Robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: technique and short-term outcome for 29 consecutive patients

Leong, Quor Meng; Son, Dong Nyoung; Cho, Jae S.; Baek, Se Jin; Kwak, Jungwon; Amar, A. H. Y.; Kim, Seon H.

doi:10.1007/s00464-011-1657-6

Cited by 58 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…the docking time was reported in 4 studies with a median of 9.6 minutes. 23,36,37,42 the operating time still represents a disadvantage of robotic surgery; however, it might be overcome with an increased experience.…”

Section: Conversion Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Does Robotic Rectal Cancer Surgery Offer Improved Early Postoperative Outcomes?

Scarpinata¹,

Aly²

2013

Diseases of the Colon &Amp; Rectum

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Conversion Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Does Robotic Rectal Cancer Surgery Offer Improved Early Postoperative Outcomes?

Scarpinata¹,

Aly²

2013

Diseases of the Colon &Amp; Rectum

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although Baik et al reported that serious complication rates were significantly lower with robotic surgery (5.4 %) compared with laparoscopic surgery (19.3 %) [15], complication rates did not differ between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries in other reports [9,11,14,16,19,25]. The results of meta-analyses have demonstrated that there is no difference in complication rates [20][21][22][23].…”

Section: Perioperative Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…A number of reports have demonstrated a longer operation time with robotic surgery [9,[11][12][13], whereas others have reported no difference in operation time between robotic and laparoscopic surgeries [14][15][16][17][18]. Patriti et al reported a shorter operation time for robotic rectal resection; however, they are minority in this regard [19].…”

Section: Operation Timementioning

confidence: 98%

Recent advances in robotic surgery for rectal cancer

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robotic technology, which has recently been introduced to the field of surgery, is expected to be useful, particularly in treating rectal cancer where precise manipulation is necessary in the confined pelvic cavity. Robotic surgery overcomes the technical drawbacks inherent to laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer through the use of multi-articulated flexible tools, three-dimensional stable camera platforms, tremor filtering and motion scaling functions, and greater ergonomic and intuitive device manipulation. Assessments of the feasibility and safety of robotic surgery for rectal cancer have reported similar operation times, blood loss during surgery, rates of postoperative morbidity, and circumferential resection margin involvement when compared with laparoscopic surgery. Furthermore, rates of conversion to open surgery are reportedly lower with increased urinary and male sexual functions in the early postoperative period compared with laparoscopic surgery, demonstrating the technical advantages of robotic surgery for rectal cancer. However, long-term outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery for rectal cancer have not been fully evaluated yet; therefore, large-scale clinical studies are required to evaluate the efficacy of this new technology.

show abstract

“…Baek and colleagues reported a series of 64-stage I-III cancer patients, who underwent robotic TME, where there were no positive circumferential margins; however, adequacy of the TME specimen was not reported 19 . Several series of robotic TME suggest adequate short-term outcomes, with operative times in the neighbourhood of 300 minutes, low or zero positive margin rates and acceptable rates of anastomotic leak of 7%-10% 9,20 . A comparative study for TME found no difference in short-term outcomes or oncologic adequacy of the resected specimen compared to laparoscopic TME 21 .…”

Section: Rectal Resection and Total Mesorectal Excisionmentioning

confidence: 99%