Oncologic Outcomes of Extended Robotic Resection for Rectal Cancer

The role of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in advanced rectal cancer: a review of current evidence and outcomes

Metastatic lateral pelvic lymph nodes (LPNs) in rectal cancer significantly impact the prognosis and treatment strategies. Western practices emphasize neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), whereas Eastern approaches often rely on LPN dissection (LPND). This review examines the evolving role of LPND in the context of modern treatments, including total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT), and the impact of CRT on the management of clinically suspicious LPNs. We comprehensively reviewed the key literature comparing the outcomes of LPND versus preoperative CRT for rectal cancer, focusing on recent advancements and ongoing debates. Key studies, including the JCOG0212 trial and recent multicenter trials, were analyzed to assess the efficacy of LPND, particularly in conjunction with preoperative CRT or TNT. Current evidence indicates that LPND can reduce local recurrence rates compared to total mesorectal excision alone in patients not receiving radiation therapy. However, the benefit of LPND in the context of neoadjuvant CRT is influenced by the size and pretreatment characteristics of LPNs. While CRT can effectively control smaller metastatic LPNs, larger or clinically suspicious LPNs may require LPND for optimal outcomes. Advances in surgical techniques, such as robotic-assisted LPND, offer potential benefits but also present challenges and complications. The role of TNT in controlling metastatic LPNs and improving patient outcomes is emerging but remains underexplored. The decision to perform LPND should be individualized based on patient-specific factors, including LPN size, response to neoadjuvant treatment, and surgeon expertise. Future research should focus on optimizing treatment protocols and further evaluating the role of TNT in managing metastatic LPNs.

Robotic versus open and laparoscopic pelvic exenterations for pelvic cancer: a multicenter propensity-matched analysis in Japan

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is the last resort for achieving a complete cure for pelvic cancer; however, it is burdensome for patients. Minimally invasive surgeries, including robot-assisted surgery, have been widely used to treat malignant tumors and have also recently been used in PE. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted PE (RPE) by comparing the outcomes of open PE (OPE) with those of conventional laparoscopic PE (LPE) for treating pelvic tumors.

METHODS

Following the ethics committee approval, a multicenter retrospective analysis of patients who underwent pelvic exenteration between January 2012 and October 2022 was conducted. Data on patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were collected. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was performed to minimize group selection bias.

RESULTS

In total, 261 patients met the study criteria, of whom 61 underwent RPE, 90 underwent OPE, and 110 underwent LPE. After propensity score matching, 50 pairs were created for RPE and OPE and 59 for RPE and LPE. RPE was associated with significantly less blood loss (RPE vs. OPE: 408 mL vs. 2385 ml, p < 0.001), lower transfusion rate (RPE vs. OPE: 32% vs. 82%, p < 0.001), and lower rate of complications over Clavien-Dindo grade II (RPE vs. OPE: 48% vs. 74%, p = 0.013; RPE vs. LPE: 48% vs. 76%, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

This multicenter study suggests that RPE reduces blood loss and transfusion compared with OPE and has a lower rate of complications compared with OPE and LPE in patients with locally advanced and recurrent pelvic tumors.

Management of internal iliac and obturator lymph nodes in mid-low rectal cancer

In rectal cancer treatment, the diagnosis and management of lateral pelvic lymph nodes (LLN) are critical for preventing local recurrence. Over time, scholars have reached a consensus: when imaging suggests LLN metastasis, combining neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with selective LLN dissection (LLND) can mitigate the risk of recurrence. Selective LLND typically encompasses lymph nodes in the internal iliac and obturator regions. Recent studies emphasize distinctions between internal iliac and obturator lymph nodes regarding prognosis and treatment outcomes, prompting the need for differentiated diagnostic and treatment approaches.

Minimally invasive versus open multivisceral resection for rectal cancer clinically invading adjacent organs: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS), such as laparoscopic and robotic surgery for rectal cancer, is performed worldwide. However, limited information is available on the advantages of MIS over open surgery for multivisceral resection for cases clinically invading adjacent organs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective propensity score-matching study of consecutive clinical T4b rectal cancer patients who underwent curative intent surgery between 2006 and 2021 at the University of Tokyo Hospital.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients who underwent multivisceral resection were analyzed. Thirty-three patients underwent MIS (the MIS group), while 36 underwent open surgery (the open group). Twenty-three patients were matched to each group. Conversion was required in 2 patients who underwent MIS (8.7%). R0 resection was achieved in 87.0% and 91.3% of patients in the MIS and open groups, respectively. The MIS group had significantly less blood loss (170 vs. 1130 mL; p < 0.0001), fewer Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2 postoperative complications (30.4% vs. 65.2%; p = 0.0170), and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (20 vs. 26 days; p = 0.0269) than the open group. The 3-year cancer-specific survival rate, relapse-free survival rate, and cumulative incidence of local recurrence were 75.7, 35.9, and 13.9%, respectively, in the MIS group and 84.5, 45.4, and 27.1%, respectively, in the open group, which were not significantly different (p = 0.8462, 0.4344, and 0.2976, respectively).

CONCLUSION

MIS had several short-term advantages over open surgery, such as lower complication rates, faster recovery, and a shorter hospital stay, in rectal cancer patients who underwent multivisceral resection.

Short-term results after robot-assisted surgery for primary rectal cancers requiring beyond total mesorectal excision in multiple compartments

AIM

Rectal cancers requiring beyond total mesorectal excision (bTME) are traditionally operated using an open approach, but the use of minimally invasive robot-assisted procedures is increasing. Introduction of minimal invasive surgery for complex cancer cases could be associated with compromised surgical margins or increased complication rates. Therefore, reporting results both clinical and oncological in large series is important. Since bTME procedure reports are heterogeneous, comparing results is often difficult. In this study, a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) classification system was used to describe the bTME surgery according to pelvic compartments.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with primary rectal cancer operated with laparoscopic robot-assisted bTME were prospectively included for 2 years. All patients had tumors that threatened the mesorectal fascia, invaded adjacent organs, and/or involved metastatic pelvic lateral lymph nodes. Short-term clinical outcomes and oncological specimen quality were registered. Surgery was classified according to pelvic compartments resected.

RESULTS

Clear resection margins (R0 resection) were achieved in 95 out of 105 patients (90.5%). About 26% had Accordion Severity Grading System of Surgical Complications grade 3-4 complications and 15% required re-operations. About 7% were converted to open surgery. The number of compartments resected ranged from one to the maximum seven, with 83% having two or three compartments resected. All 10 R1 resections occurred in the lateral and posterior compartments.

CONCLUSIONS

The short-term clinical outcomes and oncological specimen quality after robot-assisted bTME surgery were comparable to previously published open bTME surgery. The description of surgical procedures using the Royal Marsden MRI compartment classification was feasible.

Feasibility of robotic platform to perform R0 resection for locally advanced multi-visceral pelvic malignancy: an institutional experience on outcomes of robotic pelvic exenteration

BACKGROUND

Exenteration surgery for multi-visceral pelvic malignancy is a complex life-changing operation with high perioperative morbidity and mortality. Traditional open surgery has long been the standard approach for pelvic exenteration for achieving Ro resection which is the main aim of surgery. In the current era of minimally invasive surgery, robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration has provided a promising alternative, offering potential advantages in terms of improved oncological outcomes and enhanced postoperative recovery. This study aims to explore the feasibility of a robotic platform for locally advanced multi-visceral pelvic malignancy.

METHODS

A retrospective review from the prospectively maintained robotic colorectal surgery database at University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW) Trust was performed. Demographic details and clinical and surgical details were documented from the case records. Data was analysed using SPSS version 22.

RESULTS

Thirteen female patients diagnosed with primary or recurrent pelvic malignancy who underwent robotic pelvic exenteration at UHCW between February 2019 and April 2023 at UHCW were included. The mean age of our patients was 60.4 (± 10.1) years. Complete Ro resection was achieved in all 13 (100%) cases on final histopathology. The median length of hospital stay was 15 days after this extensive surgery. Grade 3 morbidity on Clavien-Dindo classification was observed in four (30.7%) patients, while zero percent 30-day mortality was experienced in this study. At a median follow-up of 21 (3-53) months, we observed tumor recurrence in three (23.7%) patients, while death in four (30.7%) patients. Only few studies have highlighted outcomes of robotic pelvic exenteration, and our results were quite comparable to them.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted pelvic exenteration for primary or recurrent pelvic malignancy is feasible with improved oncological and acceptable postoperative outcomes.

Robotic abdominoperineal resection, posterior vaginectomy and abdomino-lithotomy sacrectomy: technical considerations and case vignette

When working with patients who have locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) the ability to undertake minimally invasive procedures becomes more challenging but no less important for patient outcomes. We performed a minimally invasive approach to surgery for LARC invading the posterior vagina and sacrum. The patient was a 75-year-old lady who presented with a locally advanced rectal tumour staged T4N2 with invasion into the posterior wall of the vagina and coccyx/distal sacrum. We introduce a robotic abdominoperineal resection, posterior vaginectomy and abdomino-lithotomy sacrectomy using a purely perineal approach with no robotic adjuncts or intracorporal techniques. Final histology showed moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma invading the vagina and sacrum, ypT4b N0 TRG2 R0 and the patient entered surgical follow-up with no immediate intra- or postoperative complications. A literature review shows the need for more minimally invasive techniques when relating to major pelvic surgery and the benefits of a purely perineal approach include less expensive resource use, fewer training requirements and the ability to utilise this technique in centres that are not robotically equipped.

Hybrid robot-assisted abdominoperineal resection supported by simultaneous trans-perineal approach for anal gland adenocarcinoma with vaginal invasion: a case report

Hybrid surgery (abdominal robotic approach with a trans-anal approach) has been reported to improve oncological outcomes in cases involving advanced cancer or technical difficulties. A 74-year-old woman presented with anal pain and stenosis. Examination revealed palpable sclerosis on the anterior wall at the anal verge with possible vaginal invasion. A biopsy revealed an adenocarcinoma. We performed a two-team robot-assisted abdominoperineal resection combined with resection of the vagina supported by a simultaneous trans-perineal approach. After rendezvous at the posterior side, the abdominal team cut the posterior wall of the vaginal vault while the perineal team confirmed the surgical margin. Histopathological findings identified the tumour as an anal gland adenocarcinoma (pT4b [vagina] N0M0 pathological stage IIC) with a negative circumferential resection margin. Hybrid surgery combined with resection of the posterior wall of the vagina may be performed safely and is a valuable surgical option for multimodal treatment of anal adenocarcinomas.

Laparoscopic and robotic multivisceral resection in colorectal cancer: A case series and systematic review

PURPOSE

Multivisceral resection (MVR) with open approach is the standard surgical treatment for locally advanced colorectal cancer. However, the medical literature concerning the practice of minimally invasive MVR in order to reduce postoperative complications and hospital stay has been growing exponentially over the last years. The present study aimed to examine our experience and to provide a systematic review about the results and complications of minimally invasive MVR.

METHODS

Data of patients that underwent minimally invasive MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The literature was searched for studies concerning minimally invasive MVR for colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 39 laparoscopic MVR were performed in our department. Complications occurred in 14 patients (35.9%) with major complications in five patients (18.82%) according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Conversion was required in one case (2.56%) with subsequent mortality (2.56%). Pathologic adjacent organs or structures invasion was observed in 30 patients (76.9%) and positive resection margin occurred in two cases (5.2%). Twenty-two studies including 1055 patients were identified after literature search. In these studies, laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery were performed in 90.15% and 9.85% of the patients, respectively. R0 resection was established in 95% of cases, conversion rate varied between 0% and 41.7%, and postoperative mortality ranged between 0% and 7.7% in the included articles.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive approach may be a safe option for patients requiring MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer, with equivalent oncological results and could result in better early postoperative outcomes to open approach. However, further studies on this topic are needed to confirm the results of the current study.

Updated systematic review of the approach to pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary rectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence regarding surgical advances in the management of primary locally advanced rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND

The management of rectal cancer has evolved significantly in recent decades, with improved (neo)adjuvant treatment strategies and enhanced perioperative protocols. Centralization of care for complex, advanced cases has enabled surgeons in these units to undertake more ambitious surgical procedures.

METHODS

A Pubmed, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane database search was conducted according to the predetermined search strategy. The review protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021245582).

RESULTS

14 studies were identified which reported on the outcomes of 3,188 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) for primary rectal cancer. 50% of patients had neoadjuvant radiotherapy. 24.2% underwent flap reconstruction, 9.4% required a bony resection and 34 patients underwent a major vascular excision. 73.9% achieved R0 resection, with 33.1% experiencing a major complication. Median length of hospital stay ranged from 13 to 19 days. 1.6% of patients died within 30 days of their operation. Five-year overall survival (OS) rates ranged 29%-78%.

LIMITATIONS

The studies included in our review were mostly single-centre observational studies published prior to the introduction of modern neoadjuvant treatment regimens. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis on the basis that most were non-randomized, non-comparative studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic exenteration offers patients with locally advanced rectal cancer the chance of long-term survival with acceptable levels of morbidity. Increased experience facilitates more radical procedures, with the introduction of new platforms and/or reconstructive options.

Robotic beyond total mesorectal excision surgery for primary and recurrent pelvic malignancy: Feasibility and short-term outcomes

AIM

To explore the feasibility and safety of robotic beyond total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery for primary and recurrent pelvic malignancy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing robotic beyond TME resections for primary or recurrent pelvic malignancy between July 2015 and July 2021 in a public quaternary and a private tertiary centre were included. Demographic and clinical data were recorded and outcomes analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients (50% males) were included, with a median age of 58 (45-70.8) years, and a BMI of 26 (24.3-28.1) kg/m² . Indication for surgery was rectal adenocarcinoma in nineteen, leiomyosarcoma in two, anal squamous cell carcinoma in one and combined rectal and prostatic adenocarcinoma in two patients. All patients required resection of at least one adjacent pelvic organ including genitourinary structures (n = 23), internal iliac vessels (n = 3) and/or bone (n = 2). Eleven patients had a restorative procedure. Of the 13 nonrestorative cases, nine needed perineal reconstruction with a flap. There was one conversion due to bleeding. The mean operating time was 370 (285-424) min, and the median blood loss was 400 (200-2,000) ml. The median length of stay was 16 (9.3-23.8) days. Fourteen patients (58.3%) had postoperative complications; eight of them (33.3%) were Clavien-Dindo III or more complication. Twenty-three (95.8%) patients had an R0 resection. During a median follow-up of 10 (7-23.5) months, five patients (20.8%) had systemic recurrences. No local recurrences were identified during the study period.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of robotic beyond TME surgery for primary and recurrent pelvic malignancy is feasible within a highly specialised setting.

Analysis of bowel function, urogenital function, and long-term follow-up outcomes associated with robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgical approaches to total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The present study comparatively analyzed short-term clinical effectiveness and long-term follow-up endpoints associated with robotic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (RAS) and laparoscopic-assisted sphincter-preserving surgery (LAS) when used to treat low rectal cancer.

METHOD

Within such a single-center retrospective cohort analysis, low rectal cancer patients that underwent RAS (n=200) or LAS (n=486) between January 2015 and beginning of July 2018 were enrolled.

RESULTS

The mean operative durations in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 249±64 min and 203±47 min, respectively (P<0.001). Temporary ileostomy rates in the RAS and LAS cohorts were 64.5% and 51.6% (P = 0.002). In addition, major variations across such cohorts regarding catheter removal timing, time to liquid intake, time to first leaving bed, and length of hospitalization (all P<0.001). This distal resection margin distance within the RAS cohort was diminished in comparison to LAS cohort (P=0.004). For patients within the LAS cohort, the time required to recover from reduced urinary/female sexual function was > 6 months post-surgery (P<0.0001), whereas within the RAS cohort this interval was 3 months (P<0.0001). At 6 months post-surgery, male sexual function within RAS cohort was improved in comparison to LAS cohort (P<0.001). At 6 months post-surgery, Wexner scores revealed similar results (P<0.001). No major variations within overall or disease-free survival were identified across these cohorts at 3 or 5 years post-surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robotic sphincter-preserving surgery is a safe and effective surgical technique in low rectal patients in terms of postoperative oncological safety and long-term endpoints. And the RAS strategy provides certain additional benefits with respect to short-term urogenital/anorectal functional recovery in treated patients compared to LAS.

Robotic Surgery in Rectal Cancer: Potential, Challenges, and Opportunities

The current standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is based on a multimodal comprehensive treatment combined with preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiation and complete surgical resection of the entire mesorectal cancer. For ultra-low cases and cases with lateral lymph node metastasis, due to limitations in laparoscopic technology, the difficulties of operation and incidence of intraoperative complications are always difficult to overcome. Robotic surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer is an emerging technique that can overcome some of the technical drawbacks posed by conventional laparoscopic approaches, improving the scope and effect of radical operations. However, evidence from the literature regarding its oncological safety and clinical outcomes is still lacking. This brief review summarized the current status of robotic technology in rectal cancer therapy from the perspective of several mainstream surgical methods, including robotic total mesorectal excision (TME), robotic transanal TME, robotic lateral lymph node dissection, and artificial intelligence, focusing on the developmental direction of robotic approach in the field of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in the future.

Stepwise Improvement of Surgical Quality in Robotic Lateral Pelvic Node Dissection: Lessons From 100 Consecutive Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Lateral pelvic node dissection has significant technical difficulty and a high incidence of surgical morbidity. A steep learning curve is anticipated in performing lateral pelvic node dissection. However, no study has previously analyzed the learning curve and surgical skill acquisition for this complex procedure.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the learning process for performing robotic total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic node dissection in patients with rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database.

SETTING

This study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center.

PATIENTS

A total of 100 patients who underwent robotic total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic node dissection between 2011 and 2017 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A cumulative sum analysis was calculated based on the number of unilateral retrieved lateral pelvic nodes. Operative time, estimated bloodloss, lateral pelvic node metastatic rate, postoperative morbidities, and local recurrence were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Cumulative sum modeling suggested 4 learning phases: learning I (33 patients), learning II (19 patients), consolidation (30 patients), and competence (18 patients). In the consolidation and competence phases, we adopted fluorescence imaging and standardized the surgical procedure on the basis of anatomical planes. The competence phase had the greatest number of unilateral retrieved lateral pelvic nodes (12.8 vs 4.9, 8.2, and 10.4; p < 0.001). Urinary complications, including urinary retention and postoperative α-blocker usage, were more frequently observed in learning phase I than in the competence phase (39.4% vs 16.7%, p = 0.034). During the median follow-up of 44.2 months, local recurrence in the pelvic sidewall was observed in 4 patients from learning phase I and in 1 patient from learning phase II.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSION

Completeness of the lateral pelvic node dissection procedure increased with the surgeon's experience and as new imaging systems and surgical technique standardization were implemented. Further studies are warranted to determine the oncologic outcomes associated with each phase. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B774.

MEJORA GRADUAL DE LA CALIDAD QUIRRGICA EN LA DISECCIN LINFTICA PLVICA LATERAL ROBTICA LECCIONES DE PACIENTES CONSECUTIVOS CON CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO

ANTECEDENTES:La disección linfática pélvica lateral tiene una dificultad técnica significativa y una alta incidencia de morbilidad quirúrgica. Se prevé una curva de aprendizaje muy pronunciada al realizar la disección linfática pélvica lateral. Sin embargo, ningún estudio ha analizado previamente la curva de aprendizaje y la adquisición de habilidades quirúrgicas para este procedimiento.OBJETIVOS:Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar el proceso de aprendizaje para realizar la escisión total de mesorrecto robótica con disección linfática pélvica lateral en pacientes con cáncer de recto.DISEÑO:Este es un análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos recopilada prospectivamente.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en un centro oncológico terciario.PACIENTES:Un total de 100 pacientes fueron sometidos a escisión total de mesorrecto robótica con disección linfática pélvica lateral entre 2011 y 2017.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE DESENLACE:Se calculó un análisis de suma acumulativa basado en el número unilateral de ganglios pélvicos laterales recuperados. También se analizaron el tiempo operatorio, la pérdida de sangre estimada, la tasa de metástasis ganglionares pélvicas laterales, las morbilidades postoperatorias y la recidiva local.RESULTADOS:El modelado total acumulativo sugirió cuatro fases de aprendizaje: aprendizaje I (33 pacientes), aprendizaje II (19 pacientes), consolidación (30 pacientes) y competencia (18 pacientes). En las fases de consolidación y competencia, adoptamos imágenes de fluorescencia y estandarizamos el procedimiento quirúrgico basado en planos anatómicos, respectivamente. La fase de competencia tuvo el mayor número de ganglios pélvicos laterales recuperados unilateralmente (12,8 frente a 4,9, 8,2 y 10,4; p < 0,001). Las complicaciones urinarias, incluida la retención urinaria y el uso posoperatorio de bloqueadores beta, se observaron con más frecuencia en la fase de aprendizaje I que en la fase de competencia (39,4% frente a 16,7%, p = 0,034). Durante la mediana de seguimiento de 44,2 meses, se observó una recidiva local en la pared lateral pélvica en cuatro pacientes de la fase de aprendizaje I y en un paciente de la fase de aprendizaje II.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIÓNES:La completitud del procedimiento de disección linfática pélvica lateral aumentó con la experiencia del cirujano y a medida que se implementaron nuevos sistemas de imágenes y estandarización de técnicas quirúrgicas. Se necesitan más estudios para determinar los resultados oncológicos asociados con cada fase. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B774.

Contemporary Management of Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer: Views from the PelvEx Collaborative

Pelvic exenteration is a complex operation performed for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic cancers. The goal of surgery is to achieve clear margins, therefore identifying adjacent or involved organs, bone, muscle, nerves and/or vascular structures that may need resection. While these extensive resections are potentially curative, they can be associated with substantial morbidity. Recently, there has been a move to centralize care to specialized units, as this facilitates better multidisciplinary care input. Advancements in pelvic oncology and surgical innovation have redefined the boundaries of pelvic exenterative surgery. Combined with improved neoadjuvant therapies, advances in diagnostics, and better reconstructive techniques have provided quicker recovery and better quality of life outcomes, with improved survival This article provides highlights of the current management of advanced pelvic cancers in terms of surgical strategy and potential future developments.

Extended Lymphadenectomy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancers: A Systematic Review

Purpose

The surgical treatment of advanced low rectal cancer remains controversial. Extended lymphadenectomy (EL) is the preferred option in the East, especially in Japan, while neoadjuvant radiotherapy is the treatment of choice in the West. This review was undertaken to review available evidence supporting each of the therapies.

Methods

All studies looking at EL were included in this review. A comprehensive search was conducted as per PRISMA guidelines. Primary outcome was defined as 5-year overall survival, with secondary outcomes including 3-year overall survival, 3- and 5-year disease-free survival, length of operation, and number of complications.

Results

Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant publication bias. There was statistically significant difference in 5-year survival for patient who underwent EL (odds ratio, 1.34; 95 confidence interval, 0.09–0.5; P=0.006). There were no differences noted in secondary outcomes except for length of the operations.

Conclusion

There is evidence supporting EL in rectal cancer; however, it is difficult to interpret and not easily transferable to a Western population. Further research is necessary on this important topic.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: A propensity-score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to investigate the advantages of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy as these remains unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively recruited eligible patients with rectal cancer undergoing robotic or laparoscopic surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. We compared the surgical outcomes between patients undergoing either robotic surgery or laparoscopic surgery was based on the propensity-score matching analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were recruited, including 76 who underwent robotic surgery and 95 who underwent laparoscopic surgery. There were no significant differences in clinical and pathological characteristics between the groups after propensity-score matching (56 matched pairs). Longer operation times (324.964 ± 83.435 vs. 246.232 ± 111.324 min, p < 0.001) and more blood loss (187.679 ± 176.615 vs. 98.214 ± 107.011, p < 0.001) were observed in the robotic group. The major complication rates were similar between the treatment groups after propensity matching (p = 0.086). There were no significant differences in disease-free survival rates (p = 0.205) and overall survival rates (p = 0.837) between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery is associated with similar technical safety and oncologic efficacy compared to laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; it is an acceptable option for patients requiring minimally invasive surgery. Nevertheless, the longer operation times and greater blood loss seen in the present study are a stark reminder that the convenience and surgical precision, on which the marketing of robotic surgery is rooted, are yet to be proven and require further investigation.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic-assisted transabdominal total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision: which approach offers optimal short-term outcomes for mid-to-low rectal adenocarcinoma?

BACKGROUND

Resection of low rectal adenocarcinoma can be challenging in the narrow pelvis of male patients. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) appears to offer technical advantages for distal rectal tumours, and robotic-assisted transabdominal TME (rTME) was introduced in effort to improve operative precision and ergonomics. However, no study has comprehensively compared these approaches. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to compare postoperative short-term outcomes in rTME and TaTME.

METHODS

A systematic online search (1974-July 2020) of MEDLINE, Embase, web of science and google scholar was conducted for trials, prospective or retrospective studies involving rTME, or TaTME for rectal cancer. Outcome variables included: hospital stay; operation duration, blood loss; resection margins; proportion of histologically complete resected specimens; lymph nodes; overall complications; anastomotic leak, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Sixty-two articles met the inclusion criteria, including 37 studies (3835 patients) assessing rTME resection, 23 studies (1326 patients) involving TaTME and 2 comparing both (165 patients). Operating time was longer in rTME (309.2 min, 95% CI 285.5-332.8) than in TaTME studies (256.2 min, 95% CI 231.5-280.9) (p = 0.002). rTME resected specimens had a larger distal resection margin (2.62 cm, 95% CI 2.35-2.88) than in TaTME studies (2.10 cm, 95% CI 1.83-2.36) (p = 0.007). Other outcome variables did not significantly differ between the two techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

rTME provides similar pathological and short-term outcomes to TaTME and both are reasonable surgical approaches for patients with mid-to-low rectal cancer. To definitively answer the question of the optimal TME technique, we suggest a prospective trial comparing both techniques assessing long-term survival as a primary outcome.

Local recurrences in western low rectal cancer patients treated with or without lateral lymph node dissection after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy: An international multi-centre comparative study

BACKGROUND

In the West, low rectal cancer patients with abnormal lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) are commonly treated with neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (nCRT) followed by total mesorectal excision (TME). Additionally, some perform a lateral lymph node dissection (LLND). To date, no comparative data (nCRT vs. nCRT + LLND) are available in Western patients.

METHODS

An international multi-centre cohort study was conducted at six centres from the Netherlands, US and Australia. Patients with low rectal cancers from the Netherlands and Australia with abnormal LLNs (≥5 mm short-axis in the obturator, internal iliac, external iliac and/or common iliac basin) who underwent nCRT and TME (LLND-group) were compared to similarly staged patients from the US who underwent a LLND in addition to nCRT and TME (LLND + group).

RESULTS

LLND + patients (n = 44) were younger with higher ASA-classifications and ypN-stages compared to LLND-patients (n = 115). LLND + patients had larger median LLNs short-axes and received more adjuvant chemotherapy (100 vs. 30%; p < 0.0001). Between groups, the local recurrence rate (LRR) was 3% for LLND + vs. 11% for LLND- (p = 0.13). Disease-free survival (DFS, p = 0.94) and overall survival (OS, p = 0.42) were similar. On multivariable analysis, LLND was an independent significant factor for local recurrences (p = 0.01). Sub-analysis of patients who underwent long-course nCRT and had adjuvant chemotherapy (LLND-n = 30, LLND + n = 44) demonstrated a lower LRR for LLND + patients (3% vs. 16% for LLND-; p = 0.04). DFS (p = 0.10) and OS (p = 0.11) were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

A LLND in addition to nCRT may improve loco-regional control in Western patients with low rectal cancer and abnormal LLNs. Larger studies in Western patients are required to evaluate its contribution.

The Emerging Role of Robotics in Pelvic Exenteration Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review

Pelvic exenteration surgery for locally advanced rectal cancers is a complex and extensive multivisceral operation, which is associated with high perioperative morbidity and mortality rates. Significant technical challenges may arise due to inadequate access, visualisation, and characterisation of tissue planes and critical structures in the spatially constrained pelvis. Over the last two decades, robotic-assisted technologies have facilitated substantial advancements in the minimally invasive approach to total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancers. Here, we review the emerging experience and evidence of robotic assistance in beyond TME multivisceral pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancers where heightened operative challenges and cumbersome ergonomics are likely to be encountered.

Optimizing outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery with robotic platforms

Advanced robotic technology makes it easier to perform total mesorectal excision procedures in the narrow pelvis for rectal cancer while maintaining the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer leads to lower conversion rates and faster recovery of urogenital function than conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, longer operative time and high cost are major weaknesses of robotic surgery. To date, most other short-term surgical outcomes, pathologic outcomes, and long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery have not shown significant advantages over laparoscopic surgery. However, robotic surgery is still a valid and highly anticipated surgical approach for rectal cancer because it greatly reduces the surgeon's workload and learning curve. There are also advantages when robotic techniques are applied to technically demanding procedures such as lateral pelvic lymph node dissection or intersphincteric resection. The introduction of new surgical robot systems, including the da Vinci® SP system, is expected to expand the applications of robotic surgery and provide new advantages.

Robotic surgery for clinical T4 rectal cancer: short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical approach for clinical T4 (cT4) rectal cancer is unknown. This study was conducted to clarify short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer.

METHODS

In our retrospective cohort study, we enrolled patients who underwent robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer within 15 cm from the anal verge between 2011 and 2018. The short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of a total of 122 eligible patients, 70 (57%) had cT4a tumors and 52 (43%) had cT4b tumors. Thirty-five patients (29%) had distant metastasis and 21 (17%) underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Thirty-four patients (28%) underwent combined resection of adjacent organs and 43 (35%) underwent lateral lymph node dissection. The median operative time was 288 min and the median blood loss was 11 ml. No patients required conversion to open surgery. The incidences of postoperative complications of grades II, III, and IV or more according to the Clavien-Dindo classification were 17.2%, 3.5%, and 0%, respectively. Seventy-three patients (60%) had pathological T4 tumors, and the incidence of positive resection margins was 4.9%. The median follow-up time was 42.9 months. The 3-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and cumulative local recurrence rates were 87.5%, 70.4%, and 4.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer were favorable. Robotic surgery is considered to be a useful approach for cT4 rectal cancer.

Robotic pelvic exenteration and extended pelvic resections for locally advanced or synchronous rectal and urological malignancy

Purpose

To describe the surgical technique and examine the feasibility and outcomes following robotic pelvic exenteration and extended pelvic resection for rectal and/or urological malignancy.

Materials and Methods

We present a case series of seven patients with locally advanced or synchronous urological and/or rectal malignancy who underwent robotic total or posterior pelvic exenteration between 2012–2016.

Results

In total, we included seven patients undergoing pelvic exenteration or extended pelvic resection. The mean operative time was 485±157 minutes and median length of stay was 9 days (6–34 days). There was only one Clavien–Dindo complication grade 3 which was a vesicourethral anastomotic leak requiring rigid cystoscopy and bilateral ureteric catheter insertion. Eighty-five percent of patients had clear colorectal margins with a median margin of 3.5 mm (0.7–8.0 mm) while all urological margins were clear. Six out of seven patients had complete (grade 3) total mesorectal excision. Three patients experienced recurrence at a median of 22 months (21–24 months) post-operatively. Of the three recurrences, one was systemic only whilst two were both local and systemic. One patient died from complications of dual rectal and prostate cancer 31 months after the surgery.

Conclusions

We report a large series examining robotic pelvic exenteration or extended pelvic resection and describe the surgical technique involved. The robotic approach to pelvic exenteration is highly feasible and demonstrates acceptable peri-operative and oncological outcomes. It has the potential to benefit patients undergoing this highly complex and morbid procedure.

Oncological Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Surgery With High Dissection and Selective Ligation Technique for Sigmoid Colon and Rectal Cancer

Background: Curative resection of sigmoid colon and rectal cancer includes "high tie" of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA). However, IMA ligation compromises blood flow to the anastomosis, which may increase the complication rate. We present preliminary experiences of operative and oncologic outcomes of patients with rectal or sigmoid colon cancer who underwent robotic surgery employing the high dissection and selective ligation technique. Methods: Over May 2013 to April 2017, 113 stage I-III rectal or sigmoid colon cancer patients underwent robotic surgery with the single-docking technique at one institution. We performed D3 lymph node dissection and low-tie ligation of the IMA (i.e., high dissection and selective ligation technique). Clinicopathological features, perioperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Sphincter preservation rate was 96.3% in rectal cancer patients. Median number of harvested lymph nodes was 12. Apical nodes were pathologically harvested in 84 (82.4%) patients. R0 resection was performed in 108 (95.6%) patients. Overall complication rate was 17.7%; but most complications were mild and the patients recovered uneventfully. Estimated 5-year OS was 86.1% and 3-year DFS was 79.6% after median follow-up periods of 49.1 months (range, 5.3-85.3). Conclusions: High dissection of the IMA and selective ligation of the major feeding vessel to the sigmoid colon or rectum can be safely performed using da Vinci Surgical System,yielding favorable clinical, and oncologic outcomes in rectal or sigmoid colon cancer treatment.

Robotic multivisceral pelvic resection: experience from an exenteration unit

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration remains a viable and effective treatment option for the management of locally advanced or recurrent pelvic malignancy. The aim of this study was to present an early experience of robotic multivisceral resection of pelvic malignancy, and to compare this experience with similar series through a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on patients who had robotic-assisted multi-visceral resection for pelvic malignancy at a single Colorectal Surgical unit based between two tertiary academic hospitals. Primary outcomes observed included operation type, operation time, perioperative complications, and hospital length of stay. Secondary outcomes included R0 resection status, lymph node harvest, and rate of recurrence at clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

Eight cases of robotic multivisceral resection were performed for primary locally advanced pelvic malignancy involving a rectal resection as part of their operative management. The median age of patients undergoing resection was 56 years (range 29-83 years). The male:female ratio was 6:2. The mean total operating time was 8.3 h (range 6-10 h). Perioperative blood transfusion requirements were minimal. Mean hospital length of stay was 15 days (range 7-26 days). No patients experienced any serious postoperative morbidity or mortality. All patients had clear margins on histological assessment and no patients have recurrence at 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic multivisceral resection for malignant disease of the pelvis is a safe and feasible minimally invasive approach in highly selected cases.

Combined robotic and cystoscopic surgery for rectal cancer invading urinary bladder

Although the application of laparoscopic rectal surgery has been widely accepted by accumulated evidence, it remains technically difficult in some cases of obesity, narrow male pelvis, bulky tumors, or involvement of adjacent organs. After robotic rectal surgery has been covered by the health insurance system in Japan since April 2018, we have employed robotic rectal surgery for an increasing number of cases by taking advantages of its 3D vision and wrist function. When a colorectal cancer involves the urinary bladder, the surgical treatment of choice is an anterior resection with en bloc (partial or total) bladder resection, depending on the site and extent of bladder involvement. In the attached video, robotic surgery was conducted with the aid of intraoperative cystoscopy, which resulted in curative resection with negative margin. Given that the robotic system provides excellent stability and dexterity for bladder reconstruction, the robotic approach can be technically suitable for locally advanced T4 colorectal cancer with urinary involvement.

Laparoscopic and robotic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer

In the era of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision, overall oncological outcomes after curative resection of rectal cancer are excellent, with local recurrence rates as low as 5–10%. However, lateral nodal disease is a major cause of local recurrence after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy/radiotherapy and total mesorectal excision. Patients with lateral nodal disease have a local recurrence rate of up to 30%. The oncological benefits of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) in reducing local recurrence, particularly in the lateral compartment, have been demonstrated. Although LPLND is not standard in Western countries, technical improvements in minimally invasive surgery have resulted in rapid technical standardization of this complicated procedure. The feasibility and short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic LPLND have been reported widely. A minimally invasive approach has the advantages of less bleeding and providing a better surgical view of the deep pelvic anatomy than an open approach. With precise autonomic nerve preservation, postoperative genitourinary dysfunction has been reported to be minimal. We review recent evidence on the management of lateral nodal disease in rectal cancer and technical improvements of LPLND, focusing on laparoscopic and robotic LPLND.

Significance of multivisceral resections in oncologic surgery: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Multivisceral resections (MVR) are often necessary to reach clear resections margins but are associated with relevant morbidity and mortality. Factors associated with favorable oncologic outcomes and elevated morbidity rates are not clearly defined.

AIM

To systematically review the literature on oncologic long-term outcomes and morbidity and mortality in cancer surgery a systematic review of the literature was performed.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for relevant articles (published from 2000 to 2018). Retrieved abstracts were independently screened for relevance and data were extracted from selected studies by two researchers.

RESULTS

Included were 37 studies with 3112 patients receiving MVR for colorectal cancer (1095 for colon cancer, 1357 for rectal cancer, and in 660 patients origin was not specified). The most common resected organs were the small intestine, bladder and reproductive organs. Median postoperative morbidity rate was 37.9% (range: 7% to 76.6%) and median postoperative mortality rate was 1.3% (range: 0% to 10%). The median conversion rate for laparoscopic MVR was 7.9% (range: 4.5% to 33%). The median blood loss was lower after laparoscopic MVR compared to the open approach (60 mL vs 638 mL). Lymph-node harvest after laparoscopic MVR was comparable. Report on survival rates was heterogeneous, but the 5-year overall-survival rate ranged from 36.7% to 90%, being worst in recurrent rectal cancer patients with a median 5-year overall survival of 23%. R0 -resection, primary disease setting and no lymph-node or lymphovascular involvement were the strongest predictors for long-term survival. The presence of true malignant adhesions was not exclusively associated with poorer prognosis.

Included were 16 studies with 1.600 patients receiving MVR for gastric cancer. The rate of morbidity ranged from 11.8% to 59.8%, and the main postoperative complications were pancreatic fistulas and pancreatitis, anastomotic leakage, cardiopulmonary events and post-operative bleedings. Total mortality was between 0% and 13.6% with an R0 -resection achieved in 38.4% to 100% of patients. Patients after R0 resection had 5-year overall survival rates of 24.1% to 37.8%.

CONCLUSION

MVR provides, in a selected subset of patients, the possibility for good long-term results with acceptable morbidity rates. Unlikelihood of achieving R0 -status, lymphovascular- and lymph -node involvement, recurrent disease setting and the presence of metastatic disease should be regarded as relative contraindications for MVR.

Oncological Outcomes After Robotic Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: Analysis of a Prospective Database

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate the oncological outcomes of robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) at an NCI designated cancer center.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The effectiveness of laparoscopic TME could not be established, but the robotic-assisted approach may hold some promise, with improved visualization and ergonomics for pelvic dissection. Oncological outcome data is presently lacking.

METHODS

Patients who underwent total mesorectal excision or tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer between April 2009 and April 2016 via a robotic approach were identified from a prospective single-institution database. The circumferential resection margin (CRM), distal resection margin, and TME completeness rates were determined. Kaplan-Meier analysis of disease-free survival and overall survival was performed for all patients treated with curative intent.

RESULTS

A total of 276 patients underwent robotic proctectomy during the study period. Robotic surgery was performed initially by 1 surgeon with 3 additional surgeons progressively transitioning from open to robotic during the study period with annual increase in the total number of cases performed robotically. Seven patients had involved circumferential resection margins (2.5%), and there were no positive distal or proximal resection margins. One hundred eighty-six patients had TME quality assessed, and only 1 patient (0.5%) had an incomplete TME. Eighty-three patients were followed up for a minimum of 3 years, with a local recurrence rate of 2.4%, and a distant recurrence rate of 16.9%. Five-year disease-free survival on Kaplan-Meier analysis was 82%, and 5-year overall survival was 87%.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic proctectomy for rectal cancer can be performed with good short and medium term oncological outcomes in selected patients.

Short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted right colectomy compared with laparoscopic surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted right colectomy (RRC) with conventional laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published studies. All published literature for comparative studies reporting preoperative outcomes of RRC and LRC were searched. We searched the databases included Cochrane Library of Clinical Comparative Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM) from 1973 to 2018. The censor date was up to January 2018. Operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, conversion rates to open surgery, postoperative complications, and related outcomes were evaluated. All calculations and statistical tests were performed using Stata 12.0 software. A total of 7769 patients with colon cancer enrolled in 13 trials were divided into a study group (n = 674) and a control group (n = 7095). Meta-analysis suggested significantly greater length of hospital stay in the LRC group [MD = -0.85; 95% CI: -1.07 to -0.63; P < 0.00001]. Robotic surgery was also associated with a significantly lower complication rate [OR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.01; P = 0.05]. There were statistically significant differences between the groups in estimated blood loss [MD = -16.89; 95% CI: -24.80 to -8.98; P < 0.00001] and the rate of intraoperative conversion to open surgery [OR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.75; P = 0.008)], but these differences were not clinically relevant. The recovery of bowel function in two groups is no significant differences [MD = -0.58, 95% CI: -0.96 to -0.20, P = 0.0008]. However, operation times [MD = 43.61, 95% CI: 39.11 to 48.10, P < 0.00001] were longer for RRC than for LRC. Compared to LRC, RRC was associated with reduced estimated blood loss, reduced postoperative complications, longer operation times. Recovery of bowel function and other perioperative outcomes were equivalent between the two surgeries.

Robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current state and future perspective

Interest in minimally invasive surgery has increased in recent decades. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) was introduced as the latest advance in minimally invasive surgery. RALS has the potential to provide better clinical outcomes in rectal cancer surgery, allowing for precise dissection in the narrow pelvic space. In addition, RALS represents an important advancement in surgical education with respect to use of the dual-console robotic surgery system. Because the public health insurance systems in Japan have covered the cost of RALS for rectal cancer since April 2018, RALS has been attracting increasingly more attention. Although no overall robust evidence has yet shown that RALS is superior to laparoscopic or open surgery, the current evidence supports the notion that technically demanding subgroups (patients with obesity, male patients, and patients treated by extended procedures) may benefit from RALS. Technological innovation is a constantly evolving field. Several companies have been developing new robotic systems that incorporate new technology. This competition among companies in the development of such systems is anticipated to lead to further improvements in patient outcomes as well as drive down the cost of RALS, which is one main concern of this new technique.

Lateral Lymph Node Dissection With the Focus on Indications, Functional Outcomes, and Minimally Invasive Surgery

The lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) is still a subject of great debate as to the appropriate treatment for patients with mid to low advanced rectal cancer. The guidelines of the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum recommend a LLND for patients with T3/4 rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection. However, in most Western countries, a routine LLND is not recommended unless a node or nodes are clinically suspicious for metastasis. Even after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT), an 8% to 12% lateral pelvic recurrence was noted. The size of the lateral lymph node and responsiveness to preoperative CRT should be the main factors for selecting appropriate patients to undergo a LLND. In addition, from the recent literature, a laparoscopic LLND is safe and oncologically feasible and might have some advantages in short-term outcomes.

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer: the future?

Robotic technology currently offers some technical advantages in pelvic dissection compared with competing minimally invasive techniques, and adoption for the surgical treatment of rectal cancer is rapidly increasing worldwide. While there are some early data demonstrating modest improvement in patient outcomes, benefits in terms of long-term oncological outcomes, as well as potential improvements in surgeon-centered outcomes such as fatigue and repetitive stress injury are actively being investigated. Rapid innovation, with the impending release of several new robotic platforms, is likely to further expand the application of these technologies, improve on current limitations, and reduce capital and consumable costs. It is imperative that, as the technology develops and adoption increases further, clinician and research led programs drive safe implementation with a patient-first approach.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic resection of clinical T4b tumours of distal sigmoid and rectum: initial results

BACKGROUND

Radical resection by multivisceral resection of colorectal T4 tumours is important to reduce local recurrence and improve survival. Oncological safety of laparoscopic resection of T4 tumours is controversial. However, robot-assisted resections might have advantages, such as 3D view and greater range of motion of instruments. The aim of this study is to evaluate the initial results of robot-assisted resection of T4 rectal and distal sigmoid tumours.

METHODS

This is a cohort study of a prospectively kept database of all robot-assisted rectal and sigmoid resections between 2012 and 2017. Patients who underwent a multivisceral resection for tumours appearing as T4 cancer during surgery were included. Rectal and sigmoid resections are routinely performed with the DaVinci robot, unless an indication for intra-operative radiotherapy exists.

RESULTS

28 patients with suspected T4 rectal or sigmoid cancer were included. Most patients (78%) were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (n = 19), short course radiotherapy with long waiting interval (n = 2) or chemotherapy (n = 1). En bloc resection was performed with the complete or part of the invaded organ (prostate, vesicles, bladder, abdominal wall, presacral fascia, vagina, uterus, adnex). In 3 patients (11%), the procedure was converted to laparotomy. Twenty-four R0-resections were performed (86%) and four R1-resections (14%). Median length of surgery was 274 min (IQR 222-354). Median length of stay was 6 days (IQR 5-11). Twelve patients (43%) had postoperative complications: eight (29%) minor complications and four (14%) major complications. There was no postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted laparoscopy seems to be a feasible option for the resection of clinical T4 cancer of the distal sigmoid and rectum in selected cases. Radical resections can be achieved in the majority of cases. Therefore, T4 tumours should not be regarded as a strict contraindication for robot-assisted surgery.

Oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open lateral lymph node dissection for locally advanced low rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The long-term outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection (RALLD) have not been fully investigated. This study aimed to assess the oncological and long-term outcomes of RALLD for rectal cancer through comparison with those of open lateral lymph node dissection (OLLD) in a retrospective study.

METHODS

Between September 2002 and October 2014, the medical data of 426 patients who underwent total mesorectal excision with lateral lymph node dissection for primary rectal cancer were collected. Of these, 115 patients were excluded after data collection (stage IV, n = 61; total pelvic exenteration, n = 31; multiple cancer, n = 20; conventional laparoscopic surgery, n = 3). Before matching, 311 patients with clinical stage II/III were analyzed. Using exact matching, patients were stratified into RALLD (n = 78) and OLLD (n = 78) groups. Pathological findings and long-term outcomes were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The pathological stage and number of harvested lymph nodes showed no significant differences between the groups. The rate of positive resection margin in the RALLD group tended to be lower compared with that of the OLLD group (p = 0.059). The median follow-up duration was 54.0 months in 156 patients. The 5-year overall survival rate was 95.4 and 87.8% in the RALLD and OLLD groups, respectively (p = 0.106). The 5-year relapse-free survival rate was 79.1 and 69.9% in the RALLD and OLLD groups, respectively (p = 0.157). The 5-year local relapse-free survival rate was 98.6 and 90.9% in the RALLD and OLLD groups, respectively (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and long-term outcomes indicated that RALLD may be a useful modality for locally advanced low rectal cancer.

Robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for rectal cancer: short-term outcomes at a single center

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for locally advanced rectal cancer remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the short-term outcomes of this procedure at our institution.

METHODS

From December 2011 to December 2016, patients who underwent robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for rectal cancer were investigated. Patient demographics, treatment characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and pathological results were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

There were 31 patients; 17 men (54.8%) and 14 women (45.2%), with a median age of 65 years (range 40-82 years). Twenty-one patients (67.7%) had a cT4 tumor, 9 patients (29.0%) had a pT4b tumor, and all patients except one (96.8%) underwent complete resection of the primary tumor with negative resection margins. Eleven patients (35.5%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The most commonly resected organ was the vaginal wall (n = 12, 38.7%), followed by the prostate (n = 10, 32.3%). Lateral lymph node dissection was performed in 20 patients (64.5%). The median operative time was 394 min (range 189-549 min), and the median blood loss was 41 mL (range 0-502 mL). None of the patients received intraoperative blood transfusions or required conversion to open. Overall, postoperative complications occurred in 11 patients (35.5%). The most frequent complication was urinary retention (n = 5, 16.1%), and none of the patients developed serious complications classified as Clavien-Dindo grades III-V.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for rectal cancer is safe and technically feasible.

The First Case Report of Robotic Multivisceral Resection for Synchronous Liver Metastasis from Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor: A Case Report and Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Surgery for liver metastases in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET) improves overall survival rate. We present the first case report for robotic multivisceral resection of distal pancreas, spleen, and left liver for metastatic PNET.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We present a case of 52-year-old female diagnosed with PNET in the pancreatic neck metastatic to the liver, responding to somatostatin and bland embolization, who underwent surgical debulking using da Vinci robotic platform. Intraoperative Doppler ultrasound was used to define the vascular distribution and tumor extension. The parenchymal liver transection was performed with vessel sealer. The distal pancreas and the spleen were approached medial to lateral and resected in an en-bloc fashion. The left liver inflow, outflow, and splenic artery and vein were transected with vascular stapler device.

RESULTS

Da Vinci robot-assisted multivisceral resection has been performed with good postoperative outcome. Operative time was 369 minutes and the estimated blood loss was 100 mL. The patient had a short hospital stay with quick recovery and good outcome at 5 months follow-up after the surgery.

DISCUSSION

Liver metastases in PNETs are considered an adverse factor. Aggressive surgical management is a mainstay. The laparoscopic approach to pancreatic or hepatic surgery is difficult in inexperienced hands with steep learning curve. The recent robotic system seems to overcome many limitations. This is the first case of robotic multivisceral resection for synchronous liver metastasis from PNET. Concurrent primary tumor resection with hepatectomy offers potential curative intention.