included 122 patients diagnosed with CRC who underwent laparoscopic radical resection between January 2021 and February 2024. All patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and were diagnosed with CRC through pathological examination. MRI data and prognostic indicators were collected 30 days post-surgery. Logistic regression analysis identified imaging features linked to short-term prognosis, and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to evaluate the predictive value.

RESULTS

Among 122 patients, 22 had irregular, low-intensity tumors with adjacent high signals. In 55, tumors were surrounded by alternating signals in the muscle layer. In 32, tumors extended through the muscular layer and blurred boundaries with perienteric adipose tissue. Tumor signals appeared in the adjacent tissues in 13 patients with blurred gaps. Logistic regression revealed differences in longitudinal tumor length, axial tumor length, volume transfer constant, plasma volume fraction, and apparent diffusion coefficient among patients with varying prognostic results. ROC analysis indicated that the areas under the curve for these parameters were 0.648, 0.927, 0.821, 0.809, and 0.831, respectively. Sensitivity values were 0.643, 0.893, 0.607, 0.714, and 0.714, and specificity 0.702, 0.904, 0.883, 0.968, and 0.894 (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The imaging features of CRC correlate with the short-term prognosis following laparoscopic radical resection. These findings provide valuable insights for clinical decision-making.

Impact of double-bolus tracking to individualize scan timing of the portal venous phase in preoperative computed tomography colonography angiography for right-sided colon cancer

AIM

In computed tomography colonography angiography (CTC-A), used for preoperative screening of right-sided colon cancer, the timing of venous phase imaging is conventionally determined by a fixed-delay time; however, the contrast effect may be insufficient because of individual differences in blood flow status. Therefore, we developed the double-bolus tracking (DBT) method to solve this issue.

METHOD

We compared the contrast effect and image quality of the portal venous systems between two methods of the conventional fixed-delay and DBT which utilizes low-dose monitoring to individualize venous scan timings. Data from 30 consecutive patients who underwent CTC-A for right-sided colon cancer using the DBT method were prospectively collected and compared with that from 30 consecutive patients who underwent the conventional fixed-delay method between August 2018 and July 2022. CT values of the portal vein, gastrocolic trunk, and middle colic veins were measured. Additionally, two gastrointestinal surgeons performed a five-point visual evaluation of the three-dimensional volume rendering image of the gastrocolic trunk.

RESULTS

CT values in the DBT group were significantly higher than those in the fixed-delay group. (portal vein: 266.7 HU vs. 210.0 HU; p <  0.001, gastrocolic trunk: 251.6 HU vs. 191.0 HU; p <  0.001, middle colic vein: 257.2 HU vs. 190.1 HU; p <  0.001). Visual assessment of the gastrocolic trunk was significantly higher in the DBT group than that in the fixed-delay group (DBT, 3.6, 3.4; fixed-delay, 2.6, 2.8; p =  0.003, p =  0.044).

CONCLUSION

The DBT method can enhance the contrast effect of the portal venous systems and improve image quality.

Robot-Assisted Total Proctocolectomy for Familial Adenomatous Polyposis with Multiple Colorectal Cancers Using the Hugo RAS System

INTRODUCTION

Experience with the Hugo RAS system in robot-assisted colorectal surgery is limited. This is particularly noticeable when focusing on complex procedures, such as total proctocolectomy (TPC). This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of using the Hugo RAS system for TPC.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 27-year-old woman with multiple colorectal cancers with a background of familial adenomatous polyposis underwent robot-assisted TPC, including lymph node dissection of the entire colorectal region using the Hugo RAS system. The robotic procedure was divided into 3 steps: 1) Trendelenburg position to perform ascending colon complete mesocolic excision (CME) to the hepatic flexure, 2) descending colon CME and total mesorectal excision with D3 lymph node dissection, and 3) flat position to perform central vessel ligation along the superior mesenteric artery. After undocking, the specimen was extracted transanally, and an ileal pouch was constructed from a small laparotomy at the umbilical incision, followed by ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. The operative time was 632 min, and the estimated blood loss was minimal. The postoperative period was uneventful.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted TPC using the Hugo RAS system is safe and feasible. The flexibility of Hugo, which is carried by a modular-type surgical robot with multiple independent arms, enables safe and effective advanced procedures.

Analysis of Local Recurrence After Robotic-Assisted Total Mesorectal Excision (ALRITE): An International, Multicentre, Retrospective Cohort

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Rectal cancer is a major global health issue with high morbidity and mortality rates. Local recurrence (LR) significantly impacts patient outcomes, decreasing survival rates and often necessitating extensive secondary treatments. While robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (R-TME) is becoming a preferred method for rectal cancer surgery due to its improved precision and visualisation, long-term data on LR and predictors of recurrence remain limited. This study aims to determine the 3-year LR rate following R-TME and to identify predictors of recurrence to enhance patient selection and the personalisation of treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective international multicentre cohort study included 1039 consecutive rectal cancer patients who underwent R-TME between 2013 and 2020, with a minimum of 3 years of follow-up. Data from tertiary colorectal centres in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Spain, France, Italy, and Belgium were analysed. Potential predictors of LR were identified using backward elimination, and four machine learning models were evaluated for predicting LR.

RESULTS

The 3-year LR rate was 3.8%. Significant predictors of LR included advanced clinical M-staging, length of the hospital stay, postoperative ileus, postoperative complications, pathological N-staging, the completeness of resection, and the resection margin distance. The eXtreme Gradient Boosting model performed best for LR prediction, with a final accuracy of 77.1% and an AUC of 0.76.

CONCLUSIONS

R-TME in high-volume centres achieves low 3-year LR rates, suggesting that robot-assisted surgery offers oncological safety and advantages in rectal cancer management. This study underscores the importance of surgical precision, patient selection, and standardised perioperative care, supporting further investment in robotic training to improve long-term patient outcomes.

Comparison of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted sugery for rectal cancer after neo-adjuvant therapy: a large volume single center experience

PURPOSE

This study aims to assess the short- and long-term outcomes of rectal cancer patients undergoing robotic versus laparoscopic surgery after receiving neo-adjuvant therapy. There is a lack of clarity on this topic, necessitating a comprehensive comparison.

METHOD

Between January 2017 and December 2021, consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic and robotic rectal resection at a major public medical center were enrolled. All participants received neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) before surgery. The primary objective of this study was to assess the sphincter preservation rate and the rate of conversion to open surgery, using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. Secondary endpoints included 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), 5-year overall survival (OS), short-term postoperative complications, long-term oncological prognosis, and the occurrence of low anterior resection syndrome (LARS).

RESULT

A total of 575 patients diagnosed with rectal cancer participated in the cohort study, with 183 individuals undergoing robotic surgery and 392 undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Patients in the robotic group tended to be younger and had higher ypT, cT, and cN stages, lower tumor locations, and higher rates of extramural vascular invasion (EMVI) and circumferential resection margin (CRM) positivity. PSM resulted in 183 patients in the robotic group and 187 in the laparoscopic group. We found a higher sphincter preservation rate in robotic group compared with laparoscopic group (92.9% vs. 86.1%, P = 0.033), with no significant difference in conversion to open surgery(P > 0.05). The robotic group had a higher incidence of postoperative chylous ascites (4.9% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.029) and potentially lower sepsis occurrence (0% vs. 1.6%, P = 0.085). No significant differences were observed in long-term oncological prognosis or 5-year survival rates (P > 0.05). The median survival time for each group was 34 months. Subgroup analysis of 76 rectal cancer patients who underwent intersphincteric resection (ISR) surgery indicated that those who selected robotic surgery had higher cN and cT stages. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were observed in short-term and long-term clinical outcomes, LARS, OS time, and DFS time between the two surgical modalities. The primary outcomes of interest, specifically the rate of sphincter preservation and the rate of conversion to open laparotomy, showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer, following preoperative nCRT, demonstrates comparable technical safety and oncological outcomes to laparoscopic surgery. Further comprehensive studies are needed to to confirm the potential advantages of robotic surgical interventions.

Transanal vs Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision and 3-Year Disease-Free Survival in Rectal Cancer: The TaLaR Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Previous studies have demonstrated the advantages of short-term histopathological outcomes and complications associated with transanal total mesorectal excision (TME) compared with laparoscopic TME. However, the long-term oncological outcomes of transanal TME remain ambiguous. This study aims to compare 3-year disease-free survival of transanal TME with laparoscopic TME.

Objective

To evaluate 3-year disease-free survival between transanal TME and laparoscopic TME in patients with rectal cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized, open-label, noninferiority, phase 3 clinical trial was performed in 16 different centers in China. Between April 2016 and June 2021, a total of 1115 patients with clinical stage I to III mid-low rectal cancer were enrolled. The last date of participant follow-up was in June 2024.

Interventions

Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio before their surgical procedure to undergo either transanal TME (n = 558) or laparoscopic TME (n = 557).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was 3-year disease-free survival, with a noninferiority margin of -10% for the comparison between transanal TME and laparoscopic TME. Secondary outcomes included 3-year overall survival and 3-year local recurrence.

Results

In the primary analysis set, the median patient age was 60 years. A total of 692 male and 397 female patients were included in the analysis. Three-year disease-free survival was 82.1% (97.5% CI, 78.4%-85.8%) for the transanal TME group and 79.4% (97.5% CI, 75.6%-83.4%) for the laparoscopic TME group, with a difference of 2.7% (97.5% CI, -3.0% to 8.1%). The lower tail of a 2-tailed 97.5% CI for the group difference in 3-year disease-free survival was above the noninferiority margin of -10 percentage points. Furthermore, the 3-year local recurrence was 3.6% (95% CI, 2.0%-5.1%) for transanal TME and 4.4% (95% CI, 2.6%-6.1%) for laparoscopic TME. Three-year overall survival was 92.6% (95% CI, 90.4%-94.8%) for transanal TME and 90.7% (95% CI, 88.3%-93.2%) for laparoscopic TME.

Conclusions and Relevance

In patients with mid-low rectal cancer, 3-year disease-free survival for transanal TME was noninferior to that of laparoscopic TME.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02966483.

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing robotic total mesorectal excision versus transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

The best approach for total mesorectal excision (TME) remains controversial. Two recently described approaches are robotic TME (RTME) and transanal TME (TaTME). This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes between robotic surgery and TaTME in patients undergoing rectal cancer resection.

METHODS

We structured this systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines 2020 and Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) guidelines. An electronic search of relevant literature was conducted on 20 May 2023. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023435259).

RESULTS

Eleven eligible nonrandomised studies were included in this study. The study included 2796 patients (RTME = 1800; TaTME = 996). The RTME group had a higher rate of complete TME. However, no significant differences were observed in mortality, morbidity, severe complications, operative time, conversion rate, anastomotic leak, hospital stay, CRM-positive resection margin, distal resection margin, number of harvested lymph nodes, abdominoperineal resection (APR) rate, or local recurrence between the RTME and TaTME groups.

CONCLUSION

The RTME technique may ensure a higher rate of complete TME than TaTME. However, no significant differences were observed in most postoperative outcomes and oncological safety between the RTME and TaTME groups. Evidence does not conclusively favor one technique over the other, highlighting the need for additional randomized controlled trials to better define their roles in rectal cancer surgery.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The usage of robotic surgery in rectal cancer was increasing, but there was an ongoing debate as to whether it provided any benefit. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and prognosis of elective rectal resection for rectal cancer by robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery.

METHOD

Electronic databases were searched from their inception to 1 February 2024, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving a comparison between robotic surgery (RS) and laparoscopic surgery (LS) and performed a meta-analysis of all RCTs according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

11 RCTs including a total of 3107 cases were identified. Compared with LS, RS had a significantly lower conversion rate (odds ratio: 0.42; 95% confidence interval: 0.28 to 0.63; P < 0.0001), lower reoperation rate (odds ratio: 0.454; 95% confidence interval: 0.31 to 0.94; P = 0.03), more lymph nodes harvested (mean difference: 0.67; 95% confidence interval: 0.30 to 1.04; P = 0.0004), a smaller incidence of positive circumferential margin (CRM) (odds ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.41 to 0.85; P = 0.004). RS had less time to first autonomous urination (mean difference: -0.78; 95% confidence interval: -1.15 to -0.41; P < 0.0001), less time to first defecation (mean difference: -0.40; 95% confidence interval: -0.78 to -0.01; P = 0.04) and less time to first flatus (mean difference: -0.45; 95% confidence interval: -0.89 to -0.01; P = 0.04), more operating time (mean difference: 23.46; 95% confidence interval: 15.76 to 31.16; P < 0.00001). Overall postoperative complication, short-term postoperative complication, estimate blood loss, hospital stays, Intraoperative complication, postoperative mortality, preventive ostomy rates, readmission did not differ significantly between approaches. (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared to laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery demonstrated superior safety, efficacy, and prognosis. This meta-analysis supports that RS is a safe and effective option.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in older patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Robotic surgery is being increasingly used for colorectal cancer surgery. However, its utility versus laparoscopic surgery in older patients is unclear. We systematically examined evidence to assess the differences in short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in older patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Comparative studies published on PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched up to August 30th, 2023.

RESULTS

Seven studies totaling 14,043 patients were included. Meta-analysis showed no difference in the operation time between the robotic and laparoscopic groups. Meta-analysis of ClavienDindo complications showed no difference between the robotic and laparoscopic groups for grades I and II or grades III and IV complications. Similarly, conversion to open surgery, reoperation rates and length of hospital stay were not significantly different between the two groups. Readmission rates and mortality rates were significantly lower with robotic surgery.

CONCLUSION

This first meta-analysis comparing outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in older colorectal cancer patients shows that both approaches result in no difference in operating time, complication rates, conversion to open surgery, reoperation rates, and LOS. Scarce data shows that mortality and readmission rates may be lower with robotic surgery.

Robot-assisted anterior resection of rectal cancer in a patient with abdominal aortic aneurysm using a monitoring laparoscope: a case report

Introduction and importance

We present the first case of robot-assisted anterior resection for rectal cancer in a patient with abdominal aortic and common iliac aneurysms using a monitoring laparoscope for enhanced safety.

Case presentation

An 86-year-old man presented with bloody stool and was diagnosed with Stage IIIB rectal cancer (T3N1aM0). Preoperative computed tomography revealed a 39-mm abdominal aortic aneurysm and 25-mm left common iliac aneurysm. Robot-assisted anterior resection with D2 lymph node dissection was performed using a 5-mm laparoscope to avoid contact between robotic forceps and aneurysm. The procedure was successful, and he was discharged from the hospital on the ninth postoperative day.

Clinical discussion

Robotic surgery, owing to the lack of tactile sensation, is generally contraindicated in cases of abdominal aortic aneurysms because of the risk of vascular injury. However, this case demonstrates that real-time monitoring with a 5-mm laparoscope can effectively prevent accidental vascular injury during robotic surgery for rectal cancer.

Conclusion

This case illustrates the appropriate modifications by which robotic surgery for rectal cancer can be safely performed in patients with abdominal aortic or common iliac artery aneurysms.

Robot-Assisted Ultra-Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Neuroendocrine Tumors after Severe Perineal Tears: A Case Report

INTRODUCTION

Surgical repair of severe perineal tears is required immediately postpartum. Owing to their low prevalence, the post-treatment course of severe tears is not well known. Herein, we report a rare case of a young woman who underwent robot-assisted curative resection with anal preservation for a rectal neuroendocrine tumor (NET) incidentally discovered following a severe perineal tear.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 29-year-old woman experienced a severe perineal tear during the first vaginal delivery, which led to the incidental discovery of a 20-mm rectal NET. Four months after the perineal tear, the gynecology and digestive surgery teams ensured that the tear wound had completely healed and anal function was preserved. The patient underwent robot-assisted ultra-low anterior resection with lymph node dissection. The procedure was successfully completed, preserving anal function, and histopathology confirmed an NET (G2, pT2N2aM0, pStage IIIB). The patient recovered smoothly and was discharged on the seventh postoperative day.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal surgery after severe perineal tears may be associated with scarring and fibrosis around the rectum, and precautions should be taken at the time of rectal dissection. Depending on the tumor condition, it may be advisable to perform rectal surgery several months after the tear rather than immediately after treatment for the tear.

Modified Delphi Procedure to Achieve Consensus for the Concept of a National Curriculum for Minimally Invasive and Robot-assisted Surgery in Germany (GeRMIQ)

The rapid development of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and robot-assisted surgery (RAS) requires standardized training to ensure high-quality patient care. In Germany, there is currently a lack of a standardized curriculum that teaches these specialized skills. The aim of this study is to find a consensus for the development of a nationwide curriculum for MIS and RAS with the subsequent implementation of the consented content.A modified Delphi process was used to reach consensus among national experts in MIS and RAS. The process included a literature review, an online survey and an expert conference.All 12 invited experts participated in the survey. They primarily achieved consensus on 73% and secondarily within the expert conference on 95 out of 122 questions (77.9%). The preference for a basic curriculum as a foundation on which specialized modules can build on was particularly clear. The results support the development of an integrated curriculum for MIS and RAS that includes step-by-step training from theoretical knowledge via e-learning modules to practical skills in dry lab simulations and in the OR. Emphasis was placed on the need to promote clinical judgment and decision making through targeted assessment during the learning curve to ensure effective application of learned skills in clinical practice. There was also a consensus that training content must be aligned with learners' skill acquisition using objective performance assessments in line with the principle of proficiency-based progression (PBP). The continuous updating of the curriculum to keep it up to date with the latest technology was considered essential.The study underlines the urgent need for a standardized training curriculum for MIS and RAS in Germany in order to increase patient safety and improve the quality of surgical care. There is broad expert consensus for the implementation of such a curriculum. It aims to ensure a contemporary and internationally competitive uniform quality of training and to increase the attractiveness of surgical training.

An initial exploratory clinical study and outcome assessment of gastrointestinal surgeries using advanced robotic-assisted techniques

BACKGROUND

In addition to the Da Vinci surgical robot, domestic surgical robots are being developed rapidly. Chinese Toumai® laparoscopic surgical robot was approved for urological surgery in 2022.This study aims to systematically evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Toumai® robotic surgical system in performing complex gastrointestinal surgeries.

METHODS

This prospective, single-center, single-arm exploratory study was conducted at Gansu Provincial Hospital between June 2022 and October 2023, enrolling 12 patients undergoing gastrectomy and 9 patients undergoing colorectal resection. The primary endpoints are oncological outcomes and surgical success rates, while secondary endpoints encompassed intraoperative blood loss, operative duration, complication rates, system performance metrics, length of hospital stay, and postoperative pain levels.

RESULTS

All patients successfully underwent robotic-assisted surgery with adequate oncological resection and favorable postoperative outcomes. There were no conversions to open or laparoscopic surgery, resulting in a 100% procedural success rate. The median docking time for radical gastrectomy was 17.50 (14.25, 21.50) minutes, with a median master-slave control time of 121.50 (105.50, 172.00) minutes, median intraoperative blood loss of 100.00 (50.00, 275.00) mL, and a median postoperative hospital stay of 9.00 (7.25, 10.75) days. For radical colorectal surgery, the median docking time was 22 (17.50, 30.50) minutes, the median master-slave control time was 68 (56.50, 119.00) minutes, with a median blood loss of 50 (50.00, 150.00) mL, and a median postoperative hospital stay of 7 (7.00, 10.00) days. No intraoperative organ injury, mortality, system failure, or severe postoperative complications were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary findings provide compelling evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of the Toumai® laparoscopic surgical robotic system in performing gastric and colorectal surgeries.

A Narrative Review on the Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Colorectal Cancer Management

The role of artificial intelligence (AI) tools and deep learning in medical practice in the management of colorectal cancer has gathered significant attention in recent years. Colorectal cancer, being the third most common type of malignancy, requires an innovative approach to augment early detection and advanced surgical techniques to reduce morbidity and mortality. With its emerging potential, AI improves colorectal cancer management by assisting with accuracy in screening, pathology evaluation, precision, and postoperative care. Evidence suggests that AI minimizes missed cases during colorectal cancer screening, plays a promising role in pathology and imaging diagnoses, and facilitates accurate staging. In surgical management, AI demonstrates comparable or superior outcomes to laparoscopic approaches, with reduced hospital stays and conversion rates. However, these outcomes are influenced by clinical expertise and other dependable factors, including expertise in implementing AI-based software and detecting possible errors. Despite these advancements, limited multicenter studies and randomized trials restrict the comprehensive evaluation of AI's true potential and integration into standard practice. We used Pubmed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases for this review. The final number of articles selected, depending on inclusion and exclusion criteria, is 122. We included papers published in the English language, literature published in the last 10 years, and adult patient populations above 35 years with colorectal cancer. We thoroughly included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, and case-control studies. The use of AI paves the way for the adoption of more personalized medicine. This review highlights the advantages of AI at various disease stages for colorectal cancer patients and evaluates its potential for cost-effective implementation in clinical practice.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome

Defecation disorders following rectal resection have long been overlooked as an inevitable surgical complication due to the lack of established diagnostic criteria or definitions. However, these disorders have been recently termed low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), which is a defecation disorder that occurs following rectal resection and impairs the patient's quality of life (QOL). The LARS score developed by Emmertsen et al., which is a patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate the severity of bowel dysfunction following rectal surgery by scoring the major symptoms of LARS, facilitates the diagnosis and assessment of LARS and enables international comparison and validation through the use of validated scores generated according to the international standards. Based on comparisons with other evaluation instruments, the use of the LARS score is strongly recommended internationally for LARS screening in patients following rectal resection. Recent findings have indicated that multiple pathophysiological changes, including reservoir function and evacuation of the neorectum, anal sphincter function, negative impact of a diverting stoma, autonomic denervation, and radiotherapy, are involved in the etiology of LARS. Due to the lack of established treatments and prevention of LARS, a suggested treatment chart for patients with LARS was presented in the Management Guidelines for Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (MANUEL) project. Future surgical treatment should focus not only on the radical cure of cancer and safety of treatment but also on the maintenance and improvement of QOL, with particular attention to the preservation of function. Particularly for rectal cancer, surgeons must formulate treatment plans that consider the prevention and treatment of LARS.

Efficacy comparison of optimal natural orifice specimen extraction for robotic middle rectal cancer resection in women: transanal or transvaginal orifice

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine the optimal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) method for robotic-assisted mid-rectal cancer resection in women.

METHODS

This retrospective propensity score-matched (PSM) study was to analyze the clinical data prospectively collected from female rectal cancer patients who underwent either robotic-assisted transvaginal specimen extraction (RATV) or robotic-assisted transanal specimen extraction (RATA) at our center between June 2016 and December 2022. The main outcome measures were urinary, anal, and sexual function. Disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were also included .

RESULTS

Anal function, assessed by the Wexner score, was better in the RATV group than in the RATA group (P = 0.034). Additionally, pre-menopausal women in RATV group exhibited superior anal function over those in RATA group (P = 0.031). There was no statistically significant difference in urinary function between the groups for both pre-menopausal and peri-menopausal patients (P = 0.711, P = 0.106). No difference was observed in sexual function between the two groups (P = 0.351); however, pre-menopausal patients in RATA group had better sexual function than those in RATV group (P = 0.045). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed surgical procedure was not a significant factor for the occurrence of sexual dysfunction. There were no significant difference in DFS (P = 0.845)and OS (P = 0.642) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Though the postoperative efficacy of the RATA and RATV was equivalent on urinary and sexual function, RATV is an optimal natural orifice specimen extraction for robotic middle rectal cancer resection in women based on anal function.

Laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer surgery: triumph of reason or necessity of evolution?

The role of laparoscopy in rectal cancer surgery has evolved considerably since the early 2000s. Initial randomized trials, such as COLOR II and COREAN, indicated that laparoscopic approaches offered similar pathological outcomes with better postoperative recovery than open surgery. In contrast, trials like ACOSOG Z6051 and ALaCaRT suggested noninferiority could not be established. Variability in trial outcomes, focusing on either disease-free survival or pathological measures, initially hindered consensus. Long-term analyses have shown no significant difference in disease-free survival between laparoscopic and open approaches. Meta-analyses have reinforced the benefits of laparoscopic surgery, with reduced mortality and similar oncologic effectiveness to open surgery. However, new techniques like transanal TME (TaTME) and robotic approaches have introduced alternatives, though each presents unique challenges, from recurrence rates in TaTME to costs in robotics. While laparoscopy remains the preferred method due to accessibility and outcomes, robotic surgery is expected to gain traction in high-volume centers.

Risk factors for anastomotic leakage in rectal cancer surgery reflecting current practices

PURPOSE

In recent years, major advancements have been made in rectal cancer surgery with the introduction of new techniques such as robotic surgery and indocyanine green fluorescence imaging (ICG-FI). This study aimed to evaluate the comprehensive risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) following rectal cancer surgery, incorporating recently introduced techniques and other existing factors, to reflect current practices.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of 304 patients who underwent either robotic or laparoscopic anterior resection between January 2019 and December 2023. The study analyzed patient, tumor, and surgical factors, with AL defined by clinical or radiological findings requiring intervention within 30 days after surgery.

RESULTS

A univariate analysis indicated that moderate or severe anemia and the non-use of ICG-FI were strongly associated with AL. A multivariate analysis identified moderate or more severe anemia (hemoglobin ≤10.9 g/dL for males and ≤9.9 g/dL for females) (odds ratio [OR]: 9.94, p = 0.002) and non-use of ICG-FI (OR: 10.40, p < 0.001) as independent risk factors for AL.

CONCLUSION

Moderate or severe anemia and absence of ICG-FI were found to significantly increase the risk of AL. Preoperative anemia correction and the routine use of ICG-FI may help mitigate this risk, thus suggesting the need for further research in these areas.

Advances in prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted theranostics: from radionuclides to near-infrared fluorescence technology

Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA) is a highly expressed and structurally unique target specific to prostate cancer (PCa). Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in nuclear medicine, coupling PSMA ligands with radionuclides, have shown significant clinical success. PSMA-PET/CT effectively identifies tumors and metastatic lymph nodes for imaging purposes, while 177Lu-PSMA-617 (Pluvicto) has received FDA approval for treating metastatic castration-resistant PCa (mCRPC). Despite their success, radionuclide-based diagnostic and therapeutic methods face limitations such as high costs and significant side effects. Recently, near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging and phototherapy have advanced significantly in biomedical applications. It's benefits, such as deep tissue penetration, real-time precision, and minimal side effects, have driven broader clinical adoption, especially in fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS). This review suggests combining NIR dyes with PSMA ligands to enable targeted, high-resolution imaging with superior signal-to-background ratios, facilitating precise FGS. NIR techniques can also aid pathological diagnosis in ex vivo specimens. Furthermore, combining photosensitizers with PSMA ligands allows localized photothermal (PTT) or photodynamic therapy (PDT) under NIR irradiation, producing heat or reactive oxygen species (ROS) to treat PCa. This review aims to extend the clinical success of radionuclide-based PSMA targeting by exploring advances in NIR-based FGS and phototherapy, presenting a promising new diagnostic and therapeutic approach.

Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes between high and low tie ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery in robotic rectal cancer surgery: a propensity score matching analysis

Robotic surgery is extensively used for rectal cancer treatment. Nonetheless, studies on whether to preserve the left colonic artery (LCA) during robotic rectal cancer surgery to reduce complications remain scarce and controversial. This study compared short-term outcomes of high tie (HT) and low tie (LT) ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery in 455 patients undergoing robotic rectal cancer surgery between May 2018 and July 2022. Propensity score matching (PSM) minimized selection bias, resulting in 124 patients in each group. The LT group had a longer operative time (P < 0.001), but there were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, lymph node harvest, lymph node positivity, AJCC stage, hospital stay, or costs. Postoperative complications, 30-day mortality, and reoperations were also comparable. Univariate analysis identified hypoalbuminaemia, low tumor location, ASA scores III, and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy as risk factors for postoperative complications. Multivariate analysis confirmed low serum albumin and low tumor location as significant factors. Importantly, HT did not increase the risk of complications in either analysis. These findings indicate that high ligation does not adversely affect short-term outcomes and highlight the need for further research to refine surgical strategies.

Advantages of Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision With Partial Prostatectomy Compared With Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

AIM

Robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) with resection of adjacent organs has been increasingly used for locally advanced rectal cancer; however, few studies have focused on robotic TME with partial prostatectomy. Therefore, this study aimed to demonstrate the advantages of robotic TME with partial prostatectomy compared with open surgery for rectal cancer.

METHOD

This retrospective cohort study examined consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent robotic or open TME with partial prostatectomy at a high-volume center in Japan from April 2003 to March 2022. The patients were divided into robotic (n = 14) and open (n = 11) surgery groups. The short- and long-term outcomes of these patients were compared.

RESULTS

More transabdominal partial prostatectomies were performed in the robotic surgery group than in the open surgery group (71.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.001). Moreover, sphincter-preserving surgery was performed in 35.7% of patients in the robotic surgery group. The robotic surgery group had shorter operative times (401 min vs. 435 min, p = 0.047), less blood loss (56 mL vs. 484 mL, p < 0.001), lower complication rates (28.6% vs. 72.7%, p = 0.047), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (8 days vs. 18 days, p < 0.001) than the open surgery group. No significant differences were observed in the positive radial margin rate (7.1% vs. 9.1%, p = 1.000) or long-term outcomes between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared with open surgery, robotic TME with partial prostatectomy facilitates transabdominal partial prostatectomy, resulting in more sphincter-preserving surgeries and better short-term outcomes.

Histopathological outcomes of transanal, robotic, open, and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

While total mesorectal excision is the gold standard for rectal cancer, the optimal surgical approach to achieve adequate oncological outcomes remains controversial. This network meta-analysis aims to compare the histopathological outcomes of robotic (R-RR), transanal (Ta-RR), laparoscopic (L-RR), and open (O-RR) resections for rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were screened from inception to June 2024. Of the 4186 articles screened, 27 RCTs were selected. Pairwise comparisons and Bayesian network meta-analyses applying random effects models were performed.

RESULTS

The 27 RCTs included a total of 8696 patients. Bayesian pairwise meta-analysis revealed significantly lower odds of non-complete mesorectal excision with Ta-RR (Odds Ratio, OR, 0.60; 95%CI, 0.33, 0.92; P = .02; I2:11.7 %) and R-RR (OR, 0.68; 95%CI, 0.46, 0.94; P = .02; I2:41.7 %) compared with laparoscopy. Moreover, lower odds of positive CRMs were observed in the Ta-RR group than in the L-RR group (OR, 0.36; 95%CI, 0.13, 0.91; P = .02; I2:43.9 %). The R-RR was associated with more lymph nodes harvested compared with L-RR (Mean Difference, MD, 1.24; 95%CI, 0.10, 2.52; P = .03; I2:77.3 %). Conversely, Ta-RR was associated with a significantly lower number of lymph nodes harvested compared with all other approaches. SUCRA plots revealed that Ta-RR had the highest probability of being the best approach to achieve a complete mesorectal excision and negative CRM, followed by R-RR, which ranked the best in lymph nodes retrieved.

CONCLUSION

When comparing the effectiveness of the available surgical approaches for rectal cancer resection, Ta-RR and R-RR are associated with better histopathological outcomes than L-RR.

Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

The relative benefits of robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery are controversial in rectal cancer. This study compared the short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery with those of laparoscopic surgery in patients with rectal cancer using propensity score analysis.

METHODS

This study analyzed consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery for stage I-III rectal cancer between April 2014 and October 2020. After propensity score matching (PSM), short-term outcomes, relapse-free survival, and overall survival were compared between the robotic surgery (RS) group and the laparoscopic surgery (LS) group.

RESULTS

During the study period, 251 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery and 193 underwent robotic surgery. PSM resulted in 160 matched pairs (After PSM, the percentages of patients with stage I, II, and III disease were respectively 56%, 19%, and 24% in the LS group and 49%, 23%, and 28% in the RS group (P = 0.462). Median operation time was 239 min in the LS group and 284 min in the RS group (P = 0.001). The C-reactive protein level on postoperative day 3 was significantly lower in the RS group (4.63 mg/mL vs. 5.86 mg/mL, P = 0.013). Postoperative complications, including ileus and Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher complications, were 6% vs. 1% (P = 0.006) and 21% vs. 12% (P = 0.024) in the LS and RS groups, respectively. The 5-year relapse-free survival rate was 88.5% in the LS group and 90.5% in the RS group (P = 0.525); the respective 5-year overall survival rates were 97.3 and 93.8% (P = 0.283). The 5-year cumulative local and distant recurrence rates were 3.3% vs. 3.3% (P = 0.665) and 9.7% vs. 7.7% (P = 0.464) in the LS and RS groups, respectively CONCLUSION: Robotic surgery can be a feasible treatment modality for rectal cancer, with lower frequencies of postoperative ileus and Clavien-Dindo grade II or higher complications than laparoscopic surgery and no difference in long-term outcomes.

The financial impact of robotic surgery on hospital gross profits in Japan compared to laparoscopic surgery

Robotic surgery is gaining traction in Japan due to its technological advancements, but its financial viability for hospitals remains uncertain. This study investigates the impact of robotic surgery on hospital gross profits, comparing it to laparoscopic surgery using data from surgeries performed at Red Cross Hospital Osaka. The study spans multiple surgical fields, including gastrointestinal, urology, gynecology, and thoracic surgery. While the number of robotic surgeries has increased, they consistently generate lower gross profits for hospitals compared with laparoscopic surgeries, primarily due to the high costs of robotic instruments and maintenance. Certain procedures, such as hernia repair, proximal gastrectomy, and distal pancreatectomy, result in negative profits when performed robotically. This article highlights the financial challenges hospitals face under Japan's current healthcare reimbursement system, where the fees for robotic and laparoscopic surgeries are largely the same. Policy adjustments may be necessary to ensure the financial sustainability of robotic surgery.

Impact of the new robotic platform hinotori™ in preventing subcutaneous emphysema after colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

In the field of abdominal surgery, including colorectal cancer surgery, robotic surgery has become widespread, and the introduction of new robotic platforms is increasing. As a result, the incidence of subcutaneous emphysema (SE) as a postoperative complication has increased; however, the causes, grade, and perioperative course of SE have not been definitively examined. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate potential risk factors of SE after robotic colorectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Between November 2022 and March 2024, 244 consecutive patients who underwent robotic colorectal cancer surgery using the da Vinci Xi (n = 190) or the hinotori™ platform (n = 54) were retrospectively analyzed. Risk factors associated with postoperative SE were assessed by multivariate analysis using logistic regression models. Moreover, the grade of SE and its perioperative course were investigated based on the two robotic platforms.

RESULTS

Postoperative SE was observed in 95 patients (38.9%). Nine patients (3.7%) had severe SE. The risk factors for SE were female sex, older age (≥ 80 years), and maximum intraabdominal pressure (max IAP) with CO2 insufflation > 10 mmHg (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.981 [1.105-3.552], p = 0.022; 2.765 [1.310-5.835], p = 0.008; and 13.249 [1.227-143.020], p = 0.033, respectively). Additionally, the incidence of SE when using the hinotori™ platform was significantly lower than when using the da Vinci Xi platform (0.302 [0.135-0.667], p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Max IAP with CO2 > 10 mmHg was associated with SE during robotic colorectal cancer surgery. Compared with the use of da Vinci Xi, the use of hinotori™ was associated with fewer incidences of postoperative SE, especially in females and older patients (≥ 80 years).

Comparison of short-term outcomes and perioperative costs in laparoscopic versus robotic surgery for rectal cancers: A real-world cohort study using Japanese nationwide inpatient database

Aim

Many studies have revealed the benefits of robotic surgery for rectal cancer; however, real-world data are insufficient. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and perioperative costs of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for rectal cancer using a real-world database.

Methods

The data of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for rectal cancer between January 2018 and January 2021 from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database provided by Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd. were analyzed. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) analysis to compare the in-hospital mortality, morbidity, readmission rate, reoperation rate, length of postoperative stay, and medical costs between the two groups.

Results

We performed PSM analysis on 18 952 eligible patients. After PSM, 1396 patients in the laparoscopic group and 1396 in the robotic group were compared. The robotic group had a lower surgical site infection rate (2.9% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.010), lower respiratory failure rate (1.3% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.049), and higher operative medical costs (1 291 371 vs. 1 312 462 JPY, p = 0.013). The total medical costs of the two groups were comparable (1 862 439 vs. 1 895 822 JPY, p = 0.051).

Conclusions

PSM analysis revealed that robotic surgery was associated with better outcomes than laparoscopic surgery in terms of surgical site infection and respiratory failure rates. The operative medical costs of robotic surgery were significantly higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. However, there was no significant difference in the total medical costs between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

Laparoscopy-assisted versus open surgery for low rectal cancer (LASRE): 3-year survival outcomes of a multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is increasingly used for rectal cancer, but the long-term oncological outcomes for low rectal cancer have not been fully established. We aimed to evaluate the 3-year survival outcomes of laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery in the treatment of low rectal cancer.

METHODS

This multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial was conducted at 22 tertiary hospitals in China. Individuals aged 18-75 years with histologically confirmed cT1-2N0, cT3-4aN0, or cT1-4aN1-2 rectal adenocarcinoma within 5 cm from the dentate line were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to undergo laparoscopic surgery or open surgery. Central randomisation was conducted using a web response system, and was stratified by clinical stage, age, sex, BMI, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Investigators, patients and statisticians were not masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival, defined as the time from the date of surgery to the date of locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Non-inferiority was defined as a lower limit of one-sided 97·5% CI for group difference (laparoscopic surgery group minus open surgery group) of greater than -10%. The primary analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which excluded patients with distant metastasis discovered during surgery and those who did not undergo surgery or underwent local resection only. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01899547, and has been completed.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 12, 2013, and June 6, 2018, 1070 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment. 1039 patients (685 in the laparoscopic surgery group and 354 in the open surgery group; median age 57 years, IQR 50 to 64; 620 [60%] male and 419 [40%] women) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. 3-year disease-free survival was 81·4% (95% CI 78·2 to 84·1) in the laparoscopic surgery group and 79·8% (75·2 to 83·6) in the open surgery group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·92, 95% CI 0·69 to 1·23; p=0·56). The difference between groups was 1·60% (one-sided 97·5% CI -3·34 to ∞, p<0·0001 for non-inferiority). 3-year overall survival was 91·7% (95% CI 89·3 to 93·5) in the laparoscopic surgery group and 93·7% (90·6 to 95·8) in the open surgery group (HR 1·34, 95% CI 0·82 to 2·19; p=0·24). 3-year locoregional recurrence was 3·7% (95% CI 2·5 to 5·3) and 2·3% (1·1 to 4·3), respectively (HR 1·64, 95% CI 0·74 to 3·63; p=0·22). 5-year overall survival was 84·6% (95% CI 81·5 to 87·1) and 86·6% (82·5 to 89·8) in the open group (HR 1·16, 95% CI 0·82 to 1·64; p=0·41).

INTERPRETATION

Laparoscopic surgery performed by experienced surgeons is non-inferior to open surgery for 3-year disease-free survival among patients with low rectal cancer. These results support the use of laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer.

FUNDING

The Key Clinical Specialty Discipline Construction Program of the National Health and Family Planning Commission of China; Minimally Invasive Medical Center Construction Program, Fujian Province, China; and Joint Funds for the Innovation of Science and Technology, Fujian Province, China.

Short- and long-term impact of the TaTME learning process: a single institutional study

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a promising and innovative approach for lower rectal cancer but requires high technical skill and learning process that can affect patient outcomes. We aimed to determine the learning curve of TaTME and then to assess its impact on 5-year oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

Over a 54-month period, 94 patients underwent TaTME by experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeons at our department. To provide a comprehensive overview of success, we used a composite criterion including the most relevant parameters related to the learning process: the conversion rate to an open procedure, TaTME procedure completion, severe postoperative morbidity, mesorectal integrity on macroscopic evaluation, and microscopic margins. Moving average method and cumulative sum analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The operative time continuously decreased over the entire study period. The success rate stabilised after 14 patients in a parallel and balanced analysis of the two surgeons' experiences. Mesorectal completeness was the most sensitive marker for the TaTME learning process (42.9% vs 71.25%; p = 0.06). The learning process did not significantly affect the postoperative morbidity, conversion rate, or R0 resection. Five-year oncological outcomes were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Even among laparoscopically experienced surgeons, the TaTME learning process influences the oncological quality of the resection but not the postoperative morbidity. Gaining an early command of the surgical anatomy and technical skills and understanding the challenges through specific educational sessions are necessary. The results of this study could help generate a comprehensive training program and define necessary prerequisites for prospective trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered in our Clinical Research Unit (2016_LELONG_01). Our database is registered in the clinicalTrials.gov registry: Institut Paoli Calmettes Colorectal Cancer Database (NCT02869503).

Intermittent catheter clamping combined with active urination training (ICCAUT) to reduce the risk of urinary dysfunction in patients after proctectomy: a single-center cohort study

BACKGROUND

Intermittent urethral catheter clamping is widely used to reduce secondary catheterization in patients after proctectomy; however, its effectiveness is unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study investigated the effects of intermittent catheter clamping combined with active urination training (ICCAUT) on postoperative urinary dysfunction in patients after proctectomy. This retrospective cohort study analyzed data on patients who underwent laparoscopic/robotic-assisted proctectomy at a single medical center in China between July 2023 and January 2024.

METHODS

Patients received ICCAUT or free urinary drainage during the indwelling urethral catheter period after surgery. Data from the ICCAUT and free-drainage groups were compared. The primary outcome measure was urinary dysfunction. The secondary outcomes were urinary tract infections, time to first void after catheter removal, and urine volume during first voiding. Propensity-score matching (PSM), inverse probability-of-treatment weighting (IPTW), and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with urinary dysfunction.

RESULTS

Among 360 eligible patients, 173 received a free-drainage strategy and 187 received ICCAUT. The incidence of urinary dysfunction was 52.5% overall and was significantly lower in the ICCAUT group than in the free-drainage group (45.1% vs. 59.4%; p = 0.009). The lower incidence of urinary dysfunction in the ICCAUT group was confirmed in the PSM (44.7% vs. 59.3%; p = 0.03) and IPTW (44.5% vs. 57.1%; p = 0.028) analyses. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that ICCAUT was independently associated with a lower risk of urinary dysfunction (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.34-0.89; p = 0.015). Subgroup analysis found that, compared with female patients, male patients are more likely to benefit from the ICCAUT strategy (p for interaction = 0.029; adjusted OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17-0.62; p < 0.001). The ICCAUT strategy did not significantly increase the risk of urinary tract infection (p = 0.349).

CONCLUSIONS

The ICCAUT strategy may benefit the recovery of urinary function after proctectomy, especially for male patients. ICCAUT showed an independent association with a lower risk of urinary dysfunction and UTI, with urinary tract infection comparable to that of the free-drainage strategy.

Predictive model of the surgical difficulty of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a multicenter, retrospective study

Rectal cancer robotic surgery is becoming more and more common, but evidence for predicting surgical difficulty is scarce. Our goal was to look at the elements that influence the complexity of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (R-TME) in the medical care of middle and low rectal cancer as well as to establish and validate a predictive model on the basis of these factors. Within this multicenter retrospective investigation, 166 consecutive patients receiving R-TME between January 2021 and December 2022 with middle and low rectal cancer were included and categorized according to the median operation time. A nomogram was created to forecast the procedure's complexity after variables that could affect its difficulty were found using logistic regression analysis. Using R software, a total of 166 patients were randomly split into two groups: a test group (48 patients) and a training group (118 patients) at a ratio of 7 to 3. The median operation time of all patients was 207.5 min; patients whose operation time was ≥ 207.5 min were allocated to the difficult surgery group (83 patients), and patients whose operation time was < 207.5 min were allocated to the nondifficult surgery group. Multivariate analysis revealed that body mass index (BMI), the gap between the tumor and the anal verge and the posterior rectal mesenteric thickness were independent predictors of surgical duration. A clinical predictive model was created and assessed employing the above independent predictors. The results of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed the adequate discriminative ability of the predictive model. Our study revealed that it is feasible to predict surgical difficulty by obtaining clinical and magnetic resonance parameters for imaging (the gap between the anal verge and the tumour, and posterior mesorectal thickness), and these predictions could be useful in making clinical decisions.

Registry-based study comparing health-related quality of life between patients with primary rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer

AIM

National clinical registries offer the benefits of a comprehensive dataset, particularly when linked with patient-reported outcome (PRO) data. This aim of this study was to utilise UK registry data to assess cross-sectional differences in health-related quality of life (HrQoL) in patients with primary rectal (PRC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were extracted from the COloRECTal cancer Repository (CORECT-R) and the Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer - Quality of Life (LRRC-QoL) datasets. Propensity score matching was undertaken in a 1:1 ratio using two covariates: age and sex. The primary outcome was the FACT-C Colorectal Cancer Subscale (CCS). Statistical significance was determined using p < 0.05 and clinical significance using effect size (ES) and minimally important clinical difference (MCID).

RESULTS

A matched cohort with 72 patients in each group was identified. Overall FACT-C CCS scores were worse in patients with LRRC from a statistical (11.80 vs 18.03, p < 0.001) and clinically meaningful perspective (ES 1.63, MCID 6.23). Patients with PRC reported better digestion (p < 0.001, ES 0.85), better control over their bowels (p < 0.001, ES 1.03) and increased appetite (p < 0.001, ES 1.74, MCID 2.08). Patients with LRRC reported worse stomach swelling (p < 0,001, ES 0.97) and more diarrhoea (p < 0.001, ES 0.92), however they reported better body image (p < 0.001, ES 0.80).

CONCLUSION

Patients with LRRC reported significantly worse overall scores in the FACT-C CCS from both a statistical and clinical perspective, demonstrating the ability of the FACT-C to distinguish between these patient groups and the benefits of the inclusion of PROs within colorectal cancer registries, specifically including patients with advanced/recurrent disease.

The impact of sarcopenia on postoperative complications and survival outcomes after robotic colorectal cancer surgery: a study based on single-center propensity score matching

Sarcopenia is more common in elderly individuals and is often associated with functional limitations, which can affect postoperative clinical efficacy and mortality rates in cancer surgery. Yet, the precise effects of sarcopenia on individuals receiving robotic colorectal cancer surgery (RCRC) remain insufficiently explored. Our objective was to evaluate the value of preoperative skeletal muscle status on patients receiving RCRC about postoperative complications and long-term prognosis. Data were gathered retrospectively for patients with well-defined conditions. Clinical records of patients who underwent RCRC at a single center between January 2019 and September 2022 were analyzed. Sarcopenia was defined using preoperative computed tomography (CT) body composition analysis of the L3 vertebral level muscle index with cutoff values of < 29 cm2/m2 for females and < 36 cm2/m2 for males. In this retrospective study, 432 patients were sequentially sampled, and 127 pairs were formed through propensity score matching to contrast sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic patients. Relative to the non-sarcopenia group (NSCA), the sarcopenia group (SCA) showed increased rates of complications after matching (P = 0.045), especially in cases of wound and pulmonary infections (P = 0.0408). Compared to the NSCA group, the SCA group exhibited reduced rates of 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) (P = 0.048, 0.036). Additionally, the SCA group experienced extended hospitalizations (P = 0.04) and heightened inflammatory indices before and after surgery (P = 0.028, 0.049). Sarcopenia before surgery in RCRC patients correlates with heightened post-surgery complications and lower rates of short-term survival. Conducting sarcopenia screenings before surgery could assist in evaluating risks and developing post-surgery management approaches for these patients.

Feasibility of robot-assisted surgery for defining circumferential resection margins for rectal cancer: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Local recurrence is a major problem after surgery for rectal cancer. Precision of the circumferential resection margin (CRM) has been shown to be an independent predictor of local recurrence. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of robotic surgery for defining the CRM.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients with rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery at Tokushima University Hospital from January 2012 to April 2023 was included in this study to evaluate risk factors for CRM involvement. Short-term outcomes, including CRM rates, as well as long-term outcomes, were compared between patients who had undergone robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery following propensity score analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 223 patients were analyzed in this study. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that lymph node metastasis was the most significant predictive factor for CRM involvement (p = 0.030), and that robot-assisted surgery tended to lead to less CRM involvement (p = 0.085). The CRM involvement rate for robotic and laparoscopic surgery before propensity score matching was 4.7% and 11.7%, respectively. Following propensity score matching, the CRM involvement rate for robotic surgery was 4.5% versus 11.4% for laparoscopic surgery. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates for patients who had undergone robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery were not significantly different before or after matching (DFS before matching: p = 0.876, DFS after matching: p = 0.805, OS before matching: p = 0.511, OS after matching: p = 0.458).

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted surgery may be useful in defining the CRM for rectal cancer.

Robotic versus laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, and mortality

OBJECTIVE

Compare the efficacy and safety of robotic versus laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer treatment, addressing the ongoing debate within the medical community regarding the optimal surgical approach.

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, surgery has been the cornerstone of rectal cancer treatment, aimed at tumor removal and intestinal function preservation. Recent advancements have introduced laparoscopic and robotic surgeries as minimally invasive alternatives to conventional methods. However, it faces limitations in instrument mobility and dexterity. Robotic approach, on the other hand, enhances these aspects by providing surgeons with advanced precision, a three-dimensional high-definition view, and superior tissue manipulation capabilities, making it an increasingly preferred option for rectal cancer treatment.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA-2020 guidelines was carried out. This study analyzed phase 2 and 3 randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy and safety of robotic versus laparoscopic approach in treating rectal cancer. Only studies meeting specific criteria were included, with congress abstracts, narrative reviews, case reports, and letters to the editor excluded.

RESULTS

We identified 350 studies, 8 met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 2525 patients from diverse geographical locations. The main outcomes analyzed were regional recurrence, anastomotic leak, postoperative complications, and mortality. The findings indicated no significant differences between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries in terms of Grade III Clavien-Dindo complications, mortality, and anastomotic leakage. The diverse geographical origin of the studies suggests the applicability of the results across different health care settings, although system-specific considerations are essential.

CONCLUSION

Robotic approach does not show significant advantages over laparoscopic approach in terms of major complications and mortality rates in rectal cancer treatment, indicating that both surgical approaches are viable options with their specific benefits and limitations.

Safe implementation of minimally invasive surgery in a specialized colorectal cancer unit

INTRODUCTION

In the past 30 years, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has made remarkable progress and has become the standard of care in colorectal cancer treatment. The implementation of new techniques or platforms is, therefore, a challenge for surgical teams. This study aims to analyze the experience in the implementation of minimally invasive surgery in the colorectal unit in a specialized colorectal cancer center. We will report and compare the clinical outcomes of the patients submitted to the different surgical approaches, reflecting the importance of surgical training in the laparoscopic and robotic field for the reduction of surgical complications and improve short-term outcomes.

METHODS

This study involved a retrospective analysis of data collected from a prospectively maintained database at the colorectal unit of Champalimaud Foundation between 2012 and 2023. Data were collected as part of routine clinical documentation and included variables on patient's demographics, staging, short-term outcomes, and follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 661 patients treated at the Champalimaud Foundation between 2012 and 2023 were included, of which 389 (59%) had colon and 272 (41%) rectal cancer. Most of the patients underwent elective surgery, with a minimally invasive approach performed in 91% of cases. A complete resection (R0) was achieved in 95.1% (619) of the procedures with a pathology report staging 64.5% (409) of tumors as pT3-4. Eleven percent (70) of patients had complications classified as Clavien-Dindo (CD) ≥ 3.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the safety of the implementation of minimally invasive surgery in colorectal cancer care, with improvement in postoperative outcomes and surgical quality, supporting the importance of surgical training and specialized teams.

Pattern of colorectal surgery and long-term survival: 10-year experience from a single center

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased in recent decades, and ranks fourth among males and third among females in China. Surgical resection remains the most important treatment modality for curative intent in CRC. Several studies found that surgeon volumes and specialization appeared to be associated with improved overall survival (OS). Moreover, numerous reports have suggested that specialization and minimally invasive surgery have gained increased popularity in CRC surgery. However, few studies have specifically examined the role and long-term survival of all stage CRC in a real-world study.

AIM

To evaluate the effect of surgeon specialization on survival changes and minimally invasive surgery utilization in a real world study.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis on the association between surgeon specialization and OS between 2008 and 2013 in Zhongshan Hospital CRC database was performed. Standard demographic, clinicopathologic, surgical and follow-up data were obtained from the CRC database. Surgeon specialty was categorized as colorectal surgeon (CS) and general surgeon (GS). CRC patients who underwent primary surgical resection were enrolled.

RESULTS

A total of 5141 CRC patients who underwent primary surgical resection between 2008 and 2013 were evaluated, 1748 (34.0%) of these by CS. The percentage of minimally invasive procedures in the CS group showed an increasing trend. There was no benefit associated with surgeon specialization for stage I, II and IV patients. Surgeon specialization exhibited a significant association with OS solely among stage III patients, with 5-year OS rates of 76% and 67% for the CS and GS groups, respectively (P < 0.01). Further analyses found that surgeon specialization was significantly associated with survival only in stage III rectal patients, and the 5-year OS rate in the CS group and GS group was 80% and 67%, respectively (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Surgeon specialization is associated with improved OS after primary surgery in stage III rectal patients. An appropriate surgical technique, perioperative program and adjuvant therapy may contribute to survival benefit in these patients.

Essential updates 2022-2023: Surgical and adjuvant therapies for locally advanced colorectal cancer

Pivotal articles that had been published between 2022 and 2023 on surgical and perioperative adjuvant treatments for locally advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) were reviewed. This review focuses on new evidence in the following areas: optimization of surgical procedures for colon cancer, including the optimal length of bowel resection and use of the no-touch isolation technique; minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer, such as laparoscopic transanal total mesorectal excision and robotic surgery; neoadjuvant treatments for rectal cancer, including total neoadjuvant therapy; neoadjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer; and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for Stage II and III colon cancer. Although the current understanding may not enable perfect decision-making for patients and medical professionals, ongoing advancements are expected to result in more effective personalized treatment plans, ultimately improving the prognosis and quality of life of patients.

Comparative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Open Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer at High Risk of Positive Circumferential Resection Margin

BACKGROUND

Concerns persist regarding the effectiveness of robotic proctectomy compared with open proctectomy for locally advanced rectal cancer with a high risk of circumferential resection margin involvement.

OBJECTIVE

Comparison of surrogate cancer outcomes after robotic versus open proctectomy in this subpopulation.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Three academic hospitals (Mayo Clinic Arizona, Florida, and Rochester) with data available through the Mayo Data Explorer platform.

PATIENTS

Patients at high risk of circumferential resection margin involvement were selected on the basis of the MRI-based definition from the MERCURY I and II trials.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate of pathologic circumferential resection margin involvement (≤1 mm), mesorectal grading, and rate of distal margin involvement.

RESULTS

Out of 413 patients, 125 (30%) underwent open and 288 (70%) underwent robotic proctectomy. Open proctectomy was significantly associated with a greater proportion of cT4 tumors (39.3% vs 24.8%, p = 0.021), multivisceral/concomitant resections (40.8% vs 18.4%, p < 0.001), and less frequent total neoadjuvant therapy use (17.1% vs 47.1%, p = 0.001). Robotic proctectomy was less commonly associated with pathologic circumferential resection margin involvement (7.3% vs 17.6%, p = 0.002), including after adjustment for cT stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and multivisceral resection (OR 0.326; 95% CI, 0.157-0.670, p = 0.002). Propensity score matching for 66 patients per group and related multivariable analysis no longer indicated any reduction of circumferential positive margin rate associated with robotic surgery ( p = 0.86 and p = 0.18). Mesorectal grading was comparable (incomplete mesorectum in 6% robotic proctectomy patients vs 11.8% open proctectomy patients, p = 0.327). All cases had negative distal resection margins.

LIMITATION

Retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with locally advanced rectal cancer at high risk of circumferential resection margin involvement, robotic proctectomy is an effective approach and could be pursued when technically possible as an alternative to open proctectomy. See Video Abstract .

RESULTADOS COMPARATIVOS ENTRE LA PROCTECTOMA ROBTICA Y LA PROCTECTOMA ABIERTA EN CASOS DE CNCER DE RECTO CON ALTO RIESGO DE MRGEN DE RESECCIN CIRCUNFERENCIAL POSITIVO

ANTECEDENTES:Persisten preocupaciones con respecto a la efectividad de la proctectomía robótica en comparación con la proctectomía abierta en casos de cáncer de recto localmente avanzado con un alto riesgo de margen de resección circunferencial positivo.OBJETIVO:Comparar los resultados en la subpoblación de portadores de cáncer luego de una proctectomía robótica versus una proctectomía abierta.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de cohortes.AJUSTE:Realizado en tres hospitales académicos (Mayo Clinic de Arizona, Florida y Rochester) a través de la plataforma Mayo Data Explorer.PACIENTES:Fueron seleccionados aquellos pacientes con alto riesgo de compromiso sobre el margen de resección circunferencial, según la definición de los Estudios Mercury I-II basada en la Imágen de Resonancia Magnética.MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO PRINCIPALES Y SECUNDARIAS:La tasa de compromiso patológico sobre el margen de resección circunferencial (≤1 mm), la clasificación mesorrectal y la tasa del compromiso del margen distal.RESULTADOS:De 413 pacientes, 125 (30%) fueron sometidos a una proctectomía abierta y 288 (70%) a proctectomía robótica. La proctectomía abierta se asoció significativamente con una mayor proporción de tumores cT4 (39,3% frente a 24,8%, p = 0,021), las resecciones multiviscerales/concomitantes fueron de 40,8% frente a 18,4%, p < 0,001 y una adminstración menos frecuente de terapia neoadyuvante total (17,1). % vs 47,1%, p = 0,001).La proctectomía robótica se asoció con menos frecuencia con la presencia de una lesión sobre el margen de resección circunferencial patológico (7,3% frente a 17,6%, p = 0,002), incluso después del ajuste por estadio cT, de la terapia neoadyuvante y de resección multivisceral (OR 0,326, IC 95% 0,157-0,670, p = 0,002). El apareado de propensión por puntuación en 66 pacientes por grupo y el análisis multivariable relacionado, no mostraron ninguna reducción en la tasa de margen positivo circunferencial asociado con la cirugía robótica ( p = 0,86 y p = 0,18). La clasificación mesorrectal fue igualmente comparable (mesorrecto incompleto en el 6% de los pacientes con RP frente al 11,8% de los pacientes con OP, p = 0,327). Todos los casos tuvieron márgenes de resección distal negativos.LIMITACIÓN:Diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓN:En pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado con alto riesgo de compromiso del margen de resección circunferencial, la proctectomía robótica es un enfoque eficaz y podría realizarse cuando sea técnicamente posible como alternativa a la proctectomía abierta. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Robotic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a cumulative sum analysis for the learning curve

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the learning curve of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 89 patients who underwent robot-assisted intersphincteric resection. All surgeries were performed by the same group of surgeons at our institution between June 2016 and April 2021. The learning curve was evaluated using a cumulative sum analysis and the best-fit curve. The different stages of the learning curve were compared based on patient characteristics and short-term clinical outcomes to evaluate their impact on clinical efficacy.

RESULTS

The minimum number of cases required to overcome the learning curve was 47. The learning curve was divided into the learning improvement and proficiency stages. Significant differences were observed in the operation time and the number of lymph nodes between the two stages (P < 0.05), whereas no significant differences were found in intraoperative blood loss, first postoperative exhaust time, postoperative complications, 3-year progression-free survival, overall survival, and local recurrence-free survival (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer exhibits a learning curve that can be divided into two stages: namely, learning improvement and proficiency. Achieving proficiency requires a minimum of 47 surgical cases.

Trends and outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter cross-sectional study of minimally invasive versus open techniques in Germany

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to assess the trend from open to modern minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robot-assisted) surgical techniques for colorectal cancer (CRC) in Germany, with a particular focus on hospital mortality, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay.

METHODS

A multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted using data from 36 German hospitals, encompassing 1,250,029 cases from January 2019 to December 2023. The study included all hospitalized patients aged ≥ 18 with CRC who underwent surgery. Surgical cases were categorized as open or minimally invasive. Outcomes assessed included in-hospital mortality, morbidity, and hospital length of stay. Statistical analyses involved multivariable logistic and linear regression models adjusted for main diagnosis, metastasis presence, age, sex, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

The study included 4525 CRC cases: 2767 underwent open surgery and 1758 underwent minimally invasive surgery (173 robotic). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in open surgery (6.1% vs. 1.7%). Open surgery was also significantly associated with higher rates of acute post-hemorrhagic anemia (OR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.87-3.02), respiratory failure (OR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.34-2.18), and intraoperative and postprocedural complications (OR: 3.64; 95% CI: 2.83-4.70). Average hospital stay was longer for open surgery (19.5 days vs. 11.0 days).

CONCLUSION

Despite the advantages of minimally invasive surgery, including reduced mortality, morbidity, and shorter hospital stays, open surgery remains the predominant approach for CRC in Germany. These findings underscore the need for increased adoption of minimally invasive techniques and highlight the potential benefits of shifting toward minimally invasive methods to enhance the overall quality of CRC care.

Evaluation of the da Vinci single-port system in colorectal cancer surgery: a scoping review

Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of colon and rectal cancer has gained popularity due to its association with reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, and quicker recovery. The Da Vinci Single-Port (SP) System combines single-port laparoscopy with robotic assistance. This scoping review aims to evaluate the safety and short-term postoperative outcomes of utilizing the Da Vinci SP platform in colorectal cancer surgery. A scoping review was conducted adhering to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Data were collected from PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science Library as of December 22, 2023. Studies were screened and selected based on predefined criteria, focusing on the application of the SP robotic system in colorectal procedures. Data extraction included demographics, surgical details, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. A narrative summary of the results was provided due to the heterogeneity in study designs. From an initial 2312 articles, 22 studies were selected for analysis, encompassing 465 patients undergoing robotic SP colorectal surgeries. Of these, 384 (82.6%) had a cancer diagnosis. The median age was 65 years, with approximately 60% being male. The median operative time was 225 min, with docking times averaging 12-20 min. Conversion to multi-port laparoscopy occurred in 4.2% of cases, with no conversions to open surgery. Mean intraoperative blood loss ranged from 50 to 150 ml. The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved ranged from 15 to 28. A diverting ileostomy was constructed in 20.3% of patients. Median times to flatus and soft diet were 2.5 and 3 days, respectively, with hospital stays ranging from 3 to 11 days. Perioperative complications occurred in 15.1% of patients, including wound infections (5.1%), anastomotic leakage (3.7%), and postoperative ileus (2.8%). Negative margin status (R0 resection) was achieved in 95% of cases. The Da Vinci SP robotic platform demonstrates promising safety and effectiveness in colorectal cancer surgery. It achieves high rates of successful oncological resection, adequate lymph node retrieval, and minimal intraoperative blood loss. Postoperative outcomes indicate quicker recovery times and manageable complication rates. However, longer follow-up studies are necessary to fully assess recurrence rates and long-term survival benefits associated with this innovative surgical approach.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery (RS) is gaining prominence in colorectal procedures owing to advantages like three-dimensional vision and enhanced dexterity, particularly in rectal surgery. Although recent reviews report similar outcomes between laparoscopic surgery (LS) and RS, this study investigates the evolving trends in outcomes over time, paralleling the increasing experience in RS.

METHODS

A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression were conducted of randomised controlled trials exploring postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing RS or LS for colorectal pathology. The primary outcome measure was postoperative complications. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's assessment tool. Randomised controlled trials were identified from the PubMed®, Embase® and CINAHL® (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases via the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

RESULTS

Of 491 articles screened, 13 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis of postoperative complications revealed no significant difference between RS and LS (relative risk [RR]: 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79 to 1.18, p=0.72). Meta-regression analysis of postoperative complications demonstrated a significant trend favouring RS over time (yearly change in Ln(RR): -0.0620, 95% CI: -0.1057 to -0.0183, p=0.005). Secondary outcome measures included operative time, length of stay, blood loss, conversion to open surgery, positive circumferential resection margins and lymph nodes retrieved. The only significant findings were shorter operative time favouring LS (mean difference: 41.48 minutes, 95% CI: 22.15 to 60.81 minutes, p<0.001) and fewer conversions favouring RS (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.85, p=0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

As experience in RS grows, evidence suggests an increasing safety profile for patients. Meta-regression revealed a significant temporal trend with complication rates favouring RS over LS. Heterogeneous reporting of complications hindered subgroup analysis of minor and major complications. LS remains quicker. Rising adoption of RS coupled with emerging evidence is expected to further elucidate its clinical efficacy.

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 ).

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic-assisted extended mesorectal excision: a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of perioperative and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Concurrent neoadjuvant chemo-radiation (nCRT) with total mesorectal excision (TME) alone sometimes fails to cure lateral lymph node metastasis (LLNM). Therefore, additional lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) can help in the treatment of these patients. This is what we refer to as extended total mesorectal excision (eTME). Such operations (TME alone or eTME) can be performed using conventional laparoscopic techniques and robotic-assisted techniques as well. Our meta-analysis aims to compare the results of robot-assisted (R-eTME) versus laparoscopic-assisted extended mesorectal excision (L-eTME) in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

METHODOLOGY

Databases searched using title and abstract included Medline (via PubMed), Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, up to February 20, 2024. All studies that documented robotic versus laparoscopic procedures for extended total mesorectal excision (R-eTME versus L-eTME) and reported more than two relevant outcomes, were included in the study.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis demonstrates four significant outcomes (operative time, urinary complications, overall recurrence, and admission days) between the laparoscopic and robotic groups. The robotic approach shows advantages over the laparoscopic approach in these outcomes except for the operative time (minute), which was longer in the robotic group compared to the laparoscopic group. The laparoscopic group is associated with a higher overall recurrence than the robotic group with an Odds Ratio of 2(95% CI, 1-4, p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis study showed that the R-eTME group had a lower recurrence rate compared to the L-eTME group. Additionally, hospital admission days increased significantly in the laparoscopic group. Other long-term outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. Short-term outcomes were similar, except for more urinary complications in the laparoscopic group. In conclusion, the study suggests that robotic surgery may offer advantages over laparoscopic surgery for eTME. Further research and analysis could provide further insight into the potential benefits of robotic surgery in this procedure, particularly when surgeon experience, center volume, and learning curve are taken into consideration.

Total Mesorectal Excision with New Robotic Platforms: A Scoping Review

Colorectal surgery is one of the specialties that have significantly benefited from the adoption of robotic technology. Over 20 years since the first robotic rectal resection, the Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci system remains the predominant platform. The introduction of new robotic systems into the market has enabled the first documented total mesorectal excision (TME) using alternative platforms. This scoping review aimed to assess the role and adoption of these emerging robotic systems in performing TME for rectal cancer surgery. Methods: A comprehensive search of the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted up to August 2024, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Results: Thirty-six studies were included in the review. The majority of rectal surgical procedures were performed using eight different robotic platforms. Intraoperative, short-term, and functional outcomes were generally favorable. However, pathological results were frequently incomplete. Several studies identified the lack of advanced robotic instruments as a significant limitation. Conclusions: The quality of the resected specimen is critical in rectal cancer surgery. Although TME performed with new robotic platforms appears to be feasible and safe, the current body of literature is limited, particularly in the assessment of pathological and long-term survival outcomes.

Robotic colorectal surgery in Latin America: a systematic review on surgical outcomes

Background and objectives

Robotic approach in colorectal surgery is rapidly gaining interest, particularly in the context of rectal cancer resection. Despite economic barriers, substantial proliferation of robotic colorectal procedures has been observed throughout Latin America. However, there is a lack of data regarding intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, as well as oncological and long-term results. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal approaches across Latin America.

Material and methods

A systematic literature search of electronic databases, including PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Scielo, was performed and reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The main target of the literature search was studies that reported outcomes of colorectal robotic surgery in Latin America.

Results

A total of 9,694 published articles were identified from the initial search. Nine thousand six hundred thirty-six publications were excluded after title and abstract review and removal of duplicates. Fifty-eight articles were thoroughly reviewed, and 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. The critical appraisal of study quality (biases risk assessment) was performed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Evidence Synthesis. In general, the overall study quality was poor. Of the 11 studies included in the analysis, ten addressed intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, seven addressed oncological/pathological outcomes, and just one addressed long-term outcomes. Ten studies evaluated intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, encompassing a total of 425 patients, the majority of whom were diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Morbidity rates exhibited a range between 0% and 45.9%, while mortality ranged from 0% to 2.5%.

Conclusion

Few studies have been published addressing intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and oncological outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery in this region. Undoubtedly, there are unique challenges not encountered by developed countries, including economic obstacles in establishing structured training programmes and high-quality centres for the development of robotic surgery. Further studies are needed to assess the real extent of robotic surgery in the region and its results.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42023494112).