Role of robotic approach in ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA): A systematic review of the literature

被引:0
作者
Zeeshan Khawaja
Zohaib Jamal
Nowera Zafar
Naqqash Adnan
Muhammad Ijlal Haider
Ahmad Zafar
Najaf Nawaz Siddiqi
机构
[1] Wrightington,
[2] Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust,undefined
[3] East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust,undefined
[4] Agha Khan Medical University,undefined
[5] University Hospitals Dorset NHS Foundation Trust,undefined
来源
Journal of Robotic Surgery | 2023年 / 17卷
关键词
Robotic surgery; Restorative proctocolectomy; Ileal pouch–anal anastomoses; Ulcerative colitis; Familial adenomatous polyposis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become standard surgical treatment of choice in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) in which the medical management fails. Despite the wide use of laparoscopic method, the enhanced and innovative features that come with the robotic platform, such as endo-wrist technology, 3D visualization, surgeon-controlled camera and motion scaling, make it an appealing choice. This study aims to investigate the feasibility and safety of robotic approach for proctectomy or proctocolectomy with IPAA as compared to conventional laparoscopic approach. A systematic review was completed for studies done between 2010 and 2022 comparing the robotic approach with the laparoscopic approach. Nine studies were found to be feasible to be included in this review. In terms of the outcomes, although the mean operating time was slightly higher than the laparoscopic approach, the other outcomes, such as mean blood loss, return of the bowel movement, mean hospital stay, and conversion to open, were found to be significantly lower in the robotic approach as compared to both laparoscopic and conventional open techniques. Despite the overall increased rate of complications combined from all the studies, the rate of significant complications such as anastomotic leaks requiring readmission and return to theater was also found to be substantially less. This study concludes that although robotic approach is in its initial stages for pelvic surgeries, it can be safely employed due to improved dexterity and visibility.
引用
收藏
页码:941 / 947
页数:6
相关论文
共 142 条
[1]  
Delaney CP(2002)Equivalent function, quality of life and pouch survival rates after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for indeterminate and ulcerative colitis Ann Surg 236 43-48
[2]  
Remzi FH(1995)Ileal pouch-anal anastomoses complications and function in 1005 patients Ann Surg 222 120-127
[3]  
Gramlich T(2013)Does robotic rectal cancer surgery offer improved early postoperative outcomes? Dis Colon Rectum 56 253-262
[4]  
Dadvand B(2019)Overlooked long-term complications of colorectal surgery Clin Colon Rectal Surg 32 204-211
[5]  
Fazio VW(2022)Laparoscopic robotic-assisted restorative proctocolectomy and ileal J-pouch-anorectal anastomosis in children Pediatr Surg Int 38 59-68
[6]  
Fazio VW(2020)Short-term results after totally robotic restorative total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 30 40-44
[7]  
Ziv Y(2019)Short-term postoperative outcomes following robotic versus laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis are equivalent Tech Coloproctol 23 259-266
[8]  
Church JM(2018)P429 robotic-assisted vs. laparoscopic proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease: results of the case-match comparison in single institution J Crohns Colitis 12 S322-40
[9]  
Oakley JR(2016)Case-matched comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 26 e37-207
[10]  
Lavery IC(2016)Short-term outcome of robot-assisted and open IPAA: an observational single-center study Dis Colon Rectum 59 201-67