Prior abdominal open surgery does not impair outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a case-control study in 367 patients

Despite there already being many studies on robotic surgery as a minimally invasive approach for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, the use of this technique for stage III disease is still poorly described. These are the preliminary results of our prospective study on the safety and effectiveness of robotic approaches in patients with locally advanced NSCLC in terms of postoperative complications and oncological outcomes. Since 2016, we prospectively investigated 19 consecutive patients with NSCLC stage IIIA-pN2 (diagnosed by EBUS-TBNA) who underwent lobectomy and radical lymph node dissection with robotic approaches after induction treatment. Furthermore, we matched a case-control study with 46 patients treated with open surgery during the same period of time, with similar age, comorbidities, clinical stage and tumor size. The individual matched population was composed of 16 robot-assisted thoracic surgeries and 16 patients who underwent open surgery. The median time range of resection was inferior in the open group compared to robotic lobectomy (243 vs. 161 min; p < 0.001). Lymph node resection and positivity were not significantly different (p = 0.96 and p = 0.57, respectively). Moreover, no difference was observed for PFS (p = 0.16) or OS (p = 0.41). In conclusion, we demonstrated that the early outcomes and oncological results of N2-patients after robotic lobectomy were similar to those who had open surgery. Considering the advantages of minimally invasive surgery, robot-assisted lobectomy appears to be a safe approach to patients with locally advanced diseases.

Download Full-text

A case-control study to compare the variability of operating time in laparoscopic and open surgery

Human Reproduction ◽

10.1093/humrep/14.6.1467 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 14 (6) ◽

pp. 1467-1469 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Asher Shushan ◽

Hossam Mohamed ◽

Adam L. Magos

Keyword(s):

Open Surgery ◽

Case Control Study ◽

Operating Time ◽

Case Control ◽

Control Study

Download Full-text

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a case-control study

Radiology and Oncology ◽

10.2478/raon-2021-0026 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 0 (0) ◽

Author(s):

Jan Grosek ◽

Jurij Ales Kosir ◽

Primoz Sever ◽

Vanja Erculj ◽

Ales Tomazic

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Lymph Nodes ◽

Open Surgery ◽

Case Control Study ◽

Reoperation Rate ◽

Case Control ◽

Robotic Group ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Colorectal Resections ◽

Control Study

Abstract Background Robotic resections represent a novel approach to treatment of colorectal cancer. The aim of our study was to critically assess the implementation of robotic colorectal surgical program at our institution and to compare it to the established laparoscopically assisted surgery. Patients and methods A retrospective case-control study was designed to compare outcomes of consecutively operated patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic colorectal resections at a tertiary academic centre from 2019 to 2020. The associations between patient characteristics, type of operation, operation duration, conversions, duration of hospitalization, complications and number of harvested lymph nodes were assessed by using univariate logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 83 operations met inclusion criteria, 46 robotic and 37 laparoscopic resections, respectively. The groups were comparable regarding the patient and operative characteristics. The operative time was longer in the robotic group (p < 0.001), with fewer conversions to open surgery (p = 0.004), with less patients in need of transfusions (p = 0.004) and lower reoperation rate (p = 0.026). There was no significant difference between the length of stay (p = 0.17), the number of harvested lymph nodes (p = 0.24) and the overall complications (p = 0.58). Conclusions The short-term results of robotic colorectal resections were comparable to the laparoscopically assisted operations with fewer conversions to open surgery, fewer blood transfusions and lower reoperation rate in the robotic group.

Download Full-text