Robotic- <i>vs</i> laparoscopic-assisted proctectomy for locally advanced rectal cancer based on propensity score matching: Short-term outcomes at a colorectal center in China

Ye, Shanping; Zhu, Weiquan; Liu, Dongning; Xiong, Lei; Jiang, Qunguang; Hu, Huimin; Tang, Bo; He, Peng; Gao, Gengmei; Tang, Hechun; Shi, Jun; Li, Taiyuan

doi:10.4251/wjgo.v12.i4.424

Cited by 14 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Surgical site infection and anastomotic leak rates were not shown to be different between the robotic and laparoscopic surgery groups for rectal cancer in the ROLARR randomized clinical trial [29] . The results from this international, multi-institutional study support the findings of four other independent studies demonstrating no significant difference between the two arms [9,11,30,31] .…”

Section: Surgical Infection and Anastomotic Leaksupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Two prospective studies, as well as a meta-analysis, failed to show a major difference in male urinary symptoms at multiple time points postoperatively when comparing the two surgical techniques [29,34,36,37] . Other studies revealed only minor differences regarding an earlier return to baseline function, or shorter time to catheter removal [30,35] .…”

Section: Urogenital/sexual Functionmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Robotic or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer - which is the best answer? a comprehensive review of non-oncological outcomes and learning curve

Kavalukas¹,

Ghuman²,

Sharp³

et al. 2020

Mini-invasive Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much effort has been spent evaluating the difference between robotic and laparoscopic surgery platforms for rectal cancer. There is a plethora of literature comparing outcomes for intraoperative events, postoperative complications, long term outcomes, cost, and learning curve. The data are conclusive regarding the higher cost of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopic surgery. This article is a comprehensive review of the available literature regarding intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. For practically all parameters evaluated, there are no significant differences between the two platforms. The ultimate decision on whether to perform robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery should be based on surgeon preference and familiarity with equipment, as well as local resources.

show abstract

Section: Surgical Infection and Anastomotic Leaksupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Urogenital/sexual Functionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Robotic or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer - which is the best answer? a comprehensive review of non-oncological outcomes and learning curve

Kavalukas¹,

Ghuman²,

Sharp³

et al. 2020

Mini-invasive Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Besides, surgeons who preferred laparoscopic and robotic surgeries emphasized follow-up more. These minimally invasive procedures have been increasing in China recently [21]. Several randomized controlled trials indicated that minimally invasive surgeries showed satis ed short-term and long-term survival, but with less evidence on functional performance [22,23].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Awareness and Knowledge of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (Lars) in Colorectal Surgeons: A Cross-sectional Survey

Hou

Liu

Guo

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background More than 50% patients suffered from low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after low anterior resection, and their quality of life is predominantly determined by colorectal surgeons’ awareness and knowledge of LARS. We conducted the survey to find out the weakness in the management of patients' functional recovery after surgery and explore targeted training pathways to improve doctor’s ability to deal with LARS. Methods An anonymous paper-based survey among colorectal surgeons was performed across the country. Results 252 questionnaires were collected and analyzed with the effective rate of 86.6%. Most of the respondents were highly educated and experienced in gastroenterology. The mean age was 39.9 ± 9.20 years. In multivariate Logistic regression analysis, surgeons with MD, PhD degree (OR: 2.843, 95%CI: 1.441-5.609, p = 0.003) and national academic membership (OR: 2.063, 95%CI: 1.010-4.214, p = 0.047) were associated with surgeons’ emphasis on follow-up. 65.1% of respondents underestimated the prevalence of LARS. Chief/deputy chief, national academic membership and annual surgeries ≥ 50 (42.7% vs 29.4%, p=0.033; 46.4% vs 30.0%, p=0.007; 46.0% vs 31.6%, p=0.021) were associated with high diagnostic rate of LARS but none of these factors were statistically significant in multivariate analysis. LARS score was the most popular scale in the evaluation of LARS severity. The feedback of the most common postoperative anorectal disorders by colorectal surgeons was significantly different from the items listed in the LARS score. 48.4% of respondents use drugs to treat LARS but therapies varied from surgeons to surgeons. Conclusions There is a lack of knowledge relating to LARS in colorectal surgeons. Clinical guidelines should be developed to guide medical staff in effective management of patients with LARS.

show abstract

“…Robotic surgery for rectal cancer has been promoted as an improved minimally invasive procedure due to the flexibility of the da Vinci robot for operating in confined spaces such as the pelvis. Some prospectively randomized studies have shown that the clinical outcomes of robotic surgical resection of rectal cancer are similar to those of laparoscopic and open surgery[ 62 - 69 ]. There is also literature confirming that robotic rectal cancer surgery is closely associated with better short-term outcomes than laparoscopic surgery, and it has advantages in protecting the pelvic nerves, resulting in fewer short-term postoperative complications and shorter hospital stays[ 70 , 71 ].…”

Section: Application Status Of Robotic Surgical Systems In Gastrointestinal Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of minimally invasive techniques in gastrointestinal surgery: Current status and future perspectives

Ye¹,

Zhu²,

Huang³

et al. 2021

WJGS

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer has remained high. Currently, surgical resection is still the most effective method for treating gastrointestinal cancer. Traditionally, radical surgery depends on open surgery. However, traditional open surgery inflicts great trauma and is associated with a slow recovery. Minimally invasive surgery, which aims to reduce postoperative complications and accelerate postoperative recovery, has been rapidly developed in the last two decades; it is increasingly used in the field of gastrointestinal surgery and widely used in early-stage gastrointestinal cancer. Nevertheless, many operations for gastrointestinal cancer treatment are still performed by open surgery. One reason for this may be the challenges of minimally invasive technology, especially when operating in narrow spaces, such as within the pelvis or near the upper edge of the pancreas. Moreover, some of the current literature has questioned oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for gastrointestinal cancer. Overall, the current evidence suggests that minimally invasive techniques are safe and feasible in gastrointestinal cancer surgery, but most of the studies published in this field are retrospective studies and case-matched studies. Large-scale randomized prospective studies are needed to further support the application of minimally invasive surgery. In this review, we summarize several common minimally invasive methods used to treat gastrointestinal cancer and discuss the advances in the minimally invasive treatment of gastrointestinal cancer in detail.

show abstract

Robotic- vs laparoscopic-assisted proctectomy for locally advanced rectal cancer based on propensity score matching: Short-term outcomes at a colorectal center in China

Cited by 14 publications

References 34 publications

Robotic or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer - which is the best answer? a comprehensive review of non-oncological outcomes and learning curve

Robotic or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer - which is the best answer? a comprehensive review of non-oncological outcomes and learning curve

Awareness and Knowledge of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (Lars) in Colorectal Surgeons: A Cross-sectional Survey

Role of minimally invasive techniques in gastrointestinal surgery: Current status and future perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About