A L Lightner1,2, F Grass3, N P McKenna3, M Tilman3, A Alsughayer3, S R Kelley3, K Behm3, A Merchea4, D W Larson3. 1. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Lightna@ccf.org. 2. Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. Lightna@ccf.org. 3. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 4. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive approaches have become the standard of care for ileal pouch-anal anastomoses (IPAA). There are few reports comparing outcomes following a laparoscopic versus robotic approach. Our aim was to determine if there were any differences in the 30-day postoperative outcomes following IPAA performed laparoscopically versus robotically. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all laparoscopic and robotic IPAA performed between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2018 was carried out. Patients included were adult patients who underwent a proctectomy and IPAA utilizing either a laparoscopic or robotic approach. Data collected included patient demographics, operative variables, and 30-day postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients had a minimally invasive IPAA; 58 were performed laparoscopically and 74 robotically. Less than half the patients were female (n = 55; 41.7%) with a median age of 37 years (range 18-68 years). The majority of patients had a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (n = 103; 78.0%) with medically refractory disease (n = 87; 65.9%). A greater proportion of patients in the laparoscopic cohort had a prolonged length of stay (n = 27; 46.6% versus n = 18; 24.3%; p < 0.001) and a two-stage approach (n = 56; 96.6% versus n = 37; 50%; p < 0.001), but there were no differences in the rates between the laparoscopic versus robotic cohorts of superficial surgical site infection (6.9% versus 6.8%; p = 0.99), peripouch abscess (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), anastomotic leak (6.9% versus 2.7%; p = 0.21), pelvic abscess (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), and pelvic sepsis (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), readmission (24.1% versus 17.6%; p = 0.35) or reoperation (6.9% versus 5.4%; p = 0.72). On multivariable analysis, only male sex remained predictive of prolonged length of stay, and a robotic approach trended toward a decreased rate of prolonged length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic and robotic IPAA have equivalent postoperative morbidity underscoring the safety of the continued expansion of the robotic platform for pouch surgery.
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive approaches have become the standard of care for ileal pouch-anal anastomoses (IPAA). There are few reports comparing outcomes following a laparoscopic versus robotic approach. Our aim was to determine if there were any differences in the 30-day postoperative outcomes following IPAA performed laparoscopically versus robotically. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all laparoscopic and robotic IPAA performed between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2018 was carried out. Patients included were adult patients who underwent a proctectomy and IPAA utilizing either a laparoscopic or robotic approach. Data collected included patient demographics, operative variables, and 30-day postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients had a minimally invasive IPAA; 58 were performed laparoscopically and 74 robotically. Less than half the patients were female (n = 55; 41.7%) with a median age of 37 years (range 18-68 years). The majority of patients had a diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (n = 103; 78.0%) with medically refractory disease (n = 87; 65.9%). A greater proportion of patients in the laparoscopic cohort had a prolonged length of stay (n = 27; 46.6% versus n = 18; 24.3%; p < 0.001) and a two-stage approach (n = 56; 96.6% versus n = 37; 50%; p < 0.001), but there were no differences in the rates between the laparoscopic versus robotic cohorts of superficial surgical site infection (6.9% versus 6.8%; p = 0.99), peripouch abscess (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), anastomotic leak (6.9% versus 2.7%; p = 0.21), pelvic abscess (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), and pelvic sepsis (15.5% versus 6.8%; p = 0.11), readmission (24.1% versus 17.6%; p = 0.35) or reoperation (6.9% versus 5.4%; p = 0.72). On multivariable analysis, only male sex remained predictive of prolonged length of stay, and a robotic approach trended toward a decreased rate of prolonged length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic and robotic IPAA have equivalent postoperative morbidity underscoring the safety of the continued expansion of the robotic platform for pouch surgery.
Authors: Julie Flynn; Jose T Larach; Joseph C H Kong; Satish K Warrier; Alexander Heriot Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2021-02-20 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: G Pellino; D S Keller; G M Sampietro; M Carvello; V Celentano; C Coco; F Colombo; A Geccherle; G Luglio; M Rottoli; M Scarpa; G Sciaudone; G Sica; L Sofo; R Zinicola; S Leone; S Danese; A Spinelli; G Delaini; F Selvaggi Journal: Tech Coloproctol Date: 2020-03-02 Impact factor: 3.781
Authors: Dorcas Opoku; Alexander Hart; Dakota T Thompson; Catherine G Tran; Mohammed O Suraju; Jeremy Chang; Sonja Boatman; Alexander Troester; Paolo Goffredo; Imran Hassan Journal: Surg Open Sci Date: 2022-05-20
Authors: C Romeo; D Di Fabrizio; P Impellizzeri; S Arena; V Dipasquale; F Palo; S Costa; S Pellegrino; P Antonuccio; C Romano; G Mattioli Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2021-09-29 Impact factor: 1.827
Authors: Giorgio Bianchi; Paschalis Gavriilidis; Aleix Martínez-Pérez; Gian Luigi de'Angelis; Mathieu Uzzan; Iradj Sobhani; Federico Coccolini; Carlo Alberto Schena; Maria Clotilde Carra; Giuseppe Spinoglio; Nicola de'Angelis Journal: Front Surg Date: 2022-08-17