Literature DB >> 31400185

Successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer - a systematic review.

P S Waters1, F P Cheung1, O Peacock1, A G Heriot1, S K Warrier1, D S O'Riordain2, S Pillinger3, A C Lynch1, A R L Stevenson4.   

Abstract

AIM: Minimally invasive surgical approaches for cancer of the right colon have been well described with significant patient and equivalent oncological benefits. Robotic surgery has advanced in its ability to provide multi-quadrant abdominal access, leading the surgical community to widen its application outside of the pelvis to other abdominal compartments. Globally it is being realized that a patient's surgical episode of care is becoming the epicentre of cancer treatment. In order to establish the role of robotic surgery in a patient's episode of care, 'successful patient-oriented surgical' parameters in right hemicolectomy for malignancy were measured. The objective was to examine the rates of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH) compared to laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) for cancer.
METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid: 1946-present), PubMed (NCBI), Embase (Ovid: 1966-present) and Cochrane Library was conducted using PRISMA for parameters of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in RRH and LRH for malignancy alone. The parameters measured included postoperative ileus, anastomotic complication, surgical wound infection, length of stay (LOS), incisional hernia rate, conversion to open, margin status, lymph node harvest and overall morbidity and mortality.
RESULTS: There were 15 studies which included 831 RRH patients and 3241 LRH patients, with a median age of 62-74 years. No study analysed the concept of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative ileus, with less time to first flatus in RRH (2.0-2.7 days, compared with 2.5-4.0 days, P < 0.05). Anastomotic leak rate in one study reported a significant increase in LRH compared to RRH (P < 0.05, 0% vs 8.3%). Significantly decreased LOS following RRH was outlined in six studies. One study reported a significantly higher rate of incisional hernias following LRH with extracorporeal anastomoses compared to RRH with intracorporeal anastomoses. Overall rates of conversion to open surgery were less with RRH (0%-3.9% vs 0%-18%, P < 0.001, 0.05). One study outlined significantly higher rates of incomplete resection with an open right hemicolectomy compared with minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic resections, with positive margin rates of 2.3%, 0.9% and 0% respectively (P < 0.001). Two studies reported significantly higher lymph node harvest in RRH (P < 0.05). Overall morbidity and 30-day mortality were comparable in both approaches.
CONCLUSION: Thirty-day morbidity and mortality were comparable between the two approaches, with patients undergoing RRH having lower anastomotic complications, increased lymph node harvest, and reduced LOS, conversion to open and incisional hernia rates in a number of studies. There are limited data on surgical approach and impact on quality of life and what patients deem successful surgical outcomes. There is a further need for a randomized controlled trial examining successful patient-oriented outcomes in right hemicolectomy for malignancy. Colorectal Disease
© 2019 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.

Entities:  

Keywords:  laparoscopic right hemicolectomy; right hemicolectomy; robotic surgery; successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes

Year:  2019        PMID: 31400185     DOI: 10.1111/codi.14822

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 1462-8910            Impact factor:   3.788


  8 in total

1.  Predictors and Consequences of Unplanned Conversion to Open During Robotic Colectomy: An ACS-NSQIP Database Analysis.

Authors:  Andrew N Mueller; John D Vossler; Nicholas H Yim; Gregory J Harbison; Kenric M Murayama
Journal:  Hawaii J Health Soc Welf       Date:  2021-11

2.  Improved perioperative outcomes and reduced inflammatory stress response in malignant robot-assisted colorectal resections: a retrospective cohort study of 298 patients.

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

3.  Tunnel versus medial approach in laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy for right colon cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Xijie Zhang; Junli Zhang; Pengfei Ma; Yanghui Cao; Chenyu Liu; Sen Li; Zhi Li; Yuzhou Zhao
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a case-matched study.

Authors:  Enda Hannan; Gerard Feeney; Mohammad Fahad Ullah; Claire Ryan; Emma McNamara; David Waldron; Eoghan Condon; John Calvin Coffey; Colin Peirce
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-08-02

Review 5.  Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Leonardo Solaini; Antonio Bocchino; Andrea Avanzolini; Domenico Annunziata; Davide Cavaliere; Giorgio Ercolani
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 2.796

6.  Major colorectal resection is feasible using a new robotic surgical platform: the first report of a case series.

Authors:  F Dixon; R O'Hara; N Ghuman; J Strachan; A Khanna; B D Keeler
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2020-11-06       Impact factor: 3.781

Review 7.  Short-term outcomes in robot-assisted compared to laparoscopic colon cancer resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Pedja Cuk; Mie Dilling Kjær; Christian Backer Mogensen; Michael Festersen Nielsen; Andreas Kristian Pedersen; Mark Bremholm Ellebæk
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Simultaneous Robot Assisted Colon and Liver Resection for Metastatic Colon Cancer.

Authors:  Matthew McGuirk; Mahir Gachabayov; Aram Rojas; Agon Kajmolli; Shekhar Gogna; Katie W Gu; Qian Qiuye; Xiang Da Dong
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2021 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.