scholarly journals Robotic Surgery for Colon and Rectal Cancer

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eun Jung Park ◽  
Seung Hyuk Baik
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer

Robotic Surgery for Colon and Rectal Cancer: Current Status, Recent Advances, and Future Directions

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajit Pai ◽  
George Melich ◽  
Slawomir J. Marecik ◽  
John J. Park ◽  
Leela M. Prasad
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Recent Advances ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer

scholarly journals Recent advances in robotic surgery for colon and rectal cancer: Review article

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Hosny mubarak ◽  
Hamdy Mohammed Hussein ◽  
Mohamed Ahmed Omar ◽  
Mohammed M. Mubarak
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Recent Advances ◽  
Cancer Review ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer

A Population-Based Study of 90-Day Hospital Cost and Utilization Associated With Robotic Surgery in Colon and Rectal Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 245 ◽  
pp. 136-144
Author(s):  
Carla F. Justiniano ◽  
Adan Z. Becerra ◽  
Zhaomin Xu ◽  
Christopher T. Aquina ◽  
Courtney I. Boodry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Hospital Cost ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Day Hospital ◽  
Population Based Study ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer

scholarly journals Difference in surgical outcomes of rectal cancer by study design: meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials, case-matched studies, and cohort studies

BJS Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
N Hoshino ◽  
T Sakamoto ◽  
K Hida ◽  
Y Takahashi ◽  
H Okada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Anastomotic Leakage ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Postoperative Mortality ◽  
Resection Margins ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background RCTs are considered the standard in surgical research, whereas case-matched studies and propensity score matching studies are conducted as an alternative option. Both study designs have been used to investigate the potential superiority of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. However, no conclusion has been reached regarding whether there are differences in findings according to study design. This study aimed to examine similarities and differences in findings relating to robotic surgery for rectal cancer by study design. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL to identify RCTs, case-matched studies, and cohort studies that compared robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Primary outcomes were incidence of postoperative overall complications, incidence of anastomotic leakage, and postoperative mortality. Meta-analyses were performed for each study design using a random-effects model. Results Fifty-nine articles were identified and reviewed. No differences were observed in incidence of anastomotic leakage, mortality, rate of positive circumferential resection margins, conversion rate, and duration of operation by study design. With respect to the incidence of postoperative overall complications and duration of hospital stay, the superiority of robotic surgery was most evident in cohort studies (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95 per cent c.i. 0.74 to 0.92, P < 0.001; mean difference (MD) –1.11 (95 per cent c.i. –1.86 to –0.36) days, P = 0.004; respectively), and least evident in RCTs (RR 1.12, 0.91 to 1.38, P = 0.27; MD –0.28 (–1.44 to 0.88) days, P = 0.64; respectively). Conclusion Results of case-matched studies were often similar to those of RCTs in terms of outcomes of robotic surgery for rectal cancer. However, case-matched studies occasionally overestimated the effects of interventions compared with RCTs.

scholarly journals Experiences of a “COVID protected” robotic surgical centre for colorectal and urological cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy R. Huddy ◽  
Matthew Crockett ◽  
A Shiyam Nizar ◽  
Ralph Smith ◽  
Manar Malki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Standard Operating Procedure ◽  
Major Surgery ◽  
Renal Surgery ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Acute Hospitals ◽  
Da Vinci Si

AbstractThe recent COVID-19 pandemic led to the cancellation of elective surgery across the United Kingdom. Re-establishing elective surgery in a manner that ensures patient and staff safety has been a priority. We report our experience and patient outcomes from setting up a “COVID protected” robotic unit for colorectal and renal surgery that housed both the da Vinci Si (Intuitive, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) and the Versius (CMR Surgical, Cambridge, UK) robotic systems. “COVID protected” robotic surgery was undertaken in a day-surgical unit attached to the main hospital. A standard operating procedure was developed in collaboration with the trust COVID-19 leadership team and adapted to national recommendations. 60 patients underwent elective robotic surgery in the initial 10-weeks of the study. This included 10 colorectal procedures and 50 urology procedures. Median length of stay was 4 days for rectal cancer procedures, 2 days less than prior to the COVID period, and 1 day for renal procedures. There were no instances of in-patient coronavirus transmission. Six rectal cancer patients waited more than 62 days for their surgery because of the initial COVID peak but none had an increase T-stage between pre-operative staging and post-operative histology. Robotic surgery can be undertaken in “COVID protected” units within acute hospitals in a safe way that mitigates the increased risk of undergoing major surgery in the current pandemic. Some benefits were seen such as reduced length of stay for colorectal patients that may be associated with having a dedicated unit for elective robotic surgical services.

scholarly journals German oncology certification system for colorectal cancer – relative survival rates of a single certified centre vs. national and international registry data

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximilian Richter ◽  
Lena Sonnow ◽  
Amir Mehdizadeh-Shrifi ◽  
Axel Richter ◽  
Rainer Koch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
International Comparison ◽  
Cancer Registry ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Relative Survival ◽  
Registry Data ◽  
Cancer Registry Data ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer

Abstract Objectives To evaluate how the certification of specialised Oncology Centres in Germany affects the relative survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) by means of national and international comparison. Methods Between 2007 and 2013, 675 patients with colorectal cancer, treated at the Hildesheim Hospital, an academic teaching hospital of the Hannover Medical School (MHH), were included. A follow-up of the entire patient group was performed until 2014. To obtain international data, a SEER-database search was done. The relative survival of 148,957 patients was compared to our data after 12, 36 and 60 months. For national survival data, we compared our rates with 41,988 patients of the Munich Cancer Registry (MCR). Results Relative survival at our institution tends to be higher in advanced tumour stages compared to national and international cancer registry data. Nationally we found only little variation in survival rates for low stages CRC (UICC I and II), colon, and rectal cancer. There were notable variations regarding relative survival rates for advanced CRC tumour stages (UICC IV). These variations were even more distinct for rectal cancer after 12, 36 and 60 months (Hildesheim Hospital: 89.9, 40.3, 30.1%; Munich Cancer Registry (MCR): 65.4, 28.7, 16.6%). The international comparison of CRC showed significantly higher relative survival rates for patients with advanced tumour stages after 12 months at our institution (77 vs. 54.9% for UICC IV; raw p<0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest that patients with advanced tumour stages of CRC and especially rectal cancer benefit most from a multidisciplinary and guidelines-oriented treatment at Certified Oncology Centres. For a better evaluation of cancer treatment and improved national and international comparison, the creation of a centralised national cancer registry is necessary.

scholarly journals Factors in prognosis of colon and rectal cancer

Cancer ◽  
1971 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 213-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oliver H. Beahrs ◽  
Peter M. Sanfelippo
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer

Practice Guideline for the Surveillance of Patients After Curative Treatment of Colon and Rectal Cancer

2015 ◽  
Vol 58 (8) ◽  
pp. 713-725 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott R. Steele ◽  
George J. Chang ◽  
Samantha Hendren ◽  
Marty Weiser ◽  
Jennifer Irani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Practice Guideline ◽  
Curative Treatment ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document