Literature DB >> 30171509

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Sphincter-Saving Surgery: Results of a Single-Center Series of 400 Consecutive Patients and Perspectives.

Philippe Rouanet1, Martin Marie Bertrand2, Marta Jarlier3, Anne Mourregot2, Drissa Traore2, Christophe Taoum2, Hélène de Forges4, Pierre-Emmanuel Colombo2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare robotic total mesorectal excision (R-TME) with laparoscopic TME (L-TME) in a series of consecutive rectal cancer patients.
BACKGROUND: R-TME and L-TME have drawn contradictory reports. A recent phase III trial (ROLARR) concluded that R-TME performed by surgeons with varying experience did not confer an advantage in rectal cancer resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective single-center cohort study (8/2008 to 4/2015), data were prospectively registered. A total of 200 L-TME and 200 R-TME were operated consecutively without selection. The primary outcome was the conversion rate to open laparotomy or transanal TME. The secondary endpoints were type of anastomosis, operative time, postoperative morbidity, circumferential radial (CRM) and distal margins, quality of life, bladder and sexual dysfunction, and oncological outcomes.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Type of anastomosis [colo-anal anastomosis (CAA) 40% vs 49%; p < 0.001], transanal TME (5% vs 13%; p = 0.005), and conversion rate (2% vs 9.5%; odd ratio (OR): 0.19 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05-0.60]) were significantly different. Intersphincteric resection (39% vs 47%), diverting stoma (66.5% vs 68%), CRM involvement, median operative time (243 vs 232 min), and R0 resection rate were similar. Conversion risk was lower for R-TME in male patients and those with small tumors (< 5 cm). The 3-year overall survival rate was 84.1% [77.3-88.9%] and 88.4% [82.9-92.2%] in the R-TME and L-TME group. No significant differences were reported in quality of life, and urinary or sexual function.
CONCLUSIONS: R-TME is less likely to be converted to open surgery than L-TME; operative time and curative pathologic criteria are equivalent. Future prospective trial should compare standardized procedures performed by experienced surgeons for subgroups of high-risk patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30171509     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-018-6738-5

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


  11 in total

Review 1.  [Evidence in minimally invasive oncological surgery of the colon and rectum].

Authors:  Carolin Kastner; Joachim Reibetanz; Christoph-Thomas Germer; Armin Wiegering
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2021-04       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  A seven-step dissection technique for robotic total mesorectal excision of rectal cancer.

Authors:  M Numata; S Sawazaki; K Kazama; T Aoyama; H Tamagawa; T Sato; H Mushiake; N Yukawa; M Shiozawa; M Masuda; Y Rino
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2019-09-15       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 3.  New Frontiers in Management of Early and Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Jordan R Wlodarczyk; Sang W Lee
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-14       Impact factor: 6.639

4.  Robotic rectal resection: oncologic outcomes.

Authors:  Claudio Fiorillo; Giuseppe Quero; Roberta Menghi; Caterina Cina; Vito Laterza; Davide De Sio; Fabio Longo; Sergio Alfieri
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2020-11-10

5.  Robotic surgery contributes to the preservation of bowel and urinary function after total mesorectal excision: comparisons with transanal and conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Takuya Miura; Yoshiyuki Sakamoto; Hajime Morohashi; Akiko Suto; Shunsuke Kubota; Aika Ichisawa; Daisuke Kuwata; Takahiro Yamada; Hiroaki Tamba; Shuntaro Matsumoto; Kenichi Hakamada
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-04-21       Impact factor: 2.030

6.  Combined robotic approach and enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for optimization of costs in patients undergoing proctectomy.

Authors:  P Rouanet; A Mermoud; M Jarlier; N Bouazza; A Laine; H Mathieu Daudé
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2020-04-30

7.  Time interval between the completion of radiotherapy and robotic-assisted surgery among patients with stage I-III rectal cancer undergoing preoperative chemoradiotherapy.

Authors:  Ching-Wen Huang; Wei-Chih Su; Tzu-Chieh Yin; Po-Jung Chen; Tsung-Kun Chang; Yen-Cheng Chen; Ching-Chun Li; Yi-Chien Hsieh; Hsiang-Lin Tsai; Jaw-Yuan Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-16       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  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

Review 9.  Ultimate Functional Preservation With Intersphincteric Resection for Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Maxime Collard; Jérémie H Lefevre
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 10.  Role of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Kurt A Melstrom; Andreas M Kaiser
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.