Literature DB >> 33711141

Urogenital function following robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: meta-analysis.

C A Fleming1,2, C Cullinane1, N Lynch1, S Killeen1, J C Coffey2,3,4, C B Peirce2,3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mixed results are reported on clinical and cancer outcomes in laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery (LRCS) compared with robotic rectal cancer surgery (RRCS). However, more favourable functional outcomes are reported following RRCS. This study compared urinary and sexual function following RRCS and LRCS in male and female patients.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of urinary and sexual function after RRCS and LRCS was performed following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines, and registered prospectively with PROSPERO (ID:CRD42020164285). The functional outcome reporting tools most commonly included: the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) and Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). Mean scores and changes in mean scores from baseline were analysed using RevMan version 5.3.
RESULTS: Ten studies were included reporting on 1286 patients. Some 672 patients underwent LRCS, of whom 380 (56.5 per cent) were men and 116 (17.3 per cent) were women (gender not specified in 176 patients, 26.2 per cent). A total of 614 patients underwent RRCS, of whom 356 (58.0 per cent) were men and 83 (13.5 per cent) were women (gender not specified in 175 patients, 28.5 per cent). Regarding urinary function in men at 6 months after surgery, IPSS scores were significantly better in the RRCS group than in the LRCS group (mean difference (MD) -1.36, 95 per cent c.i. -2.31 to -0.40; P = 0.005), a trend that persisted at 12 months (MD -1.08, -1.85 to -0.30; P = 0.007). ΔIIEF scores significantly favoured RRCS at 6 months [MD -3.11 (95%CI -5.77, -0.44) P <0.021] and 12 months [MD -2.76 (95%CI -3.63, -1.88) P <0.001] post-operatively. Mixed urinary and sexual function outcomes were reported for women.
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis identified more favourable urinary and erectile function in men who undergo robotic compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Outcomes in women did not identify a consistently more favourable outcome in either group. As robotic rectal cancer surgery may offer more favourable functional outcomes it should be considered and discussed with patients.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33711141     DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znaa067

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  7 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: better promote postoperative sexual and urinary function of a propensity-matched study.

Authors:  Fang-Hai Han; Sheng-Ning Zhou; Guang-Yu Zhong; Jia-Nan Tan; Jing Huang; Han Gao; Zhi-Tao Chen; Jian-Kun Zhu; Shi-Lin Zhi; Jin-Tao Zeng; Bin Yang
Journal:  Am J Cancer Res       Date:  2022-07-15       Impact factor: 5.942

3.  Using a modified Delphi process to explore international surgeon-reported benefits of robotic-assisted surgery to perform abdominal rectopexy.

Authors:  T Keating; C A Fleming; A E Brannigan
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2022-08-20       Impact factor: 3.699

4.  Analysis of bowel function, urogenital function, and long-term follow-up outcomes associated with robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgical approaches to total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Bo Yang; Shangxin Zhang; Xiaodong Yang; Yigao Wang; Deguan Li; Jian Zhao; Yongxiang Li
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 3.253

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

Review 6.  Robotic Surgery in Rectal Cancer: Potential, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Authors:  Ge Liu; Shoujia Zhang; Yan Zhang; Xiaoqing Fu; Xinlu Liu
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2022-04-18

Review 7.  Current status and role of robotic approach in patients with low-lying rectal cancer.

Authors:  Hyo Seon Ryu; Jin Kim
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 1.766

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.