Tina Fransgaard1, Ismail Pinar2, Lau Caspar Thygesen3, Ismail Gögenur4. 1. Zealand University Hospital, Department of Surgery, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Køge, Denmark. Electronic address: tifer@regionsjaelland.dk. 2. Zealand University Hospital, Department of Surgery, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Køge, Denmark. 3. National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Studiestræde 6, 1455 Copenhagen K, Denmark. 4. Zealand University Hospital, Department of Surgery, Lykkebækvej 1, 4600 Køge, Denmark; Institute for Clinical Medicine, Copenhagen University and Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resection quality after robot-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer have not previously been investigated in a nationwide study. The aim of the study was to examine the resection quality in robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Furthermore, 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and conversion to open surgery were investigated. METHODS: Patients undergoing either laparoscopic or robot-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2015 were included. The primary outcome was whether R0 resection was achieved. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and conversions to laparotomy. RESULTS: A total of 8615 and 3934 patients had a diagnosis of colon cancer and rectal cancer respectively. Of the patients with colon cancer, 511 patients underwent robot-assisted surgery and of the patients with rectal cancer, 706 patients underwent robot-assisted surgery. In the multivariate analysis, patients with colon cancer had an odds ratio (OR) = 0.63 (95%CI 0.45-0.88) for receiving R0 resection in the robot-assisted group compared to laparoscopy. For patients with rectal cancer, the OR was 1.20 (95%CI 0.89-1.61). No difference in 30-day mortality or postoperative complications were observed. The OR of conversion to laparotomy was lower in the robot-assisted group compared to the laparoscopic group in both patients with colon - and rectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed significant lower odds of receiving R0 resection in patients with colon cancer undergoing robot-assisted surgery. In patients with rectal cancer the robot-assisted surgery non-significantly increased the odds of receiving R0 resection.
BACKGROUND: Resection quality after robot-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer have not previously been investigated in a nationwide study. The aim of the study was to examine the resection quality in robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Furthermore, 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and conversion to open surgery were investigated. METHODS:Patients undergoing either laparoscopic or robot-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2015 were included. The primary outcome was whether R0 resection was achieved. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and conversions to laparotomy. RESULTS: A total of 8615 and 3934 patients had a diagnosis of colon cancer and rectal cancer respectively. Of the patients with colon cancer, 511 patients underwent robot-assisted surgery and of the patients with rectal cancer, 706 patients underwent robot-assisted surgery. In the multivariate analysis, patients with colon cancer had an odds ratio (OR) = 0.63 (95%CI 0.45-0.88) for receiving R0 resection in the robot-assisted group compared to laparoscopy. For patients with rectal cancer, the OR was 1.20 (95%CI 0.89-1.61). No difference in 30-day mortality or postoperative complications were observed. The OR of conversion to laparotomy was lower in the robot-assisted group compared to the laparoscopic group in both patients with colon - and rectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The study showed significant lower odds of receiving R0 resection in patients with colon cancer undergoing robot-assisted surgery. In patients with rectal cancer the robot-assisted surgery non-significantly increased the odds of receiving R0 resection.
Authors: Pedja Cuk; Randi Maria Simonsen; Mirjana Komljen; Michael Festersen Nielsen; Per Helligsø; Andreas Kristian Pedersen; Christian Backer Mogensen; Mark Bremholm Ellebæk Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2021-05-22 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Kuo Chen; Jin Zhang; Narasimha M Beeraka; Mikhail Y Sinelnikov; Xinliang Zhang; Yu Cao; Pengwei Lu Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 4.241