BACKGROUND: As the use of a surgical robot allows for improved dexterity and visual field, we successfully conducted transabdominal intersphincteric resection (ISR) and perineal coloanal anastomosis for a very low lying rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility of this procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight patients underwent robotic-assisted transabdominal ISR with coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancers. The surgical procedures included 5 steps: colonic mobilization with ligation of inferior mesenteric vessels, total mesorectal excision, intersphincteric dissection with rectal transection, specimen retrieval, and coloanal anastomosis. RESULTS: The median operation time was 210 minutes, and the median estimated blood loss was 40.0 mL. The hypogastric nerve and pelvic nerve plexus was preserved in all patients. No intraoperative-related or robotic system-related morbidities were observed. In all patients, R0 resection was achieved, and the quality of the total mesorectal excision was optimal. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic transabdominal ISR is a safe operation with an expectation of future advances in pathologic quality and functional preservation. Additional work in a larger series of patients is necessary to refine this technique and to establish its efficacy.
BACKGROUND: As the use of a surgical robot allows for improved dexterity and visual field, we successfully conducted transabdominal intersphincteric resection (ISR) and perineal coloanal anastomosis for a very low lying rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility of this procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight patients underwent robotic-assisted transabdominal ISR with coloanal anastomosis for low rectal cancers. The surgical procedures included 5 steps: colonic mobilization with ligation of inferior mesenteric vessels, total mesorectal excision, intersphincteric dissection with rectal transection, specimen retrieval, and coloanal anastomosis. RESULTS: The median operation time was 210 minutes, and the median estimated blood loss was 40.0 mL. The hypogastric nerve and pelvic nerve plexus was preserved in all patients. No intraoperative-related or robotic system-related morbidities were observed. In all patients, R0 resection was achieved, and the quality of the total mesorectal excision was optimal. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic transabdominal ISR is a safe operation with an expectation of future advances in pathologic quality and functional preservation. Additional work in a larger series of patients is necessary to refine this technique and to establish its efficacy.