Robotic Colorectal Surgery Research Articles

Surgical Outcomes of Robotic Resection for Sigmoid and Rectal Cancer: Analysis of 109 Patients From a Single Center in China.

Background: Robotic colorectal surgery has been increasingly performed in recent years. The safety and feasibility of its application has also been demonstrated worldwide.However, limited studies have presented clinical data for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) receiving robotic surgery in China. The aim of this study is to present short-term clinical outcomes of robotic surgery and further confirm its safety and feasibility in Chinese CRC patients.Methods: The clinical data of 109 consecutive CRC patients who received robotic surgery at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between June 2016 and May 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics,tumor traits, treatment details, complications, pathological details, and survival status were evaluated.Results: Among the 109 patients, 35 (32.1%) had sigmoid cancer, and 74 (67.9%) had rectal cancer. Thirty-seven (33.9%) patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Ten (9.2%) patients underwent sigmoidectomy, 38 (34.9%) underwent high anterior resection (HAR), 45 (41.3%) underwent low anterior resection (LAR), and 16 (14.7%) underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR). The median surgical procedure time was 270 min (range 120–465 min). Pathologically complete resection was achieved in all patients. There was no postoperative mortality. Complications occurred in 11 (10.1%) patients, including 3 (2.8%) anastomotic leakage, 1 (0.9%) anastomotic bleeding, 1 (0.9%) pelvic hemorrhage, 4 (3.7%) intestinal obstruction, 2 (1.8%) chylous leakage, and 1 (0.9%) delayed wound union. At a median follow-up of 17 months (range 1–37 months), 1 (0.9%) patient developed local recurrence and 5 (4.6%) developed distant metastasis, with one death due to disease progression.Conclusions: Our results suggest that robotic surgery is technically feasible and safe for Chinese CRC patients, especially for rectal cancer patients who received neoadjuvant treatment. A robotic laparoscope with large magnification showed a clear surgical space for pelvic autonomic nerve preservation in cases of mesorectal edema.

The learning curve in robotic colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review.

The learning curve has implications for efficient surgical training. Robotic surgery is perceived to have a shorter learning curve than laparoscopy; however, detailed analysis is lacking. The aim of this work was to analyse studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic colorectal learning curves. Simulation studies comparing novices' learning curves were analysed in order to surmise applicability to colorectal surgery. A systematic search of Medline, PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library identified colorectal papers (from 1 January 2000 to 3 March 2021) comparing robotic and laparoscopic learning curves where surgeons lacked laparoscopic colorectal experience. Simulation studies comparing learning curves were also included. The learning curve was defined as the period of ongoing improvement in speed and/or accuracy. From 576 abstracts reviewed, three operative and 16simulation studies were included. The robotic learning curve for right colectomy was significantly faster in one study (16 vs. 25 cases) and equal for anterior resection in two studies (44 vs. 41 cases and 55 vs. 55). One study showed fewer complications for robotic patients (14.6% vs. 0%, p =0.013). Ten simulation studies reported faster times and eight recorded error rates favouring robotic surgery. Seven studies measured the learning curve. Four favoured laparoscopic surgery, but operating times were faster using the robotic platform. Operating times for robotic surgery may be faster than laparoscopy when surgeons are inexperienced with both platforms. This may be related to a superior baseline performance rather than a shorter learning curve. Whether a shorter learning curve on the laparoscopic platform will persist for long enough to enable skills to overtake robotic ability needs further investigation.

Ergonomic port placement in robotic colorectal surgery

AbstractAimThe aim of the study was to determine how spacing between ports and alignment of ports (oblique or vertical) influences manipulation angles in robotic colorectal surgery.MethodAbdominal CT scans of 10 consecutive robotic right hemicolectomy and 10 consecutive robotic high anterior resection patients were analysed. The manipulation angles were calculated using fixed points on the preoperative abdominal coronal CT scan. Port placements were marked on the CT scan. The fixed points used to measure the manipulation angles were from the most lateral part of the caecum, hepatic flexure, splenic flexure, the descending colon/sigmoid colon junction and the sigmoid colon/rectum junction.ResultsFor right hemicolectomy and high anterior resection surgery, a port spacing of 8 cm compared with 6 cm resulted in greater manipulation angles. With 6‐cm port spacing, wider manipulation angles were not achieved with vertical port alignment compared with oblique alignment except for dissection at the splenic flexure.ConclusionsThe greatest manipulation angles were achieved with the oblique 8‐cm port spacing, which should be used in most cases.

The role of telemedicine in the postoperative home monitoring after robotic colo-rectal cancer surgery: a preliminary single center experience.

The telemedicine studies, takes care and prevents diseases at distance basing on the interaction among physicians and patients remotely. Few data are available on its application to early postoperative after surgery. The endpoints of our preliminary experience were the detection, as primary, of feasibility and safety of home telemonitoring after robotic colo-rectal resection and, as secondary, perception and satisfaction of the patients. From December 2019 to March 2020, at the Division of Robotic Surgery of San Giovanni Hospital of Rome, 20 of 29 colorectal cancer patients, submitted to Robotic resection, were prospectively included in a program of postoperative home telemonitoring. Telemonitoring was considered feasible if at least 75% of data were available and safe if morbidity ≤ II by Clavien-Dindo classification. Perception and patients' satisfaction were evaluated through a dedicated questionnaire. Out of 20 patients, the median age was 68 years, overall postoperative morbidity was 30%, all events classified Clavien-Dindo Grade I or II. Only 2 patients were corresponded to surgical consult without readmission during home telemonitoring. Compliance of patients was > 80%, overall grade of satisfaction was very high: 4.2 as median (range 0-5). In this preliminary study, the procedures of postoperative home telemonitoring were feasible and safe and high rate of patients' satisfaction was observed. The telemedicine could enhance the role of robotic technique in decrease the hospital stay and improving postoperative recovery after surgery. Further structured prospective trial are needed to validate the routine application of telemedicine in healthcare.

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program with robotic surgery in high-risk patients obtains optimal results after colorectal resections.

Enhanced recovery after surgery programs reduce postoperative complications and length of stay after laparoscopic colorectal surgery, but are still under evaluation after robotic colorectal surgery. To evaluate potential benefits in terms of length of stay and complications of an Enhanced recovery after surgery program in colorectal surgery. A subanalysis was performed to assess what combination of surgical approach and perioperative care had better outcomes. Prospective observational cohort study. 300 consecutive colorectal surgery patients: 150 were prospectively included in the enhanced recovery after Surgery program group and 150 retrospectively in the traditional care group, and subdivided according to the type of surgery, in Hospital Marques de Valdecilla, between 2013 and 2016. Postoperative complications decreased significantly (p = 0.002) from 46 to 28% (traditional care vs program group). The length of stay was decreased by 2 days (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis indicated similar effect sizes after adjusting for age, gender, Charlson score, and type of surgery. Type of surgery was an independent predictive factor for postoperative complications and length of stay. Compared to open surgery, postoperative complications decreased by 50% (p < 0.001) after robotic surgery and by 40% (p = 0.01) after laparoscopic surgery, while the median length of stay decreased by three days (p < 0.001) after minimally invasive surgery. Enhanced recovery after surgery program and minimally invasive surgery were associated with decreased morbidity and length of stay after colorectal surgery compared to open surgery and traditional care. An enhanced recovery after surgery program with robotic surgery in high-risk patients might be beneficial.

Robotic Colorectal Cancer Surgery. How to Reach Expertise? A Single Surgeon-Experience.

The complexity associated with laparoscopic colorectal surgery requires several skills to overcome the technical difficulties related to this procedure. To overcome the technical challenges of laparoscopic surgery, a robotic approach has been introduced. Our study reports the surgical outcomes obtained by the transition from laparoscopic to robotic approach in colorectal cancer surgery to establish in which type of approach the proficiency is easier to reach. Data about the first consecutive 15 laparoscopic and the first 15 consecutive robotic cases are extracted, adopting as a comparator of proficiency the last 15 laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer. The variables studied are operative time, number of harvested nodes, conversion rate, postoperative complications, recovery outcomes. Our analysis includes 15 patients per group. Our results show that operative time is significantly longer in the first 15 laparoscopic cases (p = 0.001). A significantly lower number of harvested nodes was retrieved in the first 15 laparoscopic cases (p = 0.003). Clavien Dindo I complication rate was higher in the first laparoscopic group, but without a significant difference among the three groups (p = 0.09). Our results show that the surgeon needed no apparent learning curve to reach their laparoscopic standards. However, further multicentric prospective studies are needed to confirm this conclusion.

An Intrasheath Separation Technique for Nerve-Sparing High Ligation of the Inferior Mesenteric Artery in Colorectal Cancer Surgery.

PurposeTo investigate the relationship between the left trunk of the inferior mesenteric plexus (IMP) and the vascular sheath of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and to explore anatomical evidence for autonomic nerve preservation during high ligation of the IMA in colorectal cancer surgery.MethodsWe evaluated the relationship in 23 consecutive cases of laparoscopic or robotic colorectal surgery with high ligation of the IMA at our institute. Anatomical dissection was performed on 5 formalin-fixed abdominal specimens. A novel anatomical evidence-based operative technique was proposed.ResultsAnatomical observation showed that the left trunk of the IMP was closely connected with the IMA and was involved in the composition of the vascular sheath. Based on anatomical evidence, we present a novel operative technique for nerve-sparing high ligation of the IMA that was successfully performed in 45 colorectal cancer surgeries with no intraoperative complications and satisfactory postoperative urogenital functional outcomes.ConclusionThe left trunk of the IMP is involved in the composition of the IMA vascular sheath. This novel anatomical evidence-based operative technique for nerve-sparing high ligation of the IMA is technically safe and feasible.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer: a nationwide cohort study.

On a national level, the minimally invasive approach is widely adopted in Denmark. The adoption of robotic colorectal surgery is increasing; however, the advantage of a robotic approach in right colectomy is still uncertain. The purpose of this study was to compare robotic right colectomy with laparoscopic right colectomy on a national level. This was a nationwide database study based on data from the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database. Patients from all colorectal centers in Denmark in the period 2014-2018 treated with curative intend in an elective setting with either robotic or laparoscopic right colectomy were identified. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounding, and the groups were compared on demographics, disease characteristics, operative data, and postoperative and pathology outcomes. Reporting was done in accordance with the STROBE statement. In total, 4002 patients were available for analysis. Propensity score matching in ratio 2:1 identified 718 laparoscopic and 359 robotic cases. After matching, we found a higher lymph node yield in the robotic group compared to the laparoscopic group, (32.5 vs. 28.4, P < 0.001), while radicality, plane of dissection, and pathological disease stages showed no differences. There were no statistical differences in morbidity and mortality. Intracorporeal anastomosis (23.7% vs. 4.5%, P < 0.001) was more commonly performed with a robotic approach. Robotic approach was associated with a significant higher lymph node yield and with similar postoperative morbidity compared to a laparoscopic approach for right colectomy.

Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer in the Octogenarians.

We evaluated the short-term outcomes of robotic colorectal cancer surgery in octogenarian patients, focussing on postoperative morbidity and survival. All patients ≥80years in a prospective colorectal cancer database undergoing robotic curative colorectal cancer resection were included. Patient demographics, intraoperative findings, postoperative and oncological outcomes were recorded. Patients were further subdivided into two groups named: old (OG80-85years) and very old (VOG≥86years). Fifty-eight consecutive patients were included (median age, 83years; male, 53.4%; median BMI, 26.5). Median total operative time was 230min, median blood loss 20ml, median length of stay 7days. Major complications were seen in 12% of patients; and the 90-day mortality rate was 1.7%. Complete R0 resection achieved in 93% of cases, average lymph node harvest was 22. Overall and disease-free survival was 81% and 87.3%, respectively (median follow-up 24.5months). We noticed a trend towards more advanced lesion staging in the VOG, but only N2 stage was significant (p=0.03). There was a statistically significant difference in overall survival in favour of the OG (p=0.024). Robotic surgery is feasible in octogenarian patients undergoing curative colorectal cancer resection and is associated with good post-operative outcomes and overall survival.

A rare cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding treated with robotic colorectal surgery

BackgroundMetastatic melanoma to the colon is rarely diagnosed with an incidence of only 0.3% and more than 95% of cases identified post-mortem. Survival for patients with metastatic melanoma to the colon is poor, with 5-year survival rates of 26.5%. Nonetheless, surgical resection of the colonic metastatic melanoma lesions is recommended as it is associated with improved survival. Additionally, surgical resection is also indicated for palliative reasons, as symptom resolution is achieved in 90% of such patients. Use of the surgical robot has increased dramatically in the past decades, especially in the field of colorectal surgery. Furthermore, recent studies have demonstrated comparable outcomes between patients undergoing either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted colorectal surgery for cancer. Here, we describe the first case, to the authors knowledge, of a robot-assisted sigmoid colectomy for metastatic melanoma.Case presentationA 72-year-old male with a history of metastatic melanoma diagnosed in 2015 with a favorable response to immunotherapy presented to the emergency department with symptomatic lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Endoscopy demonstrated a friable melanotic lesion of the sigmoid colon with biopsy demonstrating histopathologic evidence of metastatic melanoma. After further evaluation, the patient consented for an elective robot-assisted segmental colectomy for palliative intent. Diagnostic laparoscopy identified no evidence of further intra-abdominal metastatic disease. After identifying the metastatic lesion in the sigmoid colon, the mesentery of involved segment of sigmoid colon adjacent to the lesion was divided using the bipolar electrosurgical vessel sealer device. The colon was divided both proximal and distal to the lesion using a robotic stapler and a tension-free colo-colonic anastomosis was created intracorporeally. Postoperatively, the patient had an unremarkable course and was discharged home on post-operative day 3. On follow-up, the patient was doing well with resolution of preoperative LGIB.Conclusion This case highlights a rare presentation of metastatic melanoma to the colon in a patient presenting with LGIB. Furthermore, this case demonstrates the feasibility of the minimally invasive robotic-assisted approach for an uncommon pathology.

Robotic colorectal surgery and ergonomics.

Improved ergonomics for the operating surgeon may be an advantage of robotic colorectal surgery. Perceived robotic ergonomic advantages in visualisation include better exposure, three-dimensional vision, surgeon camera control, and line of sight screen location. Postural advantages include seated position and freedom from the constraints of the sterile operating field. Manipulation benefits include articulated instruments with seven degrees of freedom movement, elimination of fulcrum effect, tremor filtration, and scaling of movement. Potential ergonomic detriments of robotic surgery include lack of haptic feedback, visual, and mental strain from increased operating time and interruptions to workflow from crowding.

The impact of body mass index on outcomes in robotic colorectal surgery: a single-centre experience.

Obesity is an independent risk factor for postoperative morbidity and mortality in laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCRS). The technological advantages of robotic colorectal surgery (RCRS) may allow surgeons to overcome the limitations of LCRS in obese patients, but it is largely unknown if this translates to superior outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative, postoperative and short-term oncological outcomes in obese (BMI ≥ 30.0kg/m2) and non-obese (BMI < 30kg/m2) patients undergoing RCRS in a university teaching hospital. Demographic, perioperative and postoperative data along with short-term oncological outcomes of obese and non-obese patients that underwent RCRS for both benign and malignant colorectal disease were identified from a prospectively maintained database. A total of 107 patients (34 obese, 73 non-obese) underwent RCRS over a 4-year period. No statistically significant differences in the incidence of complications, 30-day reoperation, 30-day mortality, conversion to open surgery, anastomotic leak or length of inpatient stay were demonstrated. Obese patients had a significantly higher rate of surgical site infection (SSI) (p < 0.0001). Short-term oncological outcomes in both groups were favourable. There was no statistically significant difference in median duration of surgery between the two cohorts. The results demonstrate that obese patients undergoing RCRS in this institution experience similar outcomes to non-obese patients. These results suggest that RCRS is safe and feasible in obese patients and may be superior to LCRS in this cohort, where the literature suggests a higher complication rate compared to non-obese patients. The inherent advantages of robotic surgical platforms, such as improved visualisation, dexterity and ergonomics likely contribute to the improved outcomes in this challenging patient population.

AB016. SOH21AS074. The impact of body mass index on outcomes in robotic colorectal surgery: a single centre experience

AB016. SOH21AS074. The impact of body mass index on outcomes in robotic colorectal surgery: a single centre experience

Role of Simulation-Based Training in Minimally Invasive and Robotic Colorectal Surgery.

Properly performing minimally invasive colorectal procedures requires specific skills. With a focus on patient safety, the training of surgeons on patients is only accepted under exceptionally controlled, expensive, and challenging conditions. Moreover, many new techniques in colorectal surgery have been developed. Therefore, undertaking minimally invasive colorectal surgery in modern times requires specific psychomotor skills that trainee surgeons must gather in less time. In addition, there are not enough proctors with sufficient expertise for such an expressive number of new different techniques likes transanal and robotic procedures. Studies that have demonstrated an improvement in minimally invasive surgery skills to the actual operating room in general surgery and a stepwise approach to surgical simulation with a combination of various training methods appears to be useful in colorectal surgery training programs. However, the scientific evidence on the transfer of skills specifically for colorectal surgery is extremely scarce and very variable. Thus, the evaluation of the results remains quite difficult. In this review, we present the best available evidence on the types of training based on simulation, their characteristics, advantages and disadvantages, and finally the results available on their adoption. Nevertheless, scientific evidence about the benefit of simulation training in minimally invasive colorectal surgery is limited and there is a need to build more robust evidence.

Competency-Based Education in Minimally Invasive and Robotic Colorectal Surgery.

Minimally invasive and robotic techniques have become increasingly implemented into surgical practice and are now an essential part of the foundational skills of training colorectal surgeons. Over the past 5 years there has been a shift in the surgical educational paradigm toward competency-based education (CBE). CBE recognizes that trainees learn at different rates but regardless, are required to meet a competent threshold of performance prior to independent practice. Thus, CBE attempts to replace the traditional "time" endpoint of training with "performance." Although conceptually sensible, implementing CBE has proven challenging. This article will define competence, outline appropriate assessment tools to assess technical skill, and review the literature on the number of cases required to achieve competence in colorectal procedures while outlining the barriers to implementing CBE.

Fellowship training in robotic colorectal surgery within the current hospital setting: an achievable goal?

Although currently limited, the requirement for colorectal trainees to attain skills in robotic surgery is likely to increase due to further utilization of robotic platforms globally. The aim of the study is to describe the training programme utilized and assess outcomes of fellowship training in robotic colorectal surgery. A structured robotic training programme was generated across a tertiary hospital setting. Review of four prospectively maintained fellow operative logbooks was performed to assess caseload and skill acquisition. Operative and patient-related outcomes were compared with consultant trainer performed cases. Data were analysed using R with a P< 0.05 considered significant. The structured robotic training scheme is a two-tiered system over a 12-month period. The trainer-directed pathway comprised of a robotic console safety course followed by cart-side assisting, a wet lab animal course, dual-console accreditation training course and onsite proctoring, prior to becoming an independent console surgeon. Over 2 years, 265 robotic (n= 143 primary/component surgeon) cases were undertaken with fellows A, B, C and D involved in 63, 77, 75 and 50 robotic colorectal cases, respectively. Individual learning curves revealed independent procedure competency at cases 11, 14, 15 and 12, respectively, for robotic anterior resection. There was no significant difference observed in operative time (P= 0.39), blood loss (P= 0.41), lymph node harvest (P= 0.35), conversion rates (2% versus 4%), anastomotic leaks (1% versus 3%) and R0 resection rates (100% versus 98% colonic, 96% versus 96% rectal, P= 0.48) between surgical fellows and consultant trainers. Clavien-Dindo(III-IV) complications were similar (10% versus 6%,P= 0.25) with no mortalities encountered. It is feasible and safe to train fellows in robotic colorectal surgery without compromise of operative- and patient-related outcomes.

Optimizing outcomes in colorectal surgery: cost and clinical analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic approaches to colon resection.

The use of robotics in colorectal surgery has been steadily increasing, however, reported longer operative times and increased cost has limited its widespread adoption. We investigated the cost of elective colorectal surgery based on type of anatomic resection and the impact of a standardized protocol for robotic colectomies. A retrospective review was conducted of 279 elective colectomies at a single institution between 2013 and 2017. Clinical outcomes and detailed cost data were compared based on open, laparoscopic, or robotic surgical approach and stratified by anatomic resection. Robotic, laparoscopic and open colectomy rates were 35, 34 and 31%, respectively. While total costs were similar in robotic and laparoscopic surgery, anatomic resection stratification showed that low anterior resection (LAR) was significantly cheaper ($14,093 vs $17,314). When a standardized surgical protocol was implemented for robotic colectomies, significant reductions in operative times, length of stay, total cost, and operative cost were observed. Robotic surgery may be most cost effective for elective LAR compared to laparoscopic or open approaches. A standardized surgical protocol for robotic surgery may help reduce costs by reducing operative times, operating rooms expenditure, and lengths of stay.

Surgical Complexity and Outcome During the Implementation Phase of a Robotic Colorectal Surgery Program-A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BackgroundRobotic surgery holds particular promise for complex oncologic colorectal resections, as it can overcome many limitations of the laparoscopic approach. However, similar to the situation in laparoscopic surgery, appropriate case selection (simple vs. complex) with respect to the actual robotic expertise of the team may be a critical determinant of outcome. The present study aimed to analyze the clinical outcome after robotic colorectal surgery over time based on the complexity of the surgical procedure.MethodsAll robotic colorectal resections (n = 85) performed at the Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, between the beginning of the program in April 2015 until December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. To compare surgical outcome over time, the cohort was divided into 2 time periods based on case sequence (period 1: patients 1–43, period 2: patients 44–85). Cases were assigned a complexity level (I-IV) according to the type of resection, severity of disease, sex and body mass index (BMI). Postoperative complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo classification.ResultsIn total, 47 rectal resections (55.3%), 22 partial colectomies (25.8%), 14 abdomino-perineal resections (16.5%) and 2 proctocolectomies (2.4%) were performed. Of these, 69.4% (n = 59) were oncologic cases. The overall rate of major complications (Clavien Dindo III-V) was 16.5%. Complex cases (complexity levels III and IV) were more often followed by major complications than cases with a low to medium complexity level (I and II; 25.0 vs. 5.4%, p = 0.016). Furthermore, the rate of major complications decreased over time from 25.6% (period 1) to 7.1% (period 2, p = 0.038). Of note, the drop in major complications was associated with a learning effect, which was particularly pronounced in complex cases as well as a reduction of case complexity from 67.5% to 45.2% in the second period (p = 0.039).ConclusionsThe risk of major complications after robotic colorectal surgery increases significantly with escalating case complexity (levels III and IV), particularly during the initial phase of a new colorectal robotic surgery program. Before robotic proficiency has been achieved, it is therefore advisable to limit robotic colorectal resection to cases with complexity levels I and II in order to keep major complication rates at a minimum.

Robotic colorectal surgery checkpoint: a review of cited articles during the last year

Robotic colorectal surgery checkpoint: a review of cited articles during the last year

Chinese expert consensus on robotic surgery for colorectal cancer (2020 edition)

Robotic minimally invasive surgery is an important trend in the modern surgical techniques. The publish of Chinese Expert Consensus on Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer (2015 Edition) has played an important role in the standardization, promotion and application of robotic colorectal cancer surgery. With the concept update and technological progress, robotic colorectal cancer surgery has been further developed. Based on this, on the basis of 2015 expert consensus, the Chinese Expert Consensus on Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer (2020 Edition) is revised and published to supplement, update and improve the theoretical and technical system, so as to better guide clinical practice.