BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that robotic assistance (RARS) could provide better intraoperative and short-term outcomes than a traditional laparoscopic approach (LARS) to rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature, including electronic searches and communications to international robotic meetings. INCLUSION CRITERIA: studies involving rectal cancer patients and comparing outcomes of robotic surgery vs laparoscopic surgery. Primary end-points: conversion and postoperative short-term complications. Meta-analysis performed using Review Manager 5.0 software. RESULTS: Five case-control studies involving 486 patients (203 RARS-283 LARS) were finally included. Conversion to open rate (RR = 0.31; 95% CI 0.12,0.78) was lower for RARS. No differences were found in oncological outcomes, hospital stay or anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of available non-randomized studies suggests that conversion to open rate may be reduced when using RARS instead of LARS for rectal cancer.
BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that robotic assistance (RARS) could provide better intraoperative and short-term outcomes than a traditional laparoscopic approach (LARS) to rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature, including electronic searches and communications to international robotic meetings. INCLUSION CRITERIA: studies involving rectal cancerpatients and comparing outcomes of robotic surgery vs laparoscopic surgery. Primary end-points: conversion and postoperative short-term complications. Meta-analysis performed using Review Manager 5.0 software. RESULTS: Five case-control studies involving 486 patients (203 RARS-283 LARS) were finally included. Conversion to open rate (RR = 0.31; 95% CI 0.12,0.78) was lower for RARS. No differences were found in oncological outcomes, hospital stay or anastomotic leakage. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of available non-randomized studies suggests that conversion to open rate may be reduced when using RARS instead of LARS for rectal cancer.
Authors: Juan C Rodríguez-Sanjuán; Marcos Gómez-Ruiz; Soledad Trugeda-Carrera; Carlos Manuel-Palazuelos; Antonio López-Useros; Manuel Gómez-Fleitas Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2016-02-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-11-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Anuradha R Bhama; Vincent Obias; Kathleen B Welch; James F Vandewarker; Robert K Cleary Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Rosa M Jiménez-Rodríguez; Mercedes Rubio-Dorado-Manzanares; José Manuel Díaz-Pavón; M Luisa Reyes-Díaz; Jorge Manuel Vazquez-Monchul; Ana M Garcia-Cabrera; Javier Padillo; Fernando De la Portilla Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2016-10-06 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Rosa M Jiménez Rodríguez; Fernando De la Portilla De Juan; José M Díaz Pavón; Alberto Rodríguez Rodríguez; Emilio Prendes Sillero; Jean Marie Cadet Dussort; Javier Padillo Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 2.571