Literature DB >> 26749061

Does robotics improve minimally invasive rectal surgery? Functional and oncological implications.

Francesco Guerra1, Benedetta Pesi1, Stefano Amore Bonapasta1, Federico Perna1, Michele Di Marino1, Mario Annecchiarico1, Andrea Coratti1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Robot-assisted surgery has been reported to be a safe and effective alternative to conventional laparoscopy for the treatment of rectal cancer in a minimally invasive manner. Nevertheless, substantial data concerning functional outcomes and long-term oncological adequacy is still lacking. We aimed to assess the current role of robotics in rectal surgery focusing on patients' functional and oncological outcomes.
METHODS: A comprehensive review was conducted to search articles published in English up to 11 September 2015 concerning functional and/or oncological outcomes of patients who received robot-assisted rectal surgery. All relevant papers were evaluated on functional implications such as postoperative sexual and urinary dysfunction and oncological outcomes.
RESULTS: Robotics showed a general trend towards lower rates of sexual and urinary postoperative dysfunction and earlier recovery compared with laparoscopy. The rates of 3-year local recurrence, disease-free survival and overall survival of robotic-assisted rectal surgery compared favourably with those of laparoscopy.
CONCLUSIONS: This study fails to provide solid evidence to draw definitive conclusions on whether robotic systems could be useful in ameliorating the outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. However, the available data suggest potential advantages over conventional laparoscopy with reference to functional outcomes.
© 2016 Chinese Medical Association Shanghai Branch, Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, Renji Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  erectile dysfunction; general surgery; laparoscopy; rectal neoplasms; robotics, treatment outcome

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26749061     DOI: 10.1111/1751-2980.12312

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dig Dis        ISSN: 1751-2972            Impact factor:   2.325


  6 in total

1.  Systematic review of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Christoph Holmer; Martin E Kreis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Oncological Outcomes After Robotic Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: Analysis of a Prospective Database.

Authors:  Tarik Sammour; Songphol Malakorn; Brian K Bednarski; Harmeet Kaur; Ui Sup Shin; Craig Messick; Yi-Qian Nancy You; George J Chang
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 3.  Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic technique for the treatment of left-sided colonic diverticular disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Giuseppe Giuliani; Francesco Guerra; Diego Coletta; Antonio Giuliani; Lucia Salvischiani; Angela Tribuzi; Giuseppe Caravaglios; Alfredo Genovese; Andrea Coratti
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  Feasibility of robotic resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors along the entire gastrointestinal tract.

Authors:  Francesco Guerra; Claudia Paolini; Alessandra Vegni; Silvia Gasperoni; Jacopo Desiderio; Amilcare Parisi; Andrea Coratti
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2018-07-17

5.  Functional outcomes after laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted rectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  K F Kowalewski; L Seifert; S Ali; M W Schmidt; S Seide; C Haney; C Tapking; A Shamiyeh; Y Kulu; T Hackert; B P Müller-Stich; F Nickel
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Do People Trust in Robot-Assisted Surgery? Evidence from Europe.

Authors:  Joan Torrent-Sellens; Ana Isabel Jiménez-Zarco; Francesc Saigí-Rubió
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-11-28       Impact factor: 3.390

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.