Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resections for rectal and rectosigmoid cancer: an institutional experience

Donlon, Noel E; Nugent, Tim; Free, Ross; Hafeez, Adnan; Kalbassi, Resa; Neary, Paul; Ó’Ríordáin, D. S.

doi:10.1007/s11845-021-02625-z

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The RRR group recovers bowel function faster than the LRR group, and the LRR group's hospital stay is longer than the RRR group. Our findings are consistent with those of the prior study (17)(18)(19). Post-operative problems may impact longer hospital admissions in LRR, so we evaluate short-term 90-day outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

A retrospective study of post-operative complications and cost analysis in robotic rectal resection versus laparoscopic rectal resection

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRobotic rectal cancer surgery has proven to be a viable alternative to laparoscopic surgery in treating rectal cancer. This study assessed the short-term operative measures of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery.MaterialData was obtained retrospectively from July 2019 to November 2021. Patient demographics, pre-and post-operative features, initial bowel movement, length of hospital stay, and short-term postoperative outcomes such as harvested lymph node, sepsis, Clavien–Dindo Classification, and cost were evaluated.ResultsA total of 155 patients were treated for colorectal cancer, with 64 receiving robotic surgery and 91 receiving laparoscopic surgery. According to the Clavien–Dindo classification, there is a significant P < 0.05 between robotic and laparoscopic rectal surgery, with robotic having fewer patients in grade III-IV than laparoscopic. Despite this, laparoscopic surgery is associated with more sepsis patients (P < 0.05), and harvested lymph nodes are likewise associated with significant results.ConclusionWith respect to post-operative complication and cost analysis, our finding imply that robotic rectal resection achieves better-quality short-term outcome but more costly than laparoscopic as well as Clavien–Dindo classification plays a crucial role in assessing postoperative rectal cancer complications and considerably impacts the quality of life.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

A retrospective study of post-operative complications and cost analysis in robotic rectal resection versus laparoscopic rectal resection

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This could be because robotic surgery allows improved access to di cult to reach regions such as the narrow pelvis. Laparoscopic surgery on the other hand does not have this advantage and access to areas such as a narrower pelvis in the obese are more di cult [4,20]. In the ROLARR trial comparing robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, the conversion rate to open surgery was not statistically signi cant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A retrospective audit of Robotic versus Laparoscopic Anterior Resection for diverticular disease in a Single Surgeon’s Experience

Chiu

Chen

Guo

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose There has been a shift towards elective resection for recurrent or complicated diverticular disease to prevent recurrent episodes of diverticulitis. Our study aims to compare the outcomes in elective robotic and laparoscopic anterior resection for diverticular disease by a single surgeon experienced in both techniques. Method This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent elective anterior resections at the Nepean Public Hospital, Nepean Private Hospital, and Sydney Adventist Hospital (SAN) in the last 10 years. The single surgeon is an experienced surgeon who has performed laparoscopic anterior resections from January 2013 to December 2018; and mainly robotic anterior resections from January 2018 to July 2022. The primary outcome of this study was to determine if there were any differences in length of stay and post-operative complications in laparoscopic and robotic anterior resections. Secondary outcomes included operating time, rate of conversion to open surgery, and 30-day mortality and morbidity. Results 53 patients included in this study. There was no significant difference in conversion to open rates (p=0.528), mean operative time (p=0.095), stoma formation rates (p=0.528) and post-operative complication rates (0.609). Length of stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group (p=0.024), and a higher proportion of patients who had laparoscopic surgery stayed for ≥6 days (p=0.08). There were no anastomotic leakages, or 30-day mortality and morbidity. Conclusion Robotic anterior resection is a feasible approach in experienced hands and produces comparable results to laparoscopic anterior resection for diverticular disease in terms of length of stay, post-operative complications and operative timings.

show abstract

“…Surgical resection of the primary tumor is still the only curative method. Colorectal Surgery has changed with the advent of laparoscopic techniques and there is significant literature supporting its use over open surgery [13,14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic versus Open Rectosigmoid Cancer Resection: A comparative Study

Balbola

Elramah

Ibrahim

et al. 2022

International Journal of Medical Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Article informationBackground: Although widely performed the usefulness of Laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid and upper rectal cancer resection compared with open surgery has not been established sufficiently. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term, oncologic, outcomes of laparoscopic and open resection for recto-sigmoid and / or upper rectal cancer in the same time period. Patients and Methods: This prospective study included 50 patients with rectosigmoid and upper rectal cancer diseases, admitted to Al Azhar New Damietta University hospital and Damietta cancer Institute surgery departments between December 2016 and December 2018. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: [Group 1: "25 patients"] subjected to laparoscopic interventions, and [Group 2: "25 patients]" subjected to open surgery. Data were collected and Shortterm outcomes and long-term prognosis were analyzed. Results:The mean operative time was significantly increased in the LR group than OR group [LR 198.88± 18.7, OR 183.4± 20.5 minutes, p =0.01] as well as the hospital stay [LR 8.8± 2, OR 7.4± 2.9 days, p =0.013]. However, LR group was quicker to recover in term of mobilizing early, recovery of bowel function, and early toleration of diet and fluid and this difference was only statistically significant for oral fluid but not for diet [p= 0.078; 0.17 respectively]. There was no significant difference between both groups in tumor characteristics as locations, gross tumor morphology, staging, and distance to the distal margin. Also, both groups had comparable intraoperative and post-operative adverse events. Conclusion:Laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer and rectal cancer offers numerous advantages beyond aesthetics aspects and is possible and safe with comparable oncological clearance to open surgery and might be considered an option of care when both approaches are suitable.

show abstract

Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resections for rectal and rectosigmoid cancer: an institutional experience

Cited by 7 publications

References 45 publications

A retrospective study of post-operative complications and cost analysis in robotic rectal resection versus laparoscopic rectal resection

A retrospective study of post-operative complications and cost analysis in robotic rectal resection versus laparoscopic rectal resection

A retrospective audit of Robotic versus Laparoscopic Anterior Resection for diverticular disease in a Single Surgeon’s Experience

Laparoscopic versus Open Rectosigmoid Cancer Resection: A comparative Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About