Literature DB >> 22434245

A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery.

Jeong Yeon Kim1, Nam-Kyu Kim, Kang Young Lee, Hyuk Hur, Byung Soh Min, Jang Hwan Kim.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the protection of the urogenital function after robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (R-TME) for rectal cancer compared to those of laparoscopic TME (L-TME).
METHODS: 69 patients who underwent L-TME (n = 39) or R-TME (n = 30) were prospectively enrolled. Their urogenital function was evaluated by uroflowmetry, a standard questionnaire of the international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and the international index of erectile function (IIEF) before surgery and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The pre- and postoperative IPSS and IIEF scores were compared to detect functional deterioration by paired t test for each group. How postoperative IPSS and IIEF scores and uroflowmetry data deviated from the preoperative values (Δ) were statistically compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: The IPSS score significantly increased 1 month after surgery; the recovery from decreased urinary function took 6 months for patients in the L-TME group (8.2 ± 6.3; P = 0.908) but 3 months in the R-TME group (8.36 ± 5.5; P = 0.075). The ΔIPSS scores were significantly different between the two groups at 3 months (P = 0.036). In male patients (L-TME 20, R-TME 18), the total IIEF score in R-TME and L-TME significantly decreased 1 month after surgery, L-TME gradually recovered over 12 months (46.00 ± 16.9; P = 0.269), but R-TME recovered within 6 months (44.61 ± 13.76; P = 0.067). The ΔIIEF score value was not significantly different at any time between the two groups, but in an itemized analysis of the change in erectile function and sexual desire, there were significant differences at 3 months between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: R-TME for rectal cancer is associated with earlier recovery of normal voiding and sexual function compared to patients who underwent L-TME, although this result needs to be verified by larger prospective comparative studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22434245     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2262-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  120 in total

1.  Robotic-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: short-term outcomes at a single center.

Authors:  Tomohiro Yamaguchi; Yusuke Kinugasa; Akio Shiomi; Hiroyuki Tomioka; Hiroyasu Kagawa; Yushi Yamakawa
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 2.549

2.  Robot-assisted surgery for the radical treatment of deep infiltrating endometriosis with colorectal involvement: short- and mid-term surgical and functional outcomes.

Authors:  Luca Morelli; Alessandra Perutelli; Matteo Palmeri; Simone Guadagni; Maria Donatella Mariniello; Gregorio Di Franco; Vito Cela; Benedetta Brundu; Maria Giovanna Salerno; Giulio Di Candio; Franco Mosca
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 3.  Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current status and perspectives.

Authors:  Roberto Biffi; Fabrizio Luca; Paolo Pietro Bianchi; Sabina Cenciarelli; Wanda Petz; Igor Monsellato; Manuela Valvo; Maria Laura Cossu; Tiago Leal Ghezzi; Kassem Shmaissany
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; Anthony J Senagore; Justin K Lawrence; Brad J Champagne; Conor P Delaney
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-08-31       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  [Robotic colorectal surgery: current status and future developments].

Authors:  D Jayne
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  The end of robot-assisted laparoscopy? A critical appraisal of scientific evidence on the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Jeroen Heemskerk; Nicole D Bouvy; Cor G M I Baeten
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  No differences in short-term morbidity and mortality after robot-assisted laparoscopic versus laparoscopic resection for colonic cancer: a case-control study of 263 patients.

Authors:  Neel Maria Helvind; Jens Ravn Eriksen; Anders Mogensen; Buket Tas; Jesper Olsen; Mads Bundgaard; Henrik Loft Jakobsen; Ismail Gögenür
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-02-07       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Use of robotics in colon and rectal surgery.

Authors:  Michael J Pucci; Alec C Beekley
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2013-03

9.  Cholecystectomy using the Revo-i robotic surgical system from Korea: the first clinical study.

Authors:  Jin Hong Lim; Woo Jung Lee; Seung Ho Choi; Chang Moo Kang
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2020-09-16

10.  Phosphodiesterase-5 Inhibitors and Vacuum Erection Device for Penile Rehabilitation After Laparoscopic Nerve-Preserving Radical Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: A Prospective Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Haijun Deng; Dong Liu; Xiangming Mao; Xiaoliang Lan; Hao Liu; Guoxin Li
Journal:  Am J Mens Health       Date:  2016-08-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.