No abstract

Background. Robotic surgery has been recently used as a novel tool for rectal surgery. This study assessed the current evidence regarding the efficiency, safety, and potential advantages of robotic rectal surgery (RRS) compared with laparoscopic rectal surgery (LRS). Methods. We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases and performed a systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the 2 approaches. Results. Seven RCTs including a total of 1022 cases were identified. The conversion rate is significantly lower for RRS (odds ratio: 0.29; 95% confidence interval: 0.09 to 0.96; P = .04). The length of the distal margin was significantly shorter in the LRS group than in the RRS group (weighted mean difference: 0.60; 95% confidence interval: 0.09 to 1.10; P = .02). Perioperative complication rates, harvested lymph nodes, positive circumferential resection margins, complete total mesorectal excision, first flatus, and length of stay did not differ significantly between approaches ( P > .05). Conclusions. This meta-analysis indicates that RRS is a safe and effective approach. It is not inferior to LRS in terms of oncologic outcomes and postoperative complications. Future large-volume, well-designed RCTs with extensive follow-up are awaited to confirm and update the findings of this analysis.

Background. A substantial proportion of patients undergoing colorectal surgery receive a temporary stoma, and the timing for stoma closure remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of early stoma closure (ESC) compared with routine stoma closure (RSC) after colorectal surgery. Methods. We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials that compared ESC and RSC after colorectal surgery. Results. A total of 7 randomized controlled trials with 814 enrolled patients were identified for this meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the ESC and RSC groups regarding the complications of stoma closure (26.8% and 16.6%, respectively; odds ratio [OR]: 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-1.90; P = .17). A subgroup analysis was conducted by Clavien-Dindo grade of complication, and no significant difference was observed in any subgroup ( P > .05). However, the ESC group had a significantly higher risk of wound complications than the RSC group (17.6% and 7.8%, respectively; OR: 2.61; 95% CI: 1.43-4.76; P = .002), and the RSC group had more cases of small bowel obstruction than the ESC group (3.1% and 8.4%, respectively; OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.15-0.87; P = .02). Conclusions. ESC is a safe and effective therapeutic approach in patients who have undergone colorectal surgery; it is associated with a reduced risk of bowel obstruction but a higher risk of wound complications.

Mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) is evolutionally conserved and frequently activated in various tumors, including colorectal cancer (CRC). It has been reported that the ribosome assembly factor Urb1 acts downstream of mTORC1/raptor signaling and contributes to digestive organ development in zebrafish. Previously, we highlighted that URB1 was overexpressed in CRC. Here, we assessed the mTORC1/regulatory associated protein with mTOR (RAPTOR)‐URB1 axis in CRC tumorigenesis. We found that RAPTOR was overexpressed in CRC tissues and cell lines, was a favorable predictor in patients with CRC, and positively correlated with URB1. Silencing of RAPTOR suppressed CRC cell proliferation and migration and induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in vitro and inhibited xenograft growth in vivo. Moreover, ectopic overexpression of RAPTOR exerted an inverse biological phenotype. Knockdown of RAPTOR quenched mTORC1 activity and reduced the expression of URB1 and cyclinA2 (CCNA2). In contrast, overexpression of RAPTOR activated mTORC1 and upregulated URB1 and CCNA2. Furthermore, URB1 and CCNA2 expression were also impeded by rapamycin, which is a specific inhibitor of mTORC1. Thus, RAPTOR promoted CRC proliferation, migration, and cell cycle progression by inducing mTORC1 signaling and transcriptional activation of both URB1 and CCNA2. Taken together, we concluded that RAPTOR has the potential to serve as a novel biomarker and therapeutic target for CRC.