Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer

2018 ◽  
pp. 49-57
Author(s):  
Tomohiro Yamaguchi ◽  
Yusuke Kinugasa
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Robotic Assisted

scholarly journals Robotic-Assisted vs. Standard Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 19,731 Patients

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 180
Author(s):  
Kamil Safiejko ◽  
Radoslaw Tarkowski ◽  
Maciej Koselak ◽  
Marcin Juchimiuk ◽  
Aleksander Tarasik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Overall Survival Rate ◽  
Cancer Resection ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Standard Laparoscopic Surgery

Robotic-assisted surgery is expected to have advantages over standard laparoscopic approach in patients undergoing curative surgery for rectal cancer. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from database inception to November 10th, 2021, for both RCTs and observational studies comparing robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer resection. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. Forty-Two were considered eligible for the meta-analysis. Survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate was 99.6% for RG and 98.8% for LG (OR = 2.10; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.43; p = 0.05). Time to first flatus in the RG group was2.5 ± 1.4 days and was statistically significantly shorter than in LG group (2.9 ± 2.0 days; MD=-0.34; 95%CI: −0.65 to 0.03; p = 0.03). In the case of time to a liquid diet, solid diet and bowel movement, the analysis showed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). Length of hospital stay in the RG vs LG group varied and amounted to 8.0 ± 5.3 vs 9.5 ± 10.0 days (MD = −2.01; 95%CI: −2.90 to −1.11; p < 0.001). Overall, 30-days complications in the RG and LG groups were 27.2% and 19.0% (OR = 1.11; 95%CI: 0.80 to 1.55; p = 0.53), respectively. In summary, robotic-assisted techniques provide several advantages over laparoscopic techniques in reducing operative time, significantly lowering conversion of the procedure to open surgery, shortening the duration of hospital stay, lowering the risk of urinary retention, improving survival to hospital discharge or 30-day overall survival rate.

scholarly journals Robotic-assisted surgery for low rectal cancer: Initial experiences from 15 consecutive cases at Cho Ray Hospital

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Viet Trung Lam ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Laparoscopic Resection ◽  
Low Rectal Cancer ◽  
Safe Procedure ◽  
Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Conventional Laparoscopic ◽  
Robotic Assisted Surgery

Abstract Introduction: Conventional laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer has several challenges regarding the technique issues such as a limited range of motion instruments. With the advantages, Robotic-assisted surgery has resolved this problems compared with the conventional laparoscopic surgery because it’s dexterity could improve the range of motion instruments. To evaluate the short-term and early oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery for low rectal cancer. Material and Methods: Prospective study to describe one consecutive series of robotic-assisted laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancer at Department of Digestive Surgery of Cho Ray hospital. Results: Between October 2017 and June 2018, robotic-assisted laparoscopic resection with total mesorectal excision has performed on 15 consecutive patients with rectal cancer at Cho Ray hospital. The mean age was 50. Male/ female ratio was 2.75/1. The types of procedures performed were: 13 low anterior resections (LAR), 1 intersphincteric resection with coloanal anastomosis, and 1 abdominoperineal resection (APR). The overall mean operation time was 240 minutes. None of the cases was converted to open procedure. Mean harvested lymph nodes were 12. There was no surgical morbidity or mortality. On the postoperative day 1 and 2, mean visual analog scale (VAS) scores were 3.5. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.5 days. Conclusion: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic resection for low rectal cancer is a feasible and safe procedure with acceptable oncological results.

scholarly journals Comparison between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer: a single institutional retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tadahiro Kojima ◽  
Hitoshi Hino ◽  
Akio Shiomi ◽  
Hiroyasu Kagawa ◽  
Yusuke Yamaoka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Anterior Resection ◽  
Low Anterior Resection ◽  
Multivariate Analyses ◽  
Anal Verge ◽  
Intersphincteric Resection ◽  
Low Rectal Cancer ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Robotic Assisted Surgery

Abstract Background Sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer include low anterior resection and intersphincteric resection. In low anterior resection, the distal rectum is divided by a transabdominal approach, which is technically demanding. In intersphincteric resection, a perineal approach is performed. We aimed to evaluate whether robotic-assisted surgery is technically superior to laparoscopic surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer. The frequency of conducting low anterior resection by a specific procedure can indicate the technical superiority of that procedure for ultra-low rectal cancer. Thus, we compared the frequency of low anterior resection between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgery in cases of sphincter-preserving operations. Methods We investigated 183 patients who underwent sphincter-preserving robotic-assisted or laparoscopic surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer (lower border within 5 cm of the anal verge) between April 2010 and March 2020. The frequency of low anterior resection was compared between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgeries. The clinicopathological factors associated with an increase in performing low anterior resection were analyzed by multivariate analyses. Results Overall, 41 (22.4%) and 142 (77.6%) patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic-assisted surgery, respectively. Patient characteristics were similar between the groups. Low anterior resection was performed significantly more frequently in robotic-assisted surgery (67.6%) than in laparoscopic surgery (48.8%) (p = 0.04). Multivariate analyses showed that tumor distance from the anal verge (p < 0.01) and robotic-assisted surgery (p = 0.02) were significantly associated with an increase in the performance of low anterior resection. The rate of postoperative complications or pathological results was similar between the groups. Conclusions Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted surgery significantly increased the frequency of low anterior resection in sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer. Robotic-assisted surgery has technical superiority over laparoscopic surgery for ultra-low rectal cancer treatment.

Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: results of a single high-volume center in Japan

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (12) ◽  
pp. 1755-1762 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomohiro Yamaguchi ◽  
Yusuke Kinugasa ◽  
Akio Shiomi ◽  
Hiroyasu Kagawa ◽  
Yushi Yamakawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
High Volume Center ◽  
Short And Long Term
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document