An Overview of Robotic Colorectal Surgery Adoption and Training in Brazil

Minimally invasive multivisceral resection in rectal cancer: Preparation or Precipitation?

Rectal cancer is a malignant neoplasm that constitutes a significant public health challenge due to its high incidence and associated mortality. In this editorial, we comment on the article by Chan et al. In recent years, there has been progress in the development of new treatments for initial and metastatic rectal cancer due to introduction of techniques of innovative and minimally-invasive surgery (MIS) such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery. However, only a few studies have analyzed the feasibility, safety, and results of MIS in relation to open surgery, thereby highlighting the promising and superior results of MIS in functional and oncological terms. The findings were corroborated by the comparative study of Chan et al which evaluated the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive multivisceral resection (miMVR). A comparison of postoperative outcomes between open MVR and miMVR showed that miMVR presented less blood loss, fewer postoperative complications, and less morbidity. This editorial article is focused specifically on analysis of the characteristics of new minimally-invasive surgical techniques in rectal cancer, particularly in advanced stages. The importance of future research is emphasized by progress in knowledge, training, and clinical practice in the application of these surgical procedures for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer.

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

Background and objectives

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

Material and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Systematic Review Registration

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

Comparative analysis of the short and medium-term efficacy of the Da Vinci robot versus laparoscopic total mesangectomy for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The Da Vinci robot-assisted surgery technique has been widely used in laparoscopic mesangectomy for rectal cancer. However, the short-term efficacy of these procedures compared to traditional laparoscopic surgery remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare and analyze the short- and medium-term efficacy of Da Vinci robot and laparoscopic surgery in total mesangectomy (TME) for rectal cancer, so as to provide guidance and reference for clinical practice.

AIM

To investigate the safety and long-term efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic total mesorectal resection for the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

The clinicopathologic data of 240 patients who underwent TME for rectal cancer in the Anorectal Department of People's Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region from August 2018 to March 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 112 patients underwent laparoscopic TME (L-TME) group, and 128 patients underwent robotic TME (R-TME) group. The intraoperative, postoperative, and follow-up conditions of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The conversion rate of the L-TME group was greater than that of the R-TME group (5.4% vs 0.8%, χ 2 = 4.417, P = 0.036). The complication rate of the L-TME group was greater than that of the R-TME group (32.1% vs 17.2%, χ 2 = 7.290, P = 0.007). The percentage of positive annular margins in the L-TME group was greater than that in the R-TME group (7.1% vs 1.6%, χ 2 = 4.658, P = 0.031). The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate and overall survival (OS) rate of the L-TME group were lower than those of the R-TME group (74.1% vs 85.2%, χ 2 = 4.962, P = 0.026; 81.3% vs 91.4%, χ 2 = 5.494, P = 0.019); in patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III DFS rate and OS rate in the L-TME group were significantly lower than those in the R-TME group (52.5% vs 76.1%, χ 2 = 5.799, P = 0.016; 65.0% vs 84.8%, χ 2 = 4.787, P = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the L-TME group, the R-TME group had a better tumor prognosis and was more favorable for patients with rectal cancer, especially for patients with stage III rectal cancer.

Beyond the Horizon: Unveiling the Frontiers of Rectal Cancer Research and Treatment

Colorectal cancer, ranking among the most prevalent causes of cancer-related mortality, is an escalating global health concern. The incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer are expected to surge substantially by 2030, posing a significant public health challenge. This article provides a comprehensive overview of rectal cancer, encompassing its epidemiology, anatomical intricacies, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and diagnosis. The tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) classification system for rectal cancer is detailed, offering crucial insights for staging and treatment decisions. Various treatment modalities are discussed, including surgical approaches, systemic therapies, radiation therapy, and local therapies for metastases. Recent advances in robotic surgery and innovative radiation technologies are explored. Furthermore, prevention strategies are elucidated, focusing on lifestyle modifications and pharmacological interventions that may mitigate the risk of colorectal cancer. The article underscores the importance of understanding rectal cancer for healthcare professionals and patients, enabling informed decision-making and enhanced management of this disease. Prognostic factors are outlined, with survival rates and the prognosis of rectal cancer contingent on several influential elements, highlighting the multifaceted nature of this condition. In conclusion, accurate diagnosis, diverse treatment options, and prevention strategies, including advances like robotic surgery, influence rectal cancer outcomes. A comprehensive overview empowers healthcare professionals and patients to make informed decisions for improved disease management and prognosis.