Comparing pathologic outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic Surgery in rectal cancer resection: a propensity adjusted analysis of 7616 patients

被引:18
|
作者
Hopkins, M. Benjamin [1 ]
Geiger, Timothy M. [1 ]
Bethurum, Alva J. [1 ]
Ford, Molly M. [1 ]
Muldoon, Roberta L. [1 ]
Beck, David E. [1 ]
Stewart, Thomas G. [2 ]
Hawkins, Alexander T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Div Gen Surg, Sect Colon & Rectal Surg, 1161 21st Ave South,Room D5248 MCN, Nashville, TN 37232 USA
[2] Vanderbilt Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Biostat, Nashville, TN USA
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 2020年 / 34卷 / 06期
关键词
Rectal cancer; Laparoscopy; Robotic surgery; Circumferential resection margin; Rectal surgery; ASSISTED RESECTION; OPEN-LABEL; DATA-BASE; PROCTECTOMY; TRIAL; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-019-07032-1
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Margin negative resection of rectal cancer with minimally invasive techniques remains technically challenging. Robotic surgery has potential advantages over traditional laparoscopy. We hypothesize that the difference in the rate of negative margin status will be < 6% between laparoscopic and robotic approach. Methods The National Cancer Database (2010-2014) was queried for adults with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation and curative resection to conduct an observational retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database. Patients were grouped by either robotic (ROB) or laparoscopic (LAP) approach in an intent-to-treat analysis. Primary outcome was negative margin status, defined as a composite of circumferential resection margin and distal margin. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), readmission, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. Results 7616 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent minimally invasive resection were identified. 2472 (32%) underwent attempted robotic approach. The overall conversion rate was 13% and was increased in the laparoscopic group [LAP: 15% vs. ROB: 8%; OR 0.47; 95% CI (0.39, 0.57)]. Differences in margin negative resection rate were within the prespecified range of practical equivalence (LAP: 93% vs.: ROB 94%; 95% CI (0.69, 1.06); p delta For secondary outcomes, there was no difference in 30-day readmission [LAP: 9% vs.: ROB 8%; 95% CI (0.84, 1.24)] and 90-day mortality [LAP: 1% vs.: ROB 1%; 95% CI (0.38, 1.24)]. While the median LOS was 5 days in both groups, the mean LOS was 0.6 (95% CI: 0.24, 0.89) days shorter in the robotic group. Conclusion This robust analysis supports either robotic or laparoscopic approach for resection of locally advanced rectal cancer from a margin perspective. Both have similar readmission and 5-year overall survival rates. Patients undergoing robotic surgery have a 0.6-day decrease in LOS and decreased conversion rate.
引用
收藏
页码:2613 / 2622
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparing pathologic outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic Surgery in rectal cancer resection: a propensity adjusted analysis of 7616 patients
    M. Benjamin Hopkins
    Timothy M. Geiger
    Alva J. Bethurum
    Molly M. Ford
    Roberta L. Muldoon
    David E. Beck
    Thomas G. Stewart
    Alexander T. Hawkins
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2020, 34 : 2613 - 2622
  • [2] Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery in obese patients
    Gorgun, E.
    Ozben, V.
    Costedio, M.
    Stocchi, L.
    Kalady, M.
    Remzi, F.
    COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2016, 18 (11) : 1063 - 1071
  • [3] Operative and long-term oncological outcomes in patients undergoing robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer
    Bilgin, Ismail Ahmet
    Bas, Mustafa
    Aytac, Erman
    Benlice, Cigdem
    Esen, Eren
    Kirbiyik, Ebru
    Kiziltas, Cansu
    Aghayeva, Afag
    Ozben, Volkan
    Hamzaoglu, Ismail
    Karahasanoglu, Tayfun
    Baca, Bilgi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ROBOTICS AND COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY, 2020, 16 (06): : 1 - 10
  • [4] A Comparison of Pathologic Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Resections for Rectal Cancer Using the ACS-NSQIP Proctectomy-Targeted Database: a Propensity Score Analysis
    Garfinkle, Richard
    Abou-Khalil, Maria
    Bhatnagar, Sahir
    Wong-Chong, Nathalie
    Azoulay, Laurent
    Morin, Nancy
    Vasilevsky, Carol-Ann
    Boutros, Marylise
    JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2019, 23 (02) : 348 - 356
  • [5] Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: A propensity-score matching analysis
    Chen, Tzu-Chun
    Liang, Jin-Tung
    JOURNAL OF THE FORMOSAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2022, 121 (08) : 1532 - 1540
  • [6] Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis
    Takamizawa, Yasuyuki
    Tsukamoto, Shunsuke
    Kato, Takeharu
    Nagata, Hiroshi
    Moritani, Konosuke
    Kanemitsu, Yukihide
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2025, 39 (01): : 184 - 193
  • [7] Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in colon and rectal cancer
    Shin, Jae-Won
    Kim, Seon-Hahn
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2012, 55 (07): : 620 - 628
  • [8] Propensity score-matched analysis comparing laparoscopic to robotic surgery for colorectal cancer shows comparable clinical and oncological outcomes
    Fleming, Christina A.
    Ullah, Muhamad Fahad
    Chang, Kah Hoong
    McNamara, Emma
    Condon, Eoghan
    Waldron, David
    Coffey, J. Calvin
    Peirce, Colin B.
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2021, 15 (03) : 389 - 396
  • [9] Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic low anterior resection using ArtiSential® versus robotic approach in patients with rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis
    Kim, I. K.
    Lee, C. S.
    Bae, J. H.
    Han, S. R.
    Alshalawi, W.
    Kim, B. C.
    Lee, I. K.
    Lee, D. S.
    Lee, Y. S.
    TECHNIQUES IN COLOPROCTOLOGY, 2024, 28 (01)
  • [10] A Comparison of Pathologic Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Resections for Rectal Cancer Using the ACS-NSQIP Proctectomy-Targeted Database: a Propensity Score Analysis
    Richard Garfinkle
    Maria Abou-Khalil
    Sahir Bhatnagar
    Nathalie Wong-Chong
    Laurent Azoulay
    Nancy Morin
    Carol-Ann Vasilevsky
    Marylise Boutros
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2019, 23 : 348 - 356