Robotic Colorectal Surgery Research Articles

Outcome of Colorectal Robotic Surgery in Newly Established Robotic Surgery Center: A Case Series

Introduction: The robotic platform compared to laparoscopy has proven to have similar postoperative outcomes; however, its adoption in the Middle East has been slow and there are limited data regarding outcomes with its use in small newly established robotic colorectal programs. Our aim was to report our experience and outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery performed by fellowship-trained robotic colorectal surgeons and compare them to larger, more experienced centers. Methods: This is retrospective review of data collected between November 2021 and March 2023 from a tertiary health care referral center. The series included 51 patients who had elective or urgent robotic colorectal surgery. Patients who had emergency surgery were excluded. The outcomes were overall morbidity, serious morbidity, mortality, conversion to open, length of hospital stay, and quality of oncological specimen. Results: The overall morbidity was 31.4% (n = 16 patients). Only 9.8% (n = 5) had serious morbidity of which three required interventions under general anesthesia. The median length of hospital stay was 6 days (IQR = 4), and there was no mortality. Of 17 rectal cancer resections, 88% had complete mesorectal excision, 15 of them were R0 resections, median lymph node harvested was 14 (IQR = 7) and two cases were converted to open. All the colon cancer resections had R0 resection, median lymph nodes harvested was 21 (IQR = 4) and none were converted to open. Conclusions: The implementation and integration of robotic colorectal surgery at a newly established center in a small country, when led by fellowship-trained robotic colorectal surgeons, is safe and effective in terms of morbidity, mortality, conversion to open and specimen pathological quality.

European Society of Coloproctology guideline on training in robotic colorectal surgery (2024).

European Society of Coloproctology guideline on training in robotic colorectal surgery (2024).

Assessment of the quality of online patient-oriented information on robotic colorectal surgery.

With advances in modern medicine, there is a constant need for accurate and up-to-date readily available information online to ensure patients are well-equipped for informed decision making. This study sets out to analyze websites that provide patient-centered information on robotic colorectal surgery. Three search engines (Google, Yahoo and Firefox) were used with search terms 'robotic colorectal surgery' and the first 20 results on each platform assessed. After screening sites using predetermined criteria, further analysis was performed with the DISCERN questionnaire and Cohen Kappa analysis. Out of the 60 websites identified from the initial search, only 14 websites contained patient information on robotic colorectal surgery. Of these, only three (21%) sites had been updated in the past year and one site was last updated 10 years ago. Ten (71%) websites were affiliated with hospitals and the majority (12, 86%) were based in the United States of America (USA). Approximately half of the websites explored alternative surgical techniques, only three (21%) discussed the risks, a similar number had details on post-operative experience, and none mentioned cost implications, ongoing research or the waiting list involved. Overall, no website had a perfect score of 5 to be classified as good or excellent. There was at least a fair level of agreement (reliability score of > 0.2) in 12 DISCERN criteria (80%), 4 of which were statistically significant. Despite the huge volume of generic information on colorectal surgery, there is still a paucity of comprehensive patient-centered information on robotics as a modality of treatment.

The rise of robotic colorectal surgery: better for patients and better for surgeons.

Robotic colorectal surgery represents a major technological advancement in the treatment of patients with colorectal disease. Several recent randomized controlled trials comparing robotic colorectal surgery with laparoscopic surgery have demonstrated improved short-term patient outcomes in the robotic group. Whilst the primary focus of research in robotic surgery has been on patient outcomes, the robotic platform also provides unparalleled benefits for the surgeon, including improved ergonomics and surgeon comfort, with the potential to reduce occupational injuries and prolong career longevity. It is becoming clear that robotic surgical systems improve patient outcomes and may provide significant benefits to the surgical workforce.

Endoluminal and next generation robotics in colorectal surgery

Innovative approaches leverage cutting-edge technologies to advance the field of minimally invasive colorectal surgery. The implementation of complex endoluminal and transluminal procedures is challenging and requires extensive training. Recent technological advances not only enable improved detection of colorectal neoplasms with the support of computer science, but also enhanced surgical treatment with robotic instrumentation. Early diagnosis will revolutionize colorectal cancer treatment by avoiding surgery, as has been demonstrated in the treatment of early-stage gastric cancer using third-space endoscopy. Automated colorectal cancer screening with polyp detection and classification can change the therapeutic strategy and orient towards resection during endoscopy, including full-thickness resection, with endoscopic bimanual suturing to close the defect. Several therapeutic flexible endoscopic robotic systems are expected to provide surgery-like dexterity for endo- and transluminal approaches by enabling tissue triangulation while lowering the technical hurdles for endoscopic submucosal dissection and other highly sophisticated procedures such as endoscopic creation or revision of anastomoses. In the curvilinear anatomy of the colon and rectum, navigation assistance for improved spatio-temporal orientation will aid in the detection and documentation of lesions and facilitate their localization for excision and follow-up. Flexible robotic systems encourage surgeons as well as gastroenterologists to perform advanced intra- and transluminal resections.

P988 Preliminary report on short-term post-operative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic approach for restorative procto-colectomy with ileal-pouch-anal anastomosis in ulcerative colitis: a comparative study

Abstract Background Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) performed in two or three stages has become the standard surgical treatment in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) in which the medical management fails. It is a technically complex operation associated with significant morbidity that can be performed with a laparoscopic or robotic approach. Robotic colorectal surgery is gaining popularity because it overcomes many of the mechanical and optical disadvantages of laparoscopy, although limited data are available regarding its safety, efficacy, and costs. This study compares the postoperative short-terms surgical outcomes of the two surgical approaches. Methods Robotic and laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy procedures with IPAA consecutively performed between June 2015 and May 2023 were retrospectively collected. Inclusion criteria was UC not responders to medical therapy. Exclusion criteria was conversion to open surgery. Primary analyzed outcome were complications rate in the first month (30 days) according to Clavien Dindo Score and length of hospital stay (days). Statistical analysis was performed with a dedicated software (SPSS). Results A total of 54 patients with UC refractory to medical therapy were included, with 31 laparoscopic procedure and 23 robotic procedures. Demographic data were comparable between two groups in terms of age (48.7 vs 45.7 years; p= 0.62), BMI (22,0 vs 23,7 Kg/m2; p= 1.311) and ASA score (p=0,72).Short-term complications defined as Clavien Dindo scores 2-3, (compared with score 1) were 13% in the robotic group and 31% in the laparoscopic group (RR= 0.27, 95% conf. interv. 0.11-1.06). In particular, no high-grade Clavien-Dindo complications occurred in the robotic group while 3 events (grade 3) occurred in the laparoscopic group. No surgical reintervention was needed in both groups. Length of hospital stay was a mean of 7.3 days in lap-group and 6.3 days in rob-group with no statistical significativity (p=0,09). Conclusion This preliminary study concludes that robot-assisted surgery allows a reduction of short-term complications compared to laparoscopic approach. Moreover, robotic surgery allows a reduction of length of hospital stay although not statistically significant. Limits of the study were the retrospective design and the low numerosity of the sample, although comparable with the experiences already published.

Evaluating body mass index's impact on Da Vinci Robotic rectal cancer surgery, a retrospective study.

Robotic surgery addresses laparoscopic shortcomings and yields comparable results for low and high body mass index (BMI) patients. However, the impact of BMI on postoperative complications in robotic colorectal surgery remains debated. This study assessed the implications of BMI on short outcomes and postoperative complications, highlighting its unique role in the outcomes. Retrospective analysis of 119 patients who underwent robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer (January 2022 to March 2023). Patients grouped by BMI: normal weight (BMI < 23.9kg/m2), overweight (BMI ≥ 23.9kg/m2 and BMI < 27.9kg/m2), and obese (BMI ≥ 27.9kg/m2). Investigated BMI's impact on surgical outcomes and postoperative complications. Statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) in Clavien-Dindo, ASA scores. The obese group had a longer time to flatus (P = 0.002) and a higher re-operation rate than other groups (P = 0.01). The overweight group had a higher anastomotic fistula rate than the obese group. Overall complications showed no significant differences among BMI cohorts (P = 0.0295). There were no significant differences in TNM stages and comorbidities. BMI had no significant impact on overall postoperative complications in robotic surgery for rectal cancer. However, higher BMI correlated with a longer time to flatus and increased re-operation rate.

Regional variations and deprivation are linked to poorer access to laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery: a national study in England

BackgroundLaparoscopic and now robotic colorectal surgery has rapidly increased in prevalence; however, little is known about how uptake varies by region and sociodemographics. The aim of this study was to quantify the uptake of minimally invasive colorectal surgery (MIS) over time and variations by region, sociodemographics and ethnicity.MethodsRetrospective analysis of routinely collected healthcare data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics) for all adults having elective colorectal resectional surgery in England from 1 January 2006 to 31 March 2020. Sociodemographics between modalities were compared and the association between sociodemographic factors, region and year on MIS was compared in multivariate logistic regression analysis.ResultsA total of 93,735 patients were included: 52,098 open, 40,622 laparoscopic and 1015 robotic cases. Laparoscopic surgery surpassed open in 2015 but has plateaued; robotic surgery has rapidly increased since 2017, representing 3.2% of cases in 2019. Absolute differences up to 20% in MIS exist between regions, OR 1.77 (95% CI 1.68–1.86) in South Central and OR 0.75 (95% CI 0.72–0.79) in the North West compared to the largest region (West Midlands). MIS was less common in the most compared to least deprived (14.6% of MIS in the most deprived, 24.8% in the least, OR 0.85 95% CI 0.81–0.89), with a greater difference in robotic surgery (13.4% vs 30.5% respectively). Female gender, younger age, less comorbidity, Asian or ‘Other/Mixed’ ethnicity and cancer indication were all associated with increased MIS.ConclusionsMIS has increased over time, with significant regional and socioeconomic variations. With rapid increases in robotic surgery, national strategies for procurement, implementation, equitable distribution and training must be created to avoid worsening health inequalities.

The role of Da Vinci Xi robotic simulation curriculum in enhancing skills in robotic colorectal surgery

Robotic surgery in comparison to open and laparoscopic surgery allows better ergonomics, three-dimensional vision, and seven-degree freedom of movement. This ensures fast recovery, fewer postoperative complications, and safe oncological resections. Robotic surgery has revolutionized the field of colorectal surgery, providing surgeons with enhanced precision, dexterity, and visualization. To ensure safe and successful outcomes, surgeons must acquire competency and proficiency in robotic surgical techniques. Robotic simulation exercises have emerged as a valuable tool for training and skill development in robotic colorectal surgery. This research paper explores the importance and relationship between robotic simulation exercises and the acquisition of skills and competency required for carrying out safe colorectal surgery using a robotic platform. The authors discuss the benefits of virtual simulation-based training using the Da Vinci Xi skill simulator, and the evidence supporting its effectiveness in colorectal surgery. In this article, emphasis has been made on some important Da Vinci Xi skill simulator exercises for enhancing skills in robotic colorectal surgery.

Synergetic effects of ERAS and robotics in colorectal surgery

Synergetic effects of ERAS and robotics in colorectal surgery

Automated performance metrics, learning curve and robotic colorectal surgery.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of Automated Performance Metrics (APMs) in assessing the learning curve. A retrospective review of 85 consecutive patients who underwent total robotic colorectal surgery at a single institution between August 2020 and October 2022 was performed. Patient demographics, operation type, and APMs were collected and analysed. Cumulative summation technique (CUSUM) was used to construct learning curves of surgeon console time (SCT), use of the fourth arm, clutch activation, instrument off screen (number and duration), and cut electrocautery activation. Two phases with 50 and 35 cases were identified from the CUSUM graph for SCT. The SCT was significantly different between the two phases (176 and 251min, p<0.002). After adjustment for SCT, the APMs were not significantly different between the two phases. Most APMs do not offer additional learning curve information when compared with SCT analysis alone.

Robotic colorectal surgery initial results after 183 cases

Robotic colorectal surgery initial results after 183 cases

FTP3.6 Robotic Assisted Surgery – the future for patients with increased BMI?

Abstract Introduction Obesity increases the technical difficulty of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The ROLAR trial concluded robotic assisted surgery (RAS) did not significantly reduce the risk of conversion to open surgery in rectal cancer resections. In Scotland, in 2021, 30% of adult population were obese (BMI ≥30kg/m2) and 4% morbidly obesity (BMI ≥40kg/m2.) We describe local experience of laparoscopic surgery and RAS in the obese population. Methods Retrospective review of patients with obesity (BMI ≥30kg/m2) undergoing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery by three colorectal surgeons. Conversion to open, 30-day morbidity and mortality and length of stay were assessed. Results 30 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and 37 patients undergoing RAS. Procedures include anterior resection; Hartmann’s procedure; left and right hemicolectomy, sigmoid colectomy, APER, subtotal colectomy, panproctocolectomy and completion proctectomy for benign and malignant conditions. Conclusions RAS resulted in fewer conversions to open procedures compared to laparoscopic surgery in the obese population. Fewer complications and returns to theatre in RAS group. The increased length of stay in RAS group can be explained by geographic considerations (25 RAS patients live &amp;gt;2 hours from hospital).

"Feasibility of Ambulatory Robotic Colorectal Cancer Surgery: The Initial Experience of a UK Teaching Hospital"

"Feasibility of Ambulatory Robotic Colorectal Cancer Surgery: The Initial Experience of a UK Teaching Hospital"

Textbook Oncological Outcomes for Robotic Colorectal Cancer Resections: An Observational Study of Five Robotic Colorectal Units.

The quality of care of patients receiving colorectal resections has conventionally relied on individual metrics. When discussing with patients what these outcomes mean, they often find them confusing or overwhelming. Textbook oncological outcome (TOO) is a composite measure that summarises all the 'desirable' or 'ideal' postoperative clinical and oncological outcomes from both a patient's and doctor's point of view. This study aims to evaluate the incidence of TOO in patients receiving robotic colorectal cancer surgery in five robotic colorectal units and understand the risk factors associated with failure to achieve a TOO in these patients. We present a retrospective, multicentric study with data from a prospectively collected database. All consecutive patients receiving robotic colorectal cancer resections from five centres between 2013 and 2022 were included. Patient characteristics and short-term clinical and oncological data were collected. A TOO was achieved when all components were realized-no conversion to open, no complication with a Clavien-Dindo (CD) ≥ 3, length of hospital stay ≤ 14, no 30-day readmission, no 30-day mortality, and R0 resection. The main outcome measure was a composite measure of "ideal" practice called textbook oncological outcomes. A total of 501 patients submitted to robotic colorectal cancer resection were included. Of the 501 patients included, 388 (77.4%) achieved a TOO. Four patients were converted to open (0.8%); 55 (11%) had LOS > 14 days; 46 (9.2%) had a CD ≥ 3 complication; 30-day readmission rate was 6% (30); 30-day mortality was 0.2% (1); and 480 (95.8%) had an R0 resection. Abdominoperineal resection was a risk factor for not achieving a TOO. Robotic colorectal cancer surgery in robotic centres achieves a high TOO rate. Abdominoperineal resection is a risk factor for failure to achieve a TOO. This measure may be used in future audits and to inform patients clearly on success of treatment.

Feasibility of on-demand robotics in colorectal surgery: first cases

IntroductionThe key benefits of robotics are improved precision and control, thanks to fully articulated robotic instruments and enhanced, stable endoscope control. However, colorectal procedures also require large movements such as medialization of the colon where a robotic platform is not always needed. We present the world’s first experience in colorectal surgery with a new open platform of on-demand robotics.Methods and proceduresStandard laparoscopic 3-D camera, insufflator, trocars and energy devices, available in all hospitals performing laparoscopic surgery, are used in combination with the Dexter System™ from Distalmotion SA, which includes two robotic instrument arms, one robotic endoscope arm and a sterile surgeon console. We present the first 12 colorectal cases of robotic assisted ventral mesh rectopexy (n = 2), oncologic right colectomies (n = 8), transverse colectomy (n = 1) and ileocecal resection (n = 1) using the Dexter System.ResultsThe two ventral mesh rectopexies were fully robotic, requiring no switching from standard laparoscopy to robotic assistance. The robotic platform was used for central vascular ligation (CVL) in all 8 oncologic colectomies, whereas medialization of the colon and transection was performed with standard laparoscopy. The switch from laparoscopy to robotics and back was performed in 15–30 s. Intracorporal anastomosis was performed in 4 patients (stapling by standard laparoscopy and suturing of the defect with robotic assistance). Conversion or permanent switch to standard laparoscopy was required in two patients due to visceral obesity. No robotic platform-related intraoperative adverse event occurred. No major morbidity occurred at 60 days.ConclusionsOn-demand robotics is feasible and combines the best of two worlds: Robotics where precision and enhanced dexterity are required and standard laparoscopy where it is at its best. The surgeon remains scrubbed-in at all times, allowing a switch between robotics and laparoscopy within seconds.

Implementation of a structured robotic colorectal curriculum for general surgery residents.

There is increasing demand for colorectal robotic training for general surgery residents. We implemented a robotic colorectal surgery curriculum expecting that it would increase resident exposure to the robotic platform and would increase the number of graduating general surgery residents obtaining a robotic equivalency certificate. The aim of this study is to describe the components of the curriculum and characterize the immediate impact of the implementation or residents. Our curriculum started in 2019 and consists of didactics, simulation, and clinical performance. Objectives are specified for both junior residents (post-graduate years [PGY]1-2) and senior residents (PGY3-5). The robotic colorectal surgical experience was characterized by comparing robotic to non-robotic operations, differences in robotic operations across post-graduate year, and percentage of graduates achieving an equivalency certificate. Robotic operations are tracked using case log annotation. From 2017 to 2021, 25 residents logged 681 major operations on the colorectal service (PGY1 mean = 7.6 ± 4.6, PGY4 mean = 29.7 ± 14.4, PGY5 mean = 29.8 ± 14.8). Robotic colorectal operations made up 24% of PGY1 (49% laparoscopic, 27% open), 35% of PGY4 (35% laparoscopic, 29% open), and 41% of PGY5 (44% laparoscopic, 15% open) major colorectal operations. Robotic bedside experience is primarily during PGY1 (PGY1 mean 2.0 ± 2.0 bedside operations vs 1.4 ± 1.6 and 0.2 ± 0.4 for PGY4 and 5, respectively). Most PGY4 and 5 robotic experience is on the console (PGY4 mean 9.1 ± 7.7 console operations, PGY5 mean 12.0 ± 4.8 console operations). Rates of robotic certification for graduating chief residents increased from 0% for E-2013 to 100% for E-2018. Our robotic colorectal curriculum for general surgery residents has facilitated earlier and increased robotic exposure for residents and increased robotic certification for our graduates.

Effectiveness of fluorescence-guided methods using near-infrared fluorescent clips of robotic colorectal surgery: a case report

BackgroundThis is the first report on the application of the Da Vinci-compatible near-infrared fluorescent clips (NIRFCs) as tumor markers to localize colorectal cancer lesions during robotic surgery. In laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries, the accuracy of tumor marking is a critical issue that remains unresolved. This study aimed to determine the accuracy of NIRFCs in localizing tumors for intestinal resection. Indocyanine green (ICG) was also used to verify the feasibility of safely performing an anastomosis.Case presentationA patient diagnosed with rectal cancer was scheduled to undergo a robot-assisted high anterior resection. During colonoscopy 1 day prior to the surgery, four Da Vinci-compatible NIRFCs were placed intraluminally 90° around the lesion. The locations of the Da Vinci-compatible NIRFCs were confirmed using firefly technology, and ICG staining was performed before cutting the oral side of the tumor. The locations of the Da Vinci-compatible NIRFCs and the intestinal resection line were confirmed. Moreover, sufficient margins were obtained.ConclusionsIn robotic colorectal surgery, fluorescence guidance with firefly technology offers two advantages. First, it has an oncological advantage, because marking with the Da Vinci-compatible NIRFCs allows for real-time monitoring of the lesion location. This enables sufficient intestinal resection by grasping the lesion precisely. Second, it reduces the risk of postoperative complications, because ICG evaluation with firefly technology prevents postoperative anastomotic leakage. Fluorescence guidance in robot-assisted surgery is useful. In the future, the application of this technique should be evaluated for lower rectal cancer.

AB037. SOH23ABS_176. Evolution of robotic colorectal surgery: a 6-year single institutional experience

Background: The advent of robotic surgery has aimed to assist surgeons in the challenges posed by open and laparoscopic approaches. Implementation of any new technology that involves a multidisciplinary team can take time. The aim of this study was to assess the perioperative and short-term outcomes of a robotic colorectal surgery service over time.

A Review of Robotic Surgery in Colorectal Surgery.

Colorectal surgery is a treatment for colorectal lesions. Technological advancements have given the rise to robotic colorectal surgery, a procedure that limits excessive blood loss via 3D pin-point precision capabilities during surgeries. The aim of this study is to review robotic surgery in colorectal treatment procedures in order to dictate its ultimate merits. This is a literature review utilising PubMed and Google Scholar; it only includes case studies and case reviews related to robotic colorectal surgeries. Literature reviews are excluded. We incorporated abstracts from all articles and full publications were examined to compare the benefits of robotic surgery in colorectal treatments. The number of articles reviewed was 41 literature spanning from 2003 to 2022. We found that robotic surgeries yielded finer marginal resections, greater amounts of lymph node resections and earlier recovery of bowel functions. The patients also spent less time in hospital after surgery. The obstacles on the other hand are it costs longer operative hours and further training, which is expensive. Studies show robotic approach is a choice for treating rectal cancer. However further studies would be needed to conclude the best approach. This is especially true with patients treated for anterior colorectal resections. Based on the evidence it's safe to say that the upsides outweigh the downsides, but advancements and further research in robotic colorectal surgeries are still necessary to reduce operative hours and cost. Surgical societies should also take the initiative and set up effective training programmes for colorectal robotic surgeries, as trained physicians result in better treatment outcomes.