Robotic Colectomy Research Articles

Impact of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program on the management of complications after laparoscopic or robotic colectomy for cancer.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) reduces postoperative complications (POCs) after colorectal surgery; however, its impact on the management of POCs remains unclear. This study compared the diagnosis and management of POCs before and after implementing our ERAS protocol after laparoscopic or robotic colectomy for cancer and examined the short- and mid-term oncologic impacts. This single-center, retrospective study evaluated all consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic colectomy for cancer between 2012 and 2021, focusing on the incidence of POCs within 90 days. We compared outcomes before (standard group) and after (ERAS group) the implementation of our ERAS protocol in January 2016. Significantly fewer patients in the ERAS group developed POCs (standard vs. ERAS, 136 of 380 patients [35.8%] vs.136 of 660 patients [20.6%]; P<0.01). The ERAS group had a significantly shorter mean total length of stay after POCs (13.1 days vs. 11.4 days, P=0.04), and the rates of life-threatening complications (6.7% vs. 0.7%) and 1-year mortality (7.4% vs. 1.5%) were significantly lower in the ERAS group than in the standard group. Among patients with anastomotic complications, laparoscopic reoperation was significantly more common in the ERAS group than in the standard group (8.3% vs. 75.0%, P<0.01). Among patients with postoperative ileus, the diagnosis and recovery times were significantly shorter in the ERAS group than in the standard group, resulting in a shorter total length of stay (13.5 days vs. 10 days, P<0.01). The implementation of an ERAS protocol did not eliminate all POCs, but it did accelerate their diagnosis and management and improved patient outcomes.

Association of robotic surgery with early discharge, readmission, and complications in elective colectomy: an analysis of NSQIP data from 2012 to 2021.

Background Early discharge (ED) after colectomy has become a target outcome for multiple reasons, but the factors associated with ED are not well characterized. This study investigated the factors associated with ED and evaluated the impact of ED on overall outcome. Methods Data from ACS-NSQIP were used to identify patients who underwent non-emergent colectomy from 2012 to 2021. ED was defined as length of stay ≤ 2days. Unpaired t-tests, chi-square tests and adjusted multivariate logistic regression modeling were used to estimate associated factors for ED. Bounceback readmission was defined as readmission within 7days of discharge. Results In this cohort of 282,490 patients, 43,137 (15.3%) met the criteria for ED. Robotic colectomy (OR 14.35; 95% CI [13.63-15.12]) was more strongly associated with ED than any other patient characteristic, including laparoscopic colectomy (6.82 [6.51-7.14], ref open colectomy). ED vs. non-ED patients had lower rates of 30-day (5.84 vs. 10.37%, p < 0.01) and bounceback (3.56 vs. 5.75%, p < 0.01) readmissions, overall complications (5.65 vs. 18.63%, p < 0.01) and post-discharge complications (4.21 vs. 7.49%, p < 0.01). Conclusions Robotic surgery was the variable most strongly associated with ED, with greater odds of ED compared to both laparoscopic and open colectomy. Patients who had ED after robotic surgery had lower rates of complications and readmission compared to non-ED patients.

Surgical Outcomes and Utilization of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Techniques for Elective Colectomy in Asian American and Native Hawaiian-Pacific Islanders (AAPI) Diagnosed With Colon Cancer

IntroductionAsian American and Native Hawaiian-Pacific Islanders (AAPI) are the fastest growing racial-ethnic group, with 18.9 million people in 2019, and is predicted to rise to 46 million by 2060. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common cancer in AAPI men and the third most common in women. Treatment techniques like laparoscopic colectomy (LC) emerged as the standard of care for CRC resections; however, new robotic technologies can be advantageous. Few studies have compared clinical outcomes across minimally invasive approaches for AAPI patients with CRC. This study compares utilization and clinical outcomes of LC versus robotic colectomies (RCs) in AAPI patients. MethodsWe queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for elective RC and LC in AAPI patients from 2012 to 2020. Outcomes included unplanned conversion to open, operative time, complications, 30-d mortality, and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed the association between outcomes and the operative approach. ResultsBetween 2012 and 2020, 83,841 patients underwent elective LC or RC. Four thousand six hundred fifty-eight AAPI patients underwent 3817 (82%) LCs and 841 (18%) RCs. In 2012, all procedures were performed laparoscopically; by 2020, 27% were robotic. Mean operative time was shorter in LC (192 versus 249 min, P < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, there was no difference in infection (odds ratio [OR] 0.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.12), anastomotic leak (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.59-1.61), or death (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.31-2.61). Length of stay was shorter for RC (−0.44 d, 95% CI −0.71 to −0.18 d). ConclusionsOverall, AAPI postoperative outcomes are similar between LC and RC. Future studies that evaluate costs and resource utilization can assist hospitals in determining whether implementing robotic-assisted technologies in their hospitals and communities will be appropriate.

Comparison of outcomes after unplanned conversion for patients undergoing robotic when compared with laparoscopic colectomy.

The robotic approach improves the feasibility of minimally invasive colectomy even where there may be an anatomic challenge with laparoscopy. Whether a failure in completing colectomy with this newer technology is associated with worse consequences needs to be considered when evaluating the relative benefit of robotic colectomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate rates of conversion to open surgery after robotic and laparoscopic colectomy and whether outcomes after conversion vary after the two techniques since this has not been well studied. From the American College of Surgeons (ACS) - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) (2015-2016), patients who underwent elective minimally invasive colectomy were identified. Converted robotic were compared to laparoscopic procedures for patient demographics, co-morbidities; primary procedure and diagnosis, prolonged operation and postoperative complications. Of 36,046 colectomy procedures, 30,808 (85.5%) were laparoscopic, while 5238 (14.5%) were robotic-assisted. There were 3271 (9.1%) conversions to open surgery (laparoscopic: 2959 [9.6%]; robotic: 312 [6%]). Thirty-day postoperative surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, ileus, sepsis, bleeding requiring transfusion, urinary tract infection, reoperation; pulmonary, renal, cardiac/cerebrovascular complications; readmission, hospital stay, and mortality, were similar between the two groups. However, deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism was higher after robotic conversion (4.5% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.01). Conversion was lower after robotic when compared to laparoscopic colectomy. Converted patients had similar outcomes except for vein thromboembolism which was higher after robotic surgery. Robotic technology seems to improve the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery without negatively affecting safety and efficacy even when conversion is required.

An artificial intelligence-designed predictive calculator of conversion from minimally invasive to open colectomy in colon cancer

Minimally invasive surgery is safe and effective in colorectal cancer. Conversion to open surgery may be associated with adverse effects on treatment outcomes. This study aimed to assess risk factors of conversion from minimally invasive to open colectomy for colon cancer and impact of conversion on short-term and survival outcomes. This case–control study included colon cancer patients undergoing minimally invasive colectomy from the National Cancer Database (2015–2019). Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine independent predictors of conversion from laparoscopic and robotic colectomy to open surgery. 26,546 patients (mean age: 66.9 ± 13.1 years) were included. Laparoscopic and robotic colectomies were performed in 79.1% and 20.9% of patients, respectively, with a 10.6% conversion rate. Independent predictors of conversion were male sex (OR: 1.19, p = 0.014), left-sided cancer (OR: 1.35, p < 0.001), tumor size (OR: 1, p = 0.047), stage II (OR: 1.25, p = 0.007) and stage III (OR: 1.47, p < 0.001) disease, undifferentiated carcinomas (OR: 1.93, p = 0.002), subtotal (OR: 1.25, p = 0.011) and total (OR: 2.06, p < 0.001) colectomy, resection of contiguous organs (OR: 1.9, p < 0.001), and robotic colectomy (OR: 0.501, p < 0.001). Conversion was associated with higher 30- and 90-day mortality and unplanned readmission, longer hospital stay, and shorter overall survival (59.8 vs 65.3 months, p < 0.001). Male patients, patients with bulky, high-grade, advanced-stage, and left-sided colon cancers, and patients undergoing extended resections are at increased risk of conversion from minimally invasive to open colectomy. The robotic platform was associated with reduced odds of conversion. However, surgeons’ technical skills and criteria for conversion could not be assessed.

Ambulatory Robotic Colectomy: Factors Affecting and Affected by Postoperative Opioid Use.

The ongoing opioid crisis demands an investigation into the factors driving postoperative opioid use. Ambulatory robotic colectomies are an emerging concept in colorectal surgery, but concerns persist surrounding adequate pain control for these patients who are discharged very early. We sought to identify key factors affecting recovery room opioid use (ROU) and additional outpatient opioid prescriptions (AOP) after ambulatory robotic colectomies. This was a single-institution retrospective review of ambulatory robotic colon resections performed between 2019 and 2022. Patients were included if they discharged on the same day (SDD) or postoperative day 1 (POD1). Outcomes of interest included ROU [measured in parenteral morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs)], AOP (written between PODs 2 to 7), postoperative emergency department presentations, and readmissions. Two hundred nineteen cases were examined, 48 of which underwent SDD. The mean ROU was 29.4 MME, and 8.7% of patients required AOP. Between SDD and POD1 patients, there were no differences in postoperative emergency department presentations, readmissions, recovery opioid use, or additional outpatient opioid scripts. Older age was associated with a lower ROU (-0.54 MME for each additional year). Older age, a higher body mass index, and right-sided colectomies were also more likely to use zero ROU. Readmissions were strongly associated with lower ROU. Among SDD patients, lower ROU was also associated with higher rates of AOP. Ambulatory robotic colectomies and SDD can be performed with low opioid use and readmission rates. Notably, we found an association between low ROU and more readmission, and, in some cases, higher AOP. This suggests that adequate pain control during the postoperative recovery phase is a crucial component of reducing these negative outcomes.

The death of laparoscopy.

The introduction of laparoscopy in 1989 revolutionized surgical practices, reducing post-operative complications, and enhancing outcomes. Despite its benefits, limitations in laparoscopic tools have led to continued use of open surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery emerged to address these limitations, but its adoption trends and potential impact on open and laparoscopic surgery require analysis. A retrospective analysis used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) databases from 2012 to 2021. The study encompassed various abdominal procedures, employing Vector Autoregressive (VAR) models to analyze the dynamic relationships between surgical techniques. The models predicted future trends in open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery until Q2 of 2025. The analysis included 360,171 patients across diverse procedures. In urology, robotic surgery dominated prostatectomies (83.1% in 2021) and nephrectomies (55.1% in 2021), while the open approach remained the predominant surgical technique for cystectomies (72.5% in 2021). In general surgery, robotic colectomies were forecasted to surpass laparoscopy, becoming the primary approach by 2024 (45.7% in 2025). Proctectomies also showed a shift towards robotic surgery, predicted to surpass laparoscopy and open surgery by 2025 (32.3%). Pancreatectomies witnessed a steady growth in robotic surgery, surpassing laparoscopy in 2021, with forecasts indicating further increase. While hepatectomies remained predominantly open (70.0% in 2025), esophagectomies saw a rise in robotic surgery, predicted to become the primary approach by 2025 (52.3%). The study suggests a transformative shift towards robotic-assisted surgery, poised to dominate various minimally invasive procedures. The forecasts indicate that robotic surgery may surpass laparoscopy and open surgery in colectomies, proctectomies, pancreatectomies, and esophagectomies by 2025. This anticipated change emphasizes the need for proactive adjustments in surgical training programs to align with evolving surgical practices. The findings have substantial implications for future healthcare practices, necessitating a balance between traditional laparoscopy and the burgeoning role of robotic-assisted surgery.

Surgical and medical outcomes in robotic compared to laparoscopic colectomy global prospective cohort from the American college of surgeons national surgical quality improvement program.

Evidence regarding the outcomes benefits of robotic approach, when compared to a laparoscopic approach, in colectomy remain limited. This study aimed to analyze the value of robotic approach compared to laparoscopic approach in minimally invasive colectomy. Cohort study of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). This study included data from the NSQIP from 1/2016 to 12/2021. Adult patients undergoing minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic) colorectal surgery. Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Risk ratios for the incidence of medical and surgical morbidity and overall mortality. Compared to laparoscopic, robotic colectomy was associated with a significant decrease in postoperative morbidity [RR 0.84 (95%CI 0.72-0.96), P < 0.001], a significant reduction in postoperative mortality [RR 0.83 (95%CI 0.79-0.90), P 0.010)], and in post operative ileus [RR: 0.80 (95%CI 0.75-0.84), P < 0.001]. Yet, robotic approach was associated with a significant increase in total operative time despite a significant decrease in total length of stay. No benefit was observed regarding anastomotic leak. Observational nature of the study cannot exclude residual bias. In this prospective cohort from the NSQIP, robotic colectomy was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative ileus, unplanned conversion to open surgery, morbidity, and overall mortality when compared to laparoscopic colectomy.

Current Evidence of Single-Port Laparoscopic versus Single Port-Robotic Techniques in Colorectal Surgery: A Meta-Analysis.

Introduction: The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the operative outcomes of single-port laparoscopic versus single-port robotic platforms in colorectal surgery. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for studies comparing operative outcomes and short-term follow-up data of single-port laparoscopic versus single-port robotic colectomy. Data from eligible studies were extracted, qualitatively assessed, and included in a meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences with 95 per cent confidence intervals were calculated. Results: Three studies with a total of 346 patients (Robotic: 112 cases versus Laparoscopic: 234 cases) were included. There was no statistical difference noted with regard to overall morbidity, length of hospital stay and intra- and postoperative complications between the two groups. However, the robotic approach resulted in higher lymph nodes yield in oncologic cases (SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.01, p = 0.04, I2 = 0%). Conclusion: Both single-port laparoscopic and robotic techniques appear to be safe and feasible options in colorectal surgery displaying comparable perioperative outcomes. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to justify their application, particularly with regard to procedurerelated costs.

Short-term outcomes of single-incision robotic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer.

Since the da Vinci SP (dVSP) surgical system was introduced, single-incision robotic surgery (SIRS) for colorectal diseases has gained increasing acceptance. Comparison of the short-term outcomes between SIRS using dVSP and those of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CMLS) was performed to verify its efficacy and safety in colon cancer. The medical records of 237 patients who underwent curative resection for colon cancer by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to surgical modality: SIRS (RS group) and CMLS (LS group). Intra- and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Of the 237 patients, 140 were included in the analysis. Patients in the RS group (n = 43) were predominantly female, younger, and had better general performance than those in the LS group (n = 97). The total operation time was longer in the RS group than in the LS group (232.8 ± 46.0 vs. 204.1 ± 41.7min, P < 0.001). The RS group showed faster first flatus passing (2.5 ± 0.9 vs. 3.1 ± 1.2days, P = 0.003) and less opioid analgesic requirement (analgesic withdrawal within 3 postoperative days: 37.2% vs. 18.6%, P = 0.018) than the LS group. The RS group showed a higher immediate postoperative albumin level (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.6 ± 0.4g/dL, P < 0.001) and lower C-reactive protein level (6.6 ± 5.2 vs. 9.3 ± 5.5mg/dL, P = 0.007) than the LS group during the postoperative period. On multivariate analysis after adjusting for deviated patient characteristics, no significant difference was observed in short-term outcomes, except for operation time. SIRS with dVSP showed short-term outcomes comparable with those of CMLS for colon cancer.

A retrospective comparison of 90-day outcomes, length of stay, and readmissions between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic colectomy.

Investigations generally assess 30days of perioperative outcomes with robotic-assisted and laparoscopic colectomy. Outcomes beyond 30days serve as a quality metric of surgical services and an assessment of 90days of outcomes may have greater clinical utility. The purpose of this study was to assess 90days of outcomes, length of stay (LOS), and readmissions among patients who underwent a robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy using a national database. Patients undergoing either robotic-assisted or laparoscopic colectomy were identified using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes within PearlDiver, a national, inpatient records database from 2010 to 2019. Outcomes were defined using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) risk calculator and identified using International Classification of Disease (ICD) diagnosis codes. Categorical variables were compared using chi-square tests, and continuous variables were compared using paired t tests. Covariate-adjusted regression models were also constructed to evaluate these associations while accounting for potential confounders. A total of 82,495 patients were assessed in this study. At 90days, patients of the laparoscopic colectomy cohort experienced a higher rate of complications than patients who underwent robotic-assisted colectomy (9.5 vs. 6.6%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in LOS (6 vs. 6.5days, p = 0.08) and readmissions (6.1 vs. 6.7%, p = 0.851) at 90days. Patients undergoing robotic-assisted colectomy have a lower risk for morbidity at 90days. Neither approach is superior for LOS nor 90days of readmissions. Both techniques are effective minimally invasive procedures, yet patients may gain a greater risk benefit from robotic colectomy.

Robotic and laparoscopic colectomy: propensity score-matched outcomes from a national cancer database

Laparoscopic and robotic approaches to colonic cancer surgery appear to provide similar outcomes. The present study aimed to compare short-term and survival outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic colectomy for colonic cancer. This retrospective review of patients with stage I-III colonic cancer who underwent laparoscopic or robotic colonic resection was undertaken using data from the National Cancer Database (2013-2019). Patients were matched using the propensity score matching method. The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes included conversion to open surgery, duration of hospital stay, 30- and 90-day mortality, unplanned readmission, and positive resection margins. The original cohort included 40 457 patients with stage I-III colonic adenocarcinoma, with a mean(s.d.) age of 67.4(12.9) years. Some 33 860 (83.7 per cent) and 6597 (17.3 per cent) patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic colectomy respectively. After matching, 6210 patients were included in each group. Robotic colectomy was associated with marginally longer overall survival for women, and patients with a Charlson score of 0, stage II-III disease or left-sided tumours. The robotic group had a significantly lower rate of conversion (6.6 versus 11 per cent; P < 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (median 3 versus 4 days) than the laparoscopic group. The two groups had similar rates of 30-day mortality (1.3 versus 1 per cent for laparoscopic and robotic procedures respectively), 90-day mortality (2.1 versus 1.8 per cent), 30-day unplanned readmission (3.7 versus 3.8 per cent), and positive resection margins (2.8 versus 2.5 per cent). In this study population, robotic colectomy was associated with less conversion to open surgery and a shorter hospital stay compared with laparoscopic colectomy.

Safe implementation of robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis.

The robotic platform can overcome technical difficulties associated with laparoscopic colon surgery. Transitioning from laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) to robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) is associated with a learning phase. This study aimed at determining the length of this learning phase and its associated morbidity. We retrospectively analyzed all laparoscopic right colectomies with ECA (n = 38) and robotic right colectomies with ICA (n = 67) for (pre)malignant lesions performed by a single surgeon between January 2014 and December 2020. CUSUM-plot analysis of total procedure time was used for learning curve determination of robotic colectomies. Non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis. Compared to laparoscopy, the learning phase robotic right colectomies (n = 35) had longer procedure times (p < 0.001) but no differences in anastomotic leakage rate, length of stay or 30-day morbidity. Conversion rate was reduced from 16 to 3 percent in the robotic group. This study provides evidence that robotic right colectomy with ICA can be safely implemented without increasing morbidity.

Robotic Anastomotic Technique.

The first robotic colectomy was performed 20 years ago. Since that time, the robotic surgery platform has made significant advancements and become increasingly prevalent in colorectal surgery. The da Vinci Xi system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) and technology such as integrated table motion has facilitated multiquadrant procedures. Intracorporeal anastomoses (ICAs) have proven benefit in the literature, including decreased length of stay, decreased narcotic requirements, and lower rate of postoperative wound infections and hernias. Additional studies have shown a lower conversion to open rate in robotic surgery compared with laparoscopy. In this article, we will describe techniques for creation of robotic ICAs.

Robotic Approach is Associated With a Lower Conversion Rate Compared to Laparoscopic Approach for Patients Undergoing Colectomy for T4b Colon Cancer. An Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

We examined the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing open, laparoscopic, or robotic colectomy for T4b colon cancer, as well as the clinical factors associated with conversion to an open approach and its consequences on perioperative and oncologic outcomes. The National Cancer Database was queried for patients undergoing colectomy for cT4b colon cancer (2010-2016). Patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic colectomy were matched using Propensity-Score analysis. Factors associated with conversion to an open approach were assessed using Logistic-regression multivariable-analysis (MVA). Colectomy for cT4b colon cancer was performed in 9030 patients (open: n = 6,543, robotic: n = 157, laparoscopic: n = 2330). In the propensity-matched groups, robotic approach had lower rate of conversion (12% vs 37%, P < .001), shorter hospital stays (5 vs 7-days, P = .02), and similar overall-survival (5-yr: 49% vs 39%, P = .16), compared to laparoscopic approach. Conversion to an open approach was noted in 801(32%) of the patients undergoing minimally invasive surgical colectomy (robotic n = 23(15%), laparoscopic n = 778(33%). Factors associated with lower rate of conversion on multivariable-analysis included recent year of surgery (95% CI: 0.88-.97), robotic approach (95% CI: 0.22-.56), and surgeries performed in Academic hospitals (95% CI: 0.65-.96). Conversion to an open approach was associated with higher rate of positive parenchymal margin (31% vs 25%, P = .001), higher rate of 30-day readmission (12% vs 9.5%, P = .04), and similar overall survival (5-yr: 32% vs 35%, P = .19), compared to those who had no conversion. At the National level, patients undergoing colectomy for T4b colon cancer via a robotic approach had more favorable perioperative outcomes compared to laparoscopic approach. Conversion to an open approach did not compromise long term survival, despite being associated with higher rate of positive margins and readmissions rate.

Safety of robotic surgical management of non-elective colectomies for diverticulitis compared to laparoscopic surgery.

Non-elective minimally invasive surgery (MIS) remains controversial, with minimal focus on robotics. This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes for non-elective robotic colectomies for diverticulitis. All colectomies for diverticulitis in ACS-NSQIP between 2012 and 2019 were identified by CPT and diagnosis codes. Open and elective cases were excluded. Patients with disseminated cancer, ascites, and ventilator-dependence were excluded. Procedures were grouped by approach (laparoscopic and robotic). Demographics, operative variables, and postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. Covariates with p < .1 were entered into multivariable logistic regression models for 30day mortality, postoperative septic shock and reoperation. 6880 colectomies were evaluated (Laparoscopic = 6583, Robotic = 297). The laparoscopic group included more preoperative sepsis (31.6% vs. 10.8%), emergency cases (32.3% vs. 6.7%), and grade 3/4 wound classifications (53.3% vs. 42.8%). There was no difference in mortality, anastomotic leak, SSI, reoperation, readmission, or length of stay. The laparoscopic group had more postoperative sepsis (p = 0.001) and the robotic group showed increased bleeding (p = 0.011). In a multivariate regression model, increased age (OR = 1.083, p < 0.001), COPD (OR = 2.667, p = 0.007), dependent functional status (OR = 2.657, p = 0.021), dialysis (OR = 4.074, p = 0.016), preoperative transfusions (OR = 3.182, p = 0.019), emergency status (OR = 2.241, p = 0.010), higher ASA classification (OR = 3.170, p = 0.035), abnormal WBC (OR = 1.883, p = 0.046) were independent predictors for mortality. When controlling for confounders, robotic approach was not statistically significantly associated with septic shock or reoperation. When controlling for confounders, robotic approach was not a predictor for mortality, reoperation or septic shock. Robotic surgery is a feasible option for the acute management of diverticulitis.

Robotic colectomy with CME versus laparoscopic colon resection with or without CME for colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to compare the robotic complete mesocolon excision (RCME) to laparoscopic colectomy (LC) with (LCME) or without CME (LC non-CME) in postoperative outcomes, harvested lymph nodes and disease-free survival. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis according to PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR 2 guidelines. The literature search yielded seven comparative studies including 677 patients: 269 patients in the RCME group and 408 in the LC group. The pooled analysis concluded to a lower conversion rate in the RCME group (OR=0.17; 95% CI [0.04, 0.74], p=0.02). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of morbidity (OR=1.03; 95% CI [0.70, 1.53], p=0.87), anastomosis leakage (OR=0.83; 95% CI [0.18, 3.72], p=0.81), bleeding (OR=1.90; 95% CI [0.64, 5.58], p=0.25), wound infection (OR=1.37; 95% CI [0.51, 3.68], p=0.53), operative time (mean difference (MD)=36.32; 95% CI [-24.30, 96.93], p=0.24), hospital stay (MD=-0.94; 95% CI [-2.03, 0.15], p=0.09) and disease-free survival (OR=1.29; 95% CI [0.71, 2.35], p=0.41). In the subgroup analysis, the operative time was significantly shorter in the LCME group than RCME group (MD=50.93; 95% CI [40.05, 61.81], p<0.01) and we noticed a greater number of harvested lymph nodes in the RCME group compared with LC non-CME group (MD=8.96; 95% CI [5.98, 11.93], p<0.01). The robotic approach for CME ensures a lower conversion rate than the LC. RCME had a longer operative time than the LCME subgroup and a higher number of harvested lymph nodes than the LC non-CME group.

Oncological outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robotic colectomy in patients with transverse colon cancer.

Literature concerning surgical management of transverse colon cancer is scarce, since many key trials excluded transverse colon cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical and oncological outcomes comparing open, laparoscopic and robotic transverse colon cancer resection. Consecutivepatients who underwent elective surgery for transverse colon cancer between December 2005 and July 2021 were included. Data were kept in a prospective database approved by the institutional ethics committee. Primary outcome was overall and disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included complications, operative time, length of stay and lymph node harvest. Statistical analysis was corrected for age and tumour localisation. Two hundred and forty-six (38 robotic, 71 open and 137 laparoscopic resections) were recruited in this study. There were five conversions during laparoscopic procedures. Operative time was significantly shorter in robotic vs laparoscopic procedures (195 vs 238min, p = 0.005) and length of stay was shorter in robotic vs laparoscopic and open group (7 vs 9 vs 15days, p < 0.001). There was no difference in overall complications. R0 resections were similar. Lymph node harvest was highest in the robotic group vs. laparoscopic or open (32 vs. 29 vs. 21, p < 0.001). Overall survival was 97%, 85% and 60% (p < 0.001) and disease-free survival was 91%, 78% and 56% (p < 0.001) for the robotic, laparoscopic and open groups, respectively. Minimally invasive surgery for transverse colon cancer is safe and offers good clinical and oncological outcomes. Robotic resection is associated with significantly shorter operating times, higher lymph node harvest, lower conversion rate and does not increase morbidity. Differences in disease-free and overall survival should be further explored in randomised controlled trials.

Exploring the paradigm of robotic surgery and its contribution to the growth of surgical volume

BackgroundRobotic surgery is an appealing option for both surgeons and patients. The question around the introduction of new surgical technology, such as robotics, with the potential link to increased procedure-specific volume has not been addressed. We hypothesize that hospital adoption of robotic technology increases the total volume of specific procedures as compared to nonrobotic hospitals. MethodsThe 2010–2020 Florida Agency for Health Care Administration Inpatient database was queried for open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomy, lobectomy, gastric bypass, and antireflux procedures. International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Revisions, codes were used. Difference in difference method was used to evaluate the impact of robotics on total procedure-specific volume of robotic hospitals versus nonrobotic hospitals before and after adopting robotic technology. Incident rate ratios from the difference in difference analysis determined the significance of adding robotics. Patient demographics were evaluated using χ2 test. ResultsA total of 291,826 procedures were performed at 217 hospitals, 151 with robotic capabilities. Robotic hospitals experienced a 37% increase in surgical volume due to robotic technology (incident rate ratio 1.37, P < .05), which was consistent for each surgery except antireflux procedures (incident rate ratio 0.95). Robotic procedures had significantly higher charges for medical/surgical supplies; however, the mean length of stay for robotic procedures was significantly shorter than that of laparoscopic and open cases. ConclusionHospital adoption of robotic technology significantly increases surgical volume for select procedures. Hospitals should consider the benefits of introducing robotic technology which leads to higher volume and decreased length of stay, benefitting both hospital systems and patients.

Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease

BackgroundAdoption of minimally invasive approaches continues to increase, and there is a need to reassess outcomes and cost. We aimed to compare open versus minimally invasive colectomy short- and long-term health-care utilization and payer/patient expenditures for benign disease.MethodsThis is a retrospective analysis of IBM® MarketScan® Database patients who underwent left or right colectomy for benign disease between 2013 and 2018. Outcomes included total health-care expenditures, resource utilization, and direct workdays lost up to 365 days following colectomy. The open surgical approach (OS) was compared to minimally invasive colectomy (MIS) with subgroup analysis of laparoscopic (LS) and robotic (RS) approaches using inverse probability of treatment weighting.ResultsOf 10,439 patients, 2531 (24.3%) had open, 6826 (65.4%) had laparoscopic, and 1082 (10.3%) had robotic colectomy. MIS patients had shorter length of stay (LOS; mean difference, − 1.71, p < 0.001) and lower average total expenditures (mean difference, − $2378, p < 0.001) compared with open patients during the index hospitalization. At 1 year, MIS patients had lower readmission rates, and fewer mean emergency and outpatient department visits than open patients, translating into additional savings of $5759 and 2.22 fewer days missed from work for health-care visits over the 365-day post-discharge period. Within MIS, RS patients had shorter LOS (mean difference, − 0.60, p < 0.001) and lower conversion-to-open rates (odds ratio, 0.31 p < 0.001) during the index hospitalization, and lower hospital outpatient visits (mean difference, − 0.31, p = 0.001) at 365 days than LS.ConclusionMIS colectomy is associated with lower mean health-care expenditures and less resource utilization compared to the open approach for benign disease at index operation and 365-days post-discharge. Health-care expenditures for LS and RS are similar but shorter mean LOS and lower conversion-to-open surgery rates were observed at index operation for the RS approach.