Robotic vs laparoscopic rectal tumour surgery: a cohort study

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare robotic and laparoscopic rectal surgery in terms of perioperative data, short-term outcome and compliance to the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol. In this cohort study, 224 patients scheduled for rectal resection for cancer or adenoma between January 2011 and January 2017 were evaluated. In the first time period (12 January 2011 to 23 April 2014), 47 (46%) of 102 patients had laparoscopic surgery. In the second time period (24 April 2014 to30 January 2017), 72 (59%) of 122 patients hadrobotic surgery. Perioperative data and short-term outcome were collected from the ERAS database and patient charts. Data obtained from laparoscopic and robotic surgery in the two time periods studied were compared. Primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS) and secondary outcomes were compliance to the ERAS protocol, difference in postoperative complications and conversion to open surgery. Compliance to the ERAS protocol was 81.1% in the robotic group and 83.4% in the laparoscopic group (P=0.890). Robotic surgery was associated with shorter median LOS (3days vs 7days, P<0.001), lower conversion rate (11.1% vs 34.0%, P=0.002), lower rate of postoperative complications (25% vs 49%, P<0.01) and longer duration of surgery (5.8h vs 4.5h, P<0.001). The differences remained after multivariate analysis. Robotic surgery was associated with shorter LOS, lower conversion rates and fewer postoperative complications compared with laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery may add benefits to the ERAS protocol.