Abstract

With increasing age, there is greater need for right-sided colonic resections than its left-sided counterparts. Older age is associated with limited physical and functional status, which carries greater operative risk. Improvements in robotic surgery questions its role, especially in older adults, compared with laparoscopy. The objective is to investigate whether robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH) is as safe and effective as laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LHR) in octogenarians (age >80years). Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Octogenarians who underwent elective RRH and LRH by the Tweed Colorectal Group over 5years. Complications within 30days, age, gender, smoking status, immunocompromised status, presence of diabetes, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score, preoperative Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, mFI-5 (modified frailty index), operative time, method of anastomosis, postoperative length of stay (LOS), need for rehabilitation, and short-term oncologic data using the TNM criteria were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis. Seventy-eight elective patients were included. LRH and RRH groups had similar median ages, gender distribution, and comorbidities. Across the entire cohort, 61.5% had no 30-day complications. RRH had nonsignificantly shorter operative time but significantly shorter LOS (5 vs 8days) and fewer minor complications (24.5% vs 34.5%). Major complications and overall complications were not significantly different between the groups. Lower ASA and ECOG status were associated with lower complication rates across both groups. Oncologic resection outcomes were similar for both approaches. RRH does not confer an increased risk of complications compared to LRH in the octogenarians and may be a viable alternative in the field of minimally invasive surgery for older patients. Future research should focus on intracorporeal anastomoses, as it is a potential confounder leading to the shorter inpatient LOS shown in our robotic group.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.