A standardized suprapubic bottom-to-up approach in robotic right colectomy: technical and oncological advances for complete mesocolic excision (CME)

Robotic right colectomy versus laparoscopic right colectomy in patients with right colon cancer: a comparative study

BACKGROUND

The study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of robotic right colectomy (RRC) versus laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) in patients diagnosed with right colon cancer, given the increasing adoption of robotic surgical techniques and their potential benefits in oncologic surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective comparative study included patients who underwent right colectomy at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, between January 2019 and May 2022. The primary outcomes measured were the number of lymph nodes harvested. Key secondary outcomes included the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, hospitalization costs, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Data were analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for potential confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 225 patients (aged 65.23 ± 11.45, 108 males) with right colon cancer were included, with 100 (44.4%) patients underwent RRC. Patients who underwent RRC had significantly more lymph nodes harvested (27.69 ± 12.59 vs. 24.43 ± 9.42, P = 0.028), and incurred higher total hospitalization costs compared to those with LRC (9.68 ± 7.12 vs. 5.28 ± 1.23 ten-thousand-yuan, P < 0.001). The OS and DFS were comparable between RRC and LRC (both P > 0.05) within a median follow-up of 27 (range, 9-44) months. Multivariable cox proportional hazards regression showed that patients underwent RRC had significantly higher risk for all-cause death compared with those underwent LRC [hazards ratio (HR) = 2.303, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.625-3.265, P < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Patients underwent RRC seemed to have significantly more numbers of lymph nodes harvested and higher risk for all-cause death and higher hospitalization costs compared with those underwent LRC. These findings suggest a need for careful consideration of the benefits and risks associated with robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Robotic approach to colonic resection: For some or for all patients?

The robotic approach is rapidly gaining momentum in colorectal surgery. Its benefits in pelvic surgery have been extensively discussed and are well established amongst those who perform minimally invasive surgery. However, the same cannot be said for the robotic approach for colonic resection, where its role is still debated. Here we aim to provide an extensive debate between selective and absolute use of the robotic approach for colonic resection by combining the thoughts of experts in the field of robotic and minimally invasive colorectal surgery, dissecting all key aspects for a critical view on this exciting new paradigm in colorectal surgery.

A Systematic Review of Varying Definitions and the Clinical Significance of Fredet's Fascia in the Era of Complete Mesocolic Excision

BACKGROUND

Fredet's fascia represents a crucial landmark for vascular surgical anatomy, especially in minimally invasive complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right-sided colon adenocarcinoma. Fredet's fascia allows access to the gastrocolic trunk of Henle (GCTH), the most critical step in both open and minimally invasive right-sided CME techniques. Despite this, a recent workshop of expert surgeons on the standardization of the laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with CME did not recognize or include the term of Fredet's fascia or area. Hence, we undertook a systematic review of articles that include the terms "Fredet's fascia or area", or synonyms thereof, with special emphasis on the types of articles published, the nationality, and the relevance of this area to surgical treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review up to 15 July 2022 on PubMed, WOS, SCOPUS, and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

The results of the study revealed that the term "Fredet's fascia" is poorly used in the English language medical literature. In addition, the study found controversial and conflicting data among authors regarding the definition of "Fredet's fascia" and its topographical limits.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowledge of Fredet's fascia's surgical relevance is essential for colorectal surgeons to avoid accidental injuries to the superior mesenteric vascular pedicle during minimally invasive right hemicolectomies with CME. In order to avoid confusion and clarify this fascia for future use, we suggest moving beyond the use of the eponymous term by using a "descriptive term" instead, based on the fascia's anatomic structure. Fredet's fascia could, therefore, be more appropriately renamed "sub-mesocolic pre-duodenopancreatic fascia".

Caudal-to-Cranial Approach for Right Colectomy with Complete Mesocolic Excision in Colon Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A newly emerging approach "caudal to cranial" with complete mesenteric excision (CME) has recently been proposed for right colectomy in patients with right colon cancer. To date, only a few studies about this approach have appeared. Our study aims to investigate the safety and efficacy of this new technique.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the evidence regarding short- and long-term outcomes after the caudal-to-cranial approach (CCA). Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies was used to evaluate methodological quality. The risk of bias was assessed using Robvis tool. Meta-analyses have been conducted for the outcomes of studies comparing CCA with other techniques.

RESULTS

We found six studies from 2017 to 2021 with a total of 594 patients. The postoperative complications and oncological outcomes were acceptable. Two studies comparing CCA to medial-to-lateral approach were included in the meta-analysis. No differences were found between the techniques regarding to operative time, length of hospital stay, overall morbidity, and number of lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

Although the interpretation of our findings may be restrained by methodological limitations, risk of bias, and the absence of well-designed randomized controlled trials, CCA with CME in right-sided colon cancer may be a feasible and safe procedure.

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic short- and long-term outcomes in complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colonic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) surgery is increasingly implemented for the resection of right-sided colonic cancer, possibly resulting in improved 5-year overall and disease-free survival compared to non-CME surgery. However, it is not clear what surgical platform should be used. The aim of this study was to compare the following outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic CME-surgery for right-sided colonic cancer: (i) short-term clinical outcomes, (ii) pathological specimen quality, and (iii) long-term oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception until August 2021. Pooled proportions were calculated by applying the inverse variance method. Heterogeneity was explored by I-square and supplemented by sensitivity- and meta-regression analyses. The risk of bias was evaluated by either MINORS or Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2).

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies with 5.357 patients (740 robot-assisted and 4617 laparoscopic) were included in the meta-analysis. Overall postoperative morbidity was 17% [95% CI (14-20%)] in the robot-assisted group and 13% [95%CI (12-13%)] in the laparoscopic group. Robot-assisted CME was associated with a shorter hospital stay, lower intraoperative blood loss, a higher amount of harvested lymph nodes, and better 3-year oerall and disease-free survival. MINORS and RoB2 indicated a serious risk of bias across studies included.

CONCLUSIONS

This review which includes predominantly non-randomized studies suggests a possible advantage of the robot-assisted CME compared with a laparoscopic technique for several short-term outcomes.

Definition and reporting of lymphadenectomy and complete mesocolic excision for radical right colectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several procedures have been proposed to reduce the rates of recurrence in patients with right-sided colon cancer. Different procedures for a radical right colectomy (RRC), including extended D3 lymphadenectomy, complete mesocolic excision and central vascular ligation have been associated with survival benefits by some authors, but results are inconsistent. The aim of this study was to assess the variability in definition and reporting of RRC, which might be responsible for significant differences in outcome evaluation.

METHODS

PRISMA-compliant systematic literature review to identify the definitions of RRC. Primary aims were to identify surgical steps and different nomenclature for RRC. Secondary aims were description of heterogeneity and overlap among different RRC techniques.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Eight surgical steps were identified and recorded as specific to RRC: Central arterial ligation was described in 100% of the included studies; preservation of mesocolic integrity in 73% and dissection along the SMV plane in 67%. Other surgical steps were inconstantly reported. Six differently named techniques for RRC have been identified. There were 35 definitions for the 6 techniques and 40% of these were used to identify more than one technique.

CONCLUSIONS

The only universally adopted surgical step for RRC is central arterial ligation. There is great heterogeneity and consistent overlap among definitions of all RRC techniques. This is likely to jeopardise the interpretation of the outcomes of studies on the topic. Consistent use of definitions and reporting of procedures are needed to obtain reliable conclusions in future trials. PROSPERO CRD42021241650.

Robotic CME in obese patients: advantage of robotic ultrasound scan for vascular dissection

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) in right-sided colon cancers appears to confer oncological benefits compared to conventional colectomy. Identification of the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) remains challenging. We describe the novel use of intra-operative robotic ultrasound scan (rUSS) in obese patients (BMI ≥ 29). All consecutive patients having robotic CME for colon cancer between 2014 and 2017 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Data were recorded on an ethics approved prospective database and included patient demographics, clinical and oncological outcomes. Patients were divided into group 1 (BMI ≤ 28) and group 2 (BMI ≥ 29). SMV first approach was employed in all cases and SMV detection was aided using rUSS in group 2. Primary outcome was postoperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, operative time and length of stay (LOS). 41 (group 1, median 66 years) were compared to 32 patients (group 2, median 63 years). There were no conversions to laparoscopy or laparotomy. Median operative times for group 2 were 30 min longer (186 vs. 216 min, p = 0.05). Overall morbidity was similar (20% vs. 19% in group 1 and 2, p = 0.26). There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to LOS (median 7 vs. 6 days, p = 0.48), readmissions (2 vs. 5, p = 0.13), R0 resection rate (98% vs. 94%, p = 0.43) and lymph node harvest (median 31 vs. 30, p = 0.28).CME can be technically more challenging than conventional colectomy in obese patients and is associated with longer operative times. The use of rUSS in obese patients can help to identify SMV and allow safer dissection.

Could the top-down right hemicolectomy be an easier alternative to the classic medial-to-lateral approach in obese patients? A case report with video example

•

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is performed only in 25% of cases in recent survey

•

The medial-to-lateral and the bottom-to-up are the most frequent approaches used to perform surgery

•

Top-to-down right hemicolectomy is an infrequent approach

•

Obesity is an evident aspect complicating surgical dissection

•

Top-to Down dissection could be an opportunity to use as alternative approach when classical dissection becomes intricate

Right hemicolectomy with complete mesocolic excision is safe, leads to an increased lymph node yield and to increased survival: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The introduction of complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right colon cancer has raised an important discussion in relation to the extent of colic and mesenteric resection, and the impact this may have on lymph node yield. As uncertainty remains regarding the usefulness of and indications for right hemicolectomy with CME and the benefits of CME compared with a traditional approach, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the two procedures in terms of safety, lymph node yield and oncological outcome.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature from 2009 up to March 15th, 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two hundred eighty-one publications were evaluated, and 17 met the inclusion criteria and were included. Primary endpoints analysed were anastomotic leak rate, blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, 3- and 5-year oncologic outcomes. Secondary outcomes were operating time, conversion, intraoperative complications, reoperation rate, overall and Clavien-Dindo grade 3-4 postoperative complications.

RESULTS

In terms of safety, right hemicolectomy with CME is not inferior to the standard procedure when comparing rates of anastomotic leak (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.38-1.79), blood loss (MD -32.48, 95% CI -98.54 to -33.58), overall postoperative complications (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67-1.00), Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV postoperative complications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.82-2.28) and reoperation rate (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26-1.75). Traditional surgery is associated with a shorter operating time (MD 16.43, 95% CI 4.27-28.60) and lower conversion from laparoscopic to open approach (RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.00-2.96). In terms of oncologic outcomes, right hemicolectomy with CME leads to a higher lymph node yield than traditional surgery (MD 7.05, 95% CI 4.06-10.04). Results of statistical analysis comparing 3-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival were better in the CME group, RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.27-0.66 and RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.56, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Right hemicolectomy with CME is not inferior to traditional surgery in terms of safety and has a greater lymph node yield when compared with traditional surgery. Moreover, right-sided CME is associated with better overall and disease-free survival.

Updates on Robotic CME for Right Colon Cancer: A Qualitative Systematic Review

Background. Complete mesocolic excision (CME) is a surgical technique introduced with the aim of ameliorating the oncologic results of colectomy. Various experiences have demonstrated favorable oncologic results of CME in comparison with standard colectomy, in which the principles of CME are not respected. The majority of the literature refers to open or laparoscopic CME. This review analyses current evidence regarding robotic CME for right colectomy. Methods. An extensive Medline (Pub Med) search for relevant case series, restricted to papers published in English, was performed, censoring video vignettes and case reports. Results. Fourteen studies (ten retrospective, four comparative series of robotic versus laparoscopic CME) were included, with patient numbers ranging from 20 to 202. Four different approaches to CME are described, which also depend on the robotic platform utilized. Intraoperative and early clinical results were good, with a low conversion and anastomotic leak rate and a majority of Clavien–Dindo complications being Grades I and II. Oncologic adequacy of the surgical specimens was found to be good, although a homogeneous histopathologic evaluation was not provided. Conclusions. Further large studies are warranted to define long-term oncologic results of robotic right colectomy with CME and its eventual benefits in comparison to laparoscopy.

Complete mesocolic excision and D3 lymphadenectomy with central vascular ligation in right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review of postoperative outcomes, tumor recurrence and overall survival

BACKGROUND

In right-sided colon cancer surgery, currently there is a great deal of discussion and debate regarding complete mesocolic excision (CME) versus conventional right hemicolectomy (CRH) on postoperative outcomes and oncological results. Our aim was to perform a systematic review of the short- and long-term outcomes of CME to standardize surgical approach in patients with right-sided colon cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed examining available data on randomized and non-randomized studies evaluating the role of CME and D3 lymphadenectomy in the treatment of right-sided colon cancer, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) standards.

RESULTS

After literature search, 919 studies have been recorded, 110 studies underwent full-text reviews and 30 studies met inclusion criteria. The total number of CME procedures was 5931. Postoperative complications was reported in 28 studies with pooled overall complications of 1.88% for CME surgery. Six studies reported 0% of overall postoperative complications and they demonstrated a low incidence of complications following CME procedure. Anastomotic leak was reported in 27 studies with pooled proportion of 0.92% after CME resections. There were 16 papers reporting overall survival following CME procedure, with a mean of 85% of patients survived at 5 years. Mean 5-year overall survival was 93.05% in stage I patients, 89.76% in stage II patients and 79.65% in stage III patients. Local and distant recurrence were included in 21 studies, reporting tumor recurrence rate of 12.25% following CME. 5-year tumor recurrence was 5.8% in stage I patients, 7.68% in stage II patients and 15.69% in stage III patients.

CONCLUSIONS

CME does not increase the risk of postoperative complications and significantly improves the long-term oncological impact. Prospective multicentre studies results are needed to verify if CME could be considered standard surgery for right colon cancer.

Robot-assisted Treatment of Epigastric Hernias With a Suprapubic Approach

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted ventral hernia repair has shown itself to be feasible and safe in abdominal wall surgery. Presently, the ports are placed laterally to meet the distance from the fascial defect. The aim of our study is to report our experience of epigastric hernia treatment with trocar insertion in the suprapubic region.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

On a prospectively collected dataset on robot-assisted surgery, patients treated for epigastric hernias with suprapubic approach were identified. Demographic and clinical data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Twelve patients were selected. Median age was 58.5 years [interquartile range (IQR): 47.8 to 67.3 y]; 4 patients were male (33.3%) and the median body mass index was 23.9 kg/m2 (IQR: 22.3 to 26.2 kg/m2). All patients were referred to surgery because of pain. The median measure of the hernia defect was 30 mm (IQR: 13.75 to 31.0 mm); median larger mesh diameter was 13.5 cm (IQR: 9.5 to 15.0 cm); and median operative time was 136.5 minutes (IQR: 120.0 to 186.5 min). No intraoperative complication or conversion to open surgery occurred. Postoperatively, 2 patients presented a seroma and median length of hospital stay was 2.0 days (IQR: 1.75 to 3 d). No case of hernia recurrence was recorded at a mean follow-up of 11.2 months (range: 4 to 29 mo).

CONCLUSIONS

In the robot-assisted treatment of hernias of the epigastric region, a suprapubic port placement can be considered instead of a lateral one to have a better field overview, especially in subxiphoid hernias. Further studies are needed to assess the benefits and limitations of such technique.

The art of robotic colonic resection: a review of progress in the past 5 years

Surgery is developing in the direction of minimal invasiveness, and robotic surgery is becoming increasingly adopted in colonic resection procedures. The ergonomic improvements of robot promote surgical performance, reduce workload for surgeons and benefit patients. Compared with laparoscopy-assisted colon surgery, the robotic approach has the advantages of shorter length of hospital stay, lower rate of conversion to open surgery, and lower rate of intraoperative complications for short-term outcomes. Synchronous robotic liver resection with colon cancer is feasible. The introduction of the da Vinci Xi System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has introduced more flexibility to colonic operations. Optimization of the suprapubic surgical approach may shorten the length of hospital stay for patients who undergo robotic colonic resection. Single-port robotic colectomy reduces the number of robotic ports for better looking and faster recovery. Intestinal anastomosis methods using totally robotic surgery result in shorter time to bowel function recovery and tolerance to a solid diet, although the operative time is longer. Indocyanine green is used as a tracer to assess blood supplementation in the anastomosis and marks lymph nodes during operation. The introduction of new surgical robots from multiple manufacturers is bound to change the landscape of robotic surgery and yield high-quality surgical outcomes. The present article reviews recent advances in robotic colonic resection over the past five years.

Robotic Complete Mesocolic Excision (CME) is a safe and feasible option for right colonic cancers: short and midterm results from a single-centre experience

BACKGROUND

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right colon cancers has traditionally been an open procedure. Surgical adoption of minimal access CME remains limited due to the technical challenges, training gaps and lack of level-1 data for proven benefits. Currently there is limited published data regarding the clinical results with the use of robotic CME surgery. Aim To report our experience, results and techniques, highlighting a clinical and oncological results and midterm oncological outcomes for robotic CME.

AIM

To report our experience, results and techniques, highlighting a clinical and oncological results and midterm oncological outcomes for robotic CME.

METHODS

All patients undergoing standardised robotic CME technique with SMV first approach between January 2015 and September 2019 were included in this retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. Patient demographics, operative data and clinical and oncological outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven robotic CME resections for right colonic cancers were performed over a 4-year period. Median operative time was 180 (128-454) min and perioperative blood loss was 10 (10-50) ml. There were 25 patients who had previous abdominal surgery. Median postoperative hospital stay was 5 (3-18) days. There was no conversion to open surgery in this series. Median lymph node count was 30 (10-60). Three (4%) patients had R1 resection. There was one (1%) local recurrence in stage III disease and 4(5%) distal recurrence in stage II and stage III. There was no 30- or 90-day mortality. Three-year disease-free survival was 100%, 91.7% and 92% for stages I, II and III, respectively. Overall survival was 94%.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic CME is feasible, effective and safe. Good oncological results and improved survival are seen in this cohort of patients with a standardised approach to robotic CME.

Ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis during robotic right colectomy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of different techniques

PURPOSE

Robotic assistance could increase the rate of ileo-colic intra-corporeal anastomosis (ICA) during robotic right colectomy (RRC). However, although robotic ICA can be accomplished with several different technical variants, it is not clear whether some of these technical details should be preferred. An evaluation of the possible advantage of one respect to another would be useful.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of literature on technical details of robotic ileo-colic ICA, from which we performed a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes. The extracted data allowed a comparative analysis regarding the outcome of overall complication (OC), bleeding rate (BR) and leakage rate (LR), between (1) mechanical anastomosis with robotic stapler, versus laparoscopic stapler, versus totally hand-sewn anastomosis and (2) closure of enterocolotomy with manual double layer, versus single layer, versus stapled.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies including 2066 patients were selected. Globally, the side-to-side, isoperistaltic anastomosis, realized with laparoscopic staplers, and double-layer closure for enterocolotomy, is the most common technique used. According to the meta-analysis, the use of robotic stapler was significantly associated with a reduction of the BR with respect to mechanical anastomosis with laparoscopic stapler or totally hand-sewn anastomosis. None of the other technical aspects significantly influenced the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

ICA fashioning during RRC can be accomplished with several technical variants without evidence of a clear superiority of anyone of these techniques. Although the use of robotic staplers could be associated with some benefits, further studies are necessary to draw conclusions.

Complete mesocolic excision in minimally invasive surgery of colonic cancer: do we need the robot?

Background

Robotic surgery offers favorable prerequisites for complex minimally invasive surgeries which are delivered by higher degrees of freedom, improved instrument stability, and a perfect visualization in 3D which is fully surgeon controlled. In this article we aim to assess its impact on complete mesocolic excision (CME) in colon cancer and to answer the question of whether the current evidence expresses a need for robotic surgery for this indication.

Methods

Retrospective analysis and review of the current literature on complete mesocolic excision for colon cancer comparing the outcome after open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches.

Results

Complete mesocolic excision results in improved disease-free survival and reduced local recurrence, but turns out to be complex and prone to complications. Introduced in open surgery, the transfer to minimally invasive surgery resulted in comparable results, however, with high conversion rates. In comparison, robotic surgery shows a reduced conversion rate and a tendency toward higher lymph node yield. Data, however, are insufficient and no high-quality studies have been published to date. Almost no oncologic follow-up data are available in the literature.

Conclusion

The current data do not allow for a reliable conclusion on the need of robotic surgery for CME, but show results which hypothesize an equivalence if not superiority to laparoscopy. Due to recently published technical improvements for robotic CME and supplementary features of this method, we suppose that this approach will gain in importance in the future.

Current status and trend of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) is utilized worldwide as one of the standard surgical treatments for right-sided colon cancer. However, there have been issues concerning its applicability, techniques, and trend. The present study aimed to elucidate the current status and trend of LRH by reviewing literature focusing on important issues associated with this surgery. Based on previous studies, LRH most likely provides better short-term outcomes and similar oncological outcomes compared to open surgery. Despite the increasing use of robotic approach in this surgery, it seems to have always been associated with longer operative times and greater hospital cost with limited advantage. Intracorporeal anastomosis seems to improve short-term outcomes, such as quicker recovery of bowel function, compared to extracorporeal anastomosis. However, it does not contribute to shorter hospital stay. With regard to dissection technique, various approaches, and landmarks have been advocated to overcome the technical difficulty in LRH. This difficulty is likely to be caused by anatomical variation, especially in venous structures. The superiority of one approach or landmark over another is still argued about due to the lack of large-scale prospective studies. However, deep understanding both of anatomical variation and characteristics of each approach would be of extreme importance to minimize adverse effects and maximize patient benefit after LRH.

Metal substitutions incarbonic anhydrase: a halide ion probe study

The ASA score is known to be an independent predictor of complications and mortality following colorectal surgery. We evaluated early outcome in the initiation phase of a robotic oncological colorectal resection program in dependence of comorbidity and learning curve. 43 consecutive colorectal cancer patients (median age: 74 years) who underwent robotic surgery were firstly analysed defined by physical status (group A = ASA1 + 2; group B = ASA3). Secondly, outcome was evaluated relating to surgery date (group E: early phase; group L: late phase). There were no differences among groups A and B with regard to gender, BMI, skin-to-skin operative times (STS), N- and M-status, hospital-stay as well as overall rate of complications according to Dindo-Clavien and no one-year mortality. GroupA when compared to group B demonstrated significantly lower mean age (65.5 years ± 11.4 years vs 75.8 years  ± 8.9 years), T-stage and ICU-stay. When separately analyzed for patients age ICU-stay was comparable (> 75 years vs. < 75 years). Group E and L demonstrated comparable characteristics and early outcome except more frequent lymphatic fistulas in group E. STS was reduced in group L compared to group E. Beyond learning curve aspects in our series, we could demonstrate that patient’s physical condition according to ASA rather than age may have an impact on early outcome in the initial phase of a robotic oncological colorectal program.