Comparison of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer

Abstract

Objective To compare the short-term efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic sphincterotomy for low rectal cancer and to investigate the safety and feasibility of robotic sphincterotomy. Methods The characteristics of patients underwent robot-assisted or laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer were retrospectively collected from October 2015 to October 2017 in Gansu Provincial Hospital. Compared the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative laparotomy, first ventilation time, postoperative hospital stays, complications, distance from the distant margin of the tumor, number of positive circumferential resection margins, number of lymph nodes removed, and other outcoms between two groups. Results The liquid diet time, first ventilation time and postoperative hospital stays of the robot group were shorter than the laparoscopic group (P<0.05). The intraoperative blood loss in the robot group was more than the laparoscopic group (P<0.05). There were no significant difference between two groups in postoperative complications or operation time. The total cost of the robotic group was higher than the laparoscopic group (P<0.001). Conclusions Robotic sphincterotomy for low rectal cancer is safe and feasible. Compared with laparoscopic surgery, the robotic surgery had rapider recovery of bowel function, shorter hospital stays, and more reliable short-term efficacy in oncology. Robotic sphincterotomy may be an effective treatment for the low rectal cancer. Key words: Rectal neoplasms; Robotic surgery; Laparoscopy surgery; Intersphincteric resection