Literature DB >> 34244856

Defining benchmarks for robotic-assisted low anterior rectum resection in low-morbid patients: a multicenter analysis.

Jan-Hendrik Egberts1,2, Jan-Niclas Kersebaum3, Benno Mann4, Heiko Aselmann5, Markus Hirschburger6, Julia Graß7, Thomas Becker3, Jakob Izbicki7, Daniel Perez7.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To define the best possible outcomes for robotic-assisted low anterior rectum resection (RLAR) using total mesorectal excision (TME) in low-morbid patients, performed by expert robotic surgeons in German robotic centers. The benchmark values were derived from these results.
METHODS: The data was retrospectively collected from five German expert centers. After patient exclusion (prior surgery, extended surgery, no prior anastomosis, hand-sewn anastomosis), the benchmark cohort was defined (n = 226). The median with interquartile range was first calculated for the individual centers. The 75th percentile of the median results was defined as the benchmark cutoff and represents the "perfect" achievable outcome. This applied to all benchmark values apart from lymph node yield, where the cutoff was defined as the 25th percentile (more lymph nodes are better).
RESULTS: The benchmark values for conversion and intraoperative complication rates were ≤ 4.0% and ≤ 1.4%, respectively. For postoperative complications, the benchmark was ≤ 28% for "any" and ≤ 18.0% for major complications. The R0 and complete TME rate benchmarks were both 100%, with a lymph node yield of > 18. The benchmark for rate of anastomotic insufficiency was < 12.5% and 90-day mortality was 0%. Readmission rates should not exceed 4%.
CONCLUSION: This outcome analysis of patients with low comorbidity undergoing RLAR may serve as a reference to evaluate surgical performance in robotic rectum resection.
© 2021. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Benchmarking; RLAR; Rectal cancer; Rectum resection; Robotic low anterior rectum resection; Robotic surgery

Year:  2021        PMID: 34244856     DOI: 10.1007/s00384-021-03988-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 0179-1958            Impact factor:   2.571


  9 in total

1.  Defining Benchmarks for Major Liver Surgery: A multicenter Analysis of 5202 Living Liver Donors.

Authors:  Fabian Rössler; Gonzalo Sapisochin; GiWon Song; Yu-Hung Lin; Mary Ann Simpson; Kiyoshi Hasegawa; Andrea Laurenzi; Santiago Sánchez Cabús; Milton Inostroza Nunez; Andrea Gatti; Magali Chahdi Beltrame; Ksenija Slankamenac; Paul D Greig; Sung-Gyu Lee; Chao-Long Chen; David R Grant; Elizabeth A Pomfret; Norihiro Kokudo; Daniel Cherqui; Kim M Olthoff; Abraham Shaked; Juan Carlos García-Valdecasas; Jan Lerut; Roberto I Troisi; Martin De Santibanes; Henrik Petrowsky; Milo A Puhan; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Standardized technique for single-docking robotic rectal surgery.

Authors:  J Ahmed; N Siddiqi; L Khan; A Kuzu; A Parvaiz
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 3.788

Review 3.  Clinical, pathological, and oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.

Authors:  Caiwen Han; Peijing Yan; Wutang Jing; Meixuan Li; Binbin Du; Moubo Si; Jia Yang; Kehu Yang; Hui Cai; Tiankang Guo
Journal:  Asian J Surg       Date:  2020-01-18       Impact factor: 2.767

Review 4.  A meta-analysis to determine the oncological implications of conversion in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  C Clancy; D P O'Leary; J P Burke; H P Redmond; J C Coffey; M J Kerin; E Myers
Journal:  Colorectal Dis       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.788

5.  Robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer results in a significantly higher quality of TME specimen compared to the laparoscopic approach-report of a single-center experience.

Authors:  Heiko Aselmann; Jan-Niclas Kersebaum; Alexander Bernsmeier; Jan Henrik Beckmann; Thorben Möller; Jan Hendrik Egberts; Clemens Schafmayer; Christoph Röcken; Thomas Becker
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-07-04       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Impact of conversion on the long-term outcome in laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Albert C Y Chan; Jensen T C Poon; Joe K M Fan; Siu Hung Lo; Wai Lun Law
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-02-23       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Outcomes measures and risk adjustment.

Authors:  Meghan B Lane-Fall; Mark D Neuman
Journal:  Int Anesthesiol Clin       Date:  2013

8.  Conversion rate in 300 laparoscopic rectal resections and its influence on morbidity and oncological outcome.

Authors:  A Agha; A Fürst; I Iesalnieks; S Fichtner-Feigl; N Ghali; D Krenz; M Anthuber; K W Jauch; P Piso; H J Schlitt
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.571

9.  Total Neoadjuvant Therapy vs Standard Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anup Kasi; Saqib Abbasi; Shivani Handa; Raed Al-Rajabi; Anwaar Saeed; Joaquina Baranda; Weijing Sun
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2020-12-01
  9 in total
  2 in total

1.  Right colectomy from open to robotic - a single-center experience with functional outcomes in a learning-curve setting.

Authors:  Andreas Hecker; Martin Reichert; Markus Hirschburger; Rolf Schneider; Sophie Kraenzlein; Winfried Padberg
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  C-Reactive Protein as Predictor for Infectious Complications after Robotic and Open Esophagectomies.

Authors:  Florian Richter; Anne-Sophie Mehdorn; Thorben Fedders; Benedikt Reichert; Jan-Hendrik Egberts; Thomas Becker; Julius Pochhammer
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-09-26       Impact factor: 4.964

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.