nach oben

Surgical Endoscopy

Erschienen in:

01.04.2016

A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database

verfasst von: Anuradha R. Bhama, Vincent Obias, Kathleen B. Welch, James F. Vandewarker, Robert K. Cleary

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 4/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Until randomized trials mature, large database analyses assist in determining the role of robotics in colorectal surgery. ACS NSQIP database coding now allows differentiation between laparoscopic (LC) and robotic (RC) colorectal procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare LC and RC outcomes by analyzing the ACS NSQIP database.

Methods

The ACS NSQIP database was queried to identify patients who had undergone RC and LC during 2013. Demographic characteristics, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were identified. Using propensity score matching, abdominal and pelvic colorectal operative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

Results

A total of 11,477 cases were identified. In the abdomen, 7790 LC and 299 RC cases were identified, and 2057 LC and 331 RC cases were identified in the pelvis. There were significant differences in operative time, conversion to an open procedure in the pelvis, and hospital length of stay. RC operative times were significantly longer in both abdominal and pelvic cases. Conversion rates in the pelvis were less for RC when compared to LC—10.0 and 13.7 %, respectively (p = 0.01). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for RC abdominal cases than for LC abdominal cases (4.3 vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001) and for RC pelvic cases when compared to LC pelvic cases (4.5 vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in surgical site infection (SSI), organ/space SSI, wound complications, anastomotic leak, sepsis/shock, or need for reoperation within 30 days.

Conclusion

As the robotic platform continues to grow in colorectal surgery and as technical upgrades continue to advance, comparison of outcomes requires continuous reevaluation. This study demonstrated that robotic operations have longer operative times, decreased hospital length of stay, and decreased rates of conversion to open in the pelvis. These findings warrant continued evaluation of the role of minimally invasive technical upgrades in colorectal surgery.

Pigazzi A, Ellenhorn JD, Ballantyne GH, Paz IB (2006) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 20:1521–1525CrossRefPubMed

deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Ricci J, Park JJ, Marecik SJ, Zimmern A, Blumetti J, Abcarian H (2011) A comparison of open and robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma. Dis Colon Rectum 54:275–282CrossRefPubMed

Baik SH, Kwon HY, Kim JS, Hur H, Sohn SK, Cho CH, Kim H (2009) Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1480–1487CrossRefPubMed

Pigazzi A, Luca F, Patriti A, Valvo M, Ceccarelli G, Casciola L, Biffi R, Garcia-Aguilar J, Baek JH (2010) Multicentric study on robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 17:1614–1620CrossRefPubMed

Lim DR, Min BS, Kim MS, Alasari S, Kim G, Hur H, Baik SH, Lee KY, Kim NK (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection of sigmoid colon cancer: comparative study of long-term oncologic outcomes. Surg Endosc 27:1379–1385CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

D’Annibale A, Pernazza G, Monsellato I, Pende V, Lucandri G, Mazzocchi P, Alfano G (2013) Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27:1887–1895CrossRefPubMed

Eriksen JR, Helvind NM, Jakobsen HL, Olsen J, Bundgaard M, Harvald T, Gögenur I (2013) Early results after robot-assisted colorectal surgery. Dan Med J 60:A4736PubMed

Delaney CP, Lynch AC, Senagore AJ, Fazio VW (2003) Comparison of robotically performed and traditional laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 46:1633–1639CrossRefPubMed

Anvari M, Birch DW, Bamehriz F, Gryfe R, Chapman T (2004) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 14:311–315CrossRefPubMed

10.

Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Vegunta RK, Crawford DL (2007) Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 21:1701–1708CrossRefPubMed

11.

Spinoglio G, Summa M, Priora F, Quarati R, Testa S (2008) Robotic colorectal surgery: first 50 cases experience. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1627–1632CrossRefPubMed

12.

deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ, Marecik SJ, Blumetti J, Abcarian H (2010) Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum 53:1000–1006CrossRefPubMed

13.

Deutsch GB, Sathyanarayana SA, Gunabushanam V, Mishra N, Rubach E, Zemon H, Klein JD, Denoto G III (2012) Robotic vs. laparoscopic colorectal surgery: an institutional experience. Surg Endosc 26:956–963CrossRefPubMed

14.

Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC (2013) Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum 56:458–466CrossRefPubMed

15.

Samia H, Lawrence J, Nobel T, Stein S, Champagne BJ, Delaney CP (2013) Extraction site location and incisional hernias after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: should we be avoiding the midline? Am J Surg 205:264–267CrossRefPubMed

16.

Morpurgo E, Contardo T, Molaro R, Zerbinati A, Orsini C, D’Annibale A (2013) Robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a case control study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:414–417CrossRefPubMed

17.

Casillas MA Jr, Leichtle SW, Wahl WL, Lampman RM, Welch KB, Wellock T, Madden EB, Cleary RK (2014) Improved perioperative and short-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal operations. Am J Surg 208:33–40CrossRefPubMed

18.

Trastulli S, Coratti A, Guarino S, Piagnerelli R, Annecchiarico M, Coratti F, Di Marino M, Ricci F, Desiderio J, Cirocchi R, Parisi A (2015) Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared with laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal and intracorporeal anastomosis: a retrospective multicentre study. Surg Endosc 29:1512–1521CrossRefPubMed

19.

Trinh BB, Hauch AT, Buell JF, Kandi E (2015) Robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic colorectal surgery. JSLS. doi:10.1007/s00464-014-3835-9

20.

Hellan M, Anderson C, Ellenhorn JD, Paz B, Pigazzi A (2007) Short-term outcomes after robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 14:3168–3173CrossRefPubMed

21.

Choi GS, Park IJ, Kang BM, Lim KH, Jun SH (2009) A novel approach of robotic-assisted anterior resection with transanal or transvaginal retrieval of the specimen for colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 23:2831–2835CrossRefPubMed

22.

Baek JH, McKenzie S, Garcia-Aguilar J, Pigazzi A (2010) Oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg 251:882–886CrossRefPubMed

23.

Choi DJ, Kim SH, Lee PJ, Kim J, Woo SU (2009) Single-stage totally robotic dissection for rectal cancer surgery: technique and short-term outcome in 50 consecutive patients. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1824–1830CrossRefPubMed

24.

deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Marecik SJ, Blumetti J, Park JJ, Zimmern A, Abcarian H (2010) Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the potential advantage of robotic assistance. Dis Colon Rectum 53:1611–1617CrossRefPubMed

25.

Park YA, Kim JM, Kim SA, Min BS, Kim NK, Sohn SK, Lee KY (2010) Totally robotic surgery for rectal cancer: from splenic flexure to pelvic floor in one setup. Surg Endosc 24:715–720CrossRefPubMed

26.

Koh DC, Tsang CB, Kim SH (2011) A new application of the four-arm standard da Vinci(R) surgical system: totally robotic-assisted left-sided colon or rectal resection. Surg Endosc 25:1945–1952CrossRefPubMed

27.

Leong QM, Son DN, Cho JS, Baek SJ, Kwak JM, Amar AH, Kim SH (2011) Robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: technique and short-term outcome for 29 consecutive patients. Surg Endosc 25:2987–2992CrossRefPubMed

28.

Bokhari MB, Patel CB, Ramos-Valadez DI, Ragupathi M, Haas EM (2011) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 25:855–860CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Zawadzki M, Velchuru VR, Albalawi SA, Park JJ, Marecik S, Prasad LM (2013) Is hybrid robotic laparoscopic assistance the ideal approach for restorative rectal cancer dissection? Colorectal Dis 15:1026–1032CrossRefPubMed

30.

Baek SJ, Kim CH, Cho MS, Bae SU, Hur H, Min BS, Lee KY, Kim NK (2015) Robotic surgery for rectal cancer can overcome difficulties associated with pelvic anatomy. Surg Endosc 29:1419–1424CrossRefPubMed

31.

Shiomi A, Kinugasa Y, Yamaguchi T, Tomioka H, Kagawa H (2014) Robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery: short-term outcomes for 113 consecutive patients. Int J Colorectal Dis 29:1105–1111CrossRefPubMed

32.

Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bartoli A, Spaziani A, Biancafarina A, Casciola L (2009) Short- and medium-term outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic rectal resection. JSLS 13:176–183PubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH, Jang YS, Jun SH (2010) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer: case-matched analysis of short-term outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 17:3195–3202CrossRefPubMed

34.

Bianchi PP, Ceriani C, Locatelli A, Spinoglio G, Zampino MG, Sonzogni A, Crosta C, Anderoni B (2010) Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a comparative analysis of oncological safety and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 24:2888–2894CrossRefPubMed

35.

D’Annibale A, Morpurgo E, Fiscon V, Trevisan P, Sovernigo G, Orsini C, Guidolin D (2004) Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of colorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum 47:2162–2168CrossRefPubMed

36.

Park SY, Choi GS, Park JS, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP (2013) Short-term clinical outcome of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a retrospective comparison with conventional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 27:48–55CrossRefPubMed

37.

Kang J, Yoon KJ, Min BS, Hur H, Baik SH, Kim NK, Lee KY (2013) The impact of robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer: a case-matched analysis of a 3-arm comparison—open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery. Ann Surg 257:95–101CrossRefPubMed

38.

Lin S, Jiang HG, Chen ZH, Zhou SY, Liu XS, Yu JR (2011) Meta-analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 17:5214–5220CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Memon S, Heriot AG, Murphy DG, Bressel M, Lynch AC (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 19:2095–2101CrossRefPubMed

40.

Ortiz-Oshiro E, Sanchez-Egido I, Moreno-Sierra J, Perez CF, Diaz JS, Fernandez-Represa JA (2012) Robotic assistance may reduce conversion to open in rectal carcinoma laparoscopic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot 8:360–370CrossRefPubMed

41.

Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, Shi C, Zou Y, Qin H, Ma Y (2012) Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 19:3727–3736CrossRefPubMed

42.

Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO, Pointner R, Granderath FA (2012) Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery of the colon and rectum. Surg Endosc 26:1–11CrossRefPubMed

43.

Fung AK, Aly EH (2013) Robotic colonic surgery: is it advisable to commence a new learning curve? Dis Colon Rectum 56:786–796CrossRefPubMed

44.

Liao G, Zhao Z, Lin S, Li R, Yuan Y, Du S, Chen J, Deng H (2014) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials. World J Surg Oncol 12:122CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R, Cavaliere D, Avenia N, Sciannameo F, Gulla N, Noya G, Boselli C (2012) Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis 14:e134–e156CrossRefPubMed

46.

Papanikolaou IG (2014) Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer: systematic review of the literature. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 24:478–483PubMed

47.

Kim CW, Kim CH, Baik SH (2014) Outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic and open surgery: a systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg 18:816–830CrossRefPubMed

48.

Scarpinata R, Aly EH (2013) Does robotic rectal cancer surgery offer improved early postoperative outcomes? Dis Colon Rectum 56:253–262CrossRefPubMed

49.

Tam MS, Kaoutzanis C, Mullard AJ, Regenbogen SE, Franz MG, Hendren S, Krapohl G, Vandewarker JF, Lampam RM, Cleary RK (2015) A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4218-6 PubMed

50.

Baik SH, Ko YT, Kang CM, Lee WJ, Kim NK, Sohn SK, Chi HS, Cho CH (2008) Robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized trial. Surg Endosc 22:1601–1608CrossRefPubMed

51.

Jimenez Rodriguez RM, Diaz Pavon JM, de Juan FDLP, Sillero EP, Dussort JMHC, Padillo J (2011) Prospective randomised study: robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in colorectal cancer resection. Cir Esp 89:432–438CrossRefPubMed

52.

Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP (2012) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg 99:1219–1226CrossRefPubMed

53.

Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A, Tsang C, Barrie JM, Edlin R et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27:233–241CrossRefPubMed

54.

Kwak JM, Kim SH, Kim J, Son DN, Baek SJ, Cho JS (2012) Robotic vs laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum 54:151–156CrossRef

55.

Kuo LJ, Lin YK, Chang CC, Tai CJ, Chiou JF, Chang YJ (2014) Clinical outcomes of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopy and multifactorial analysis of the learning curve for robotic surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 29:555–562CrossRefPubMed

56.

Halabi WJ, Kang CY, Jafari MD, Nguyen VQ, Carmichael JC, Mills S, Stamos MJ, Pigazzi A (2013) Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes. World J Surg 37:2782–2790CrossRefPubMed

57.

Araujo SE, Seid VE, Klajner S (2014) Robotic surgery for rectal cancer: current immediate clinical and oncological outcomes. World J Gastroenterol 20:14359–14370CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

58.

Patel CB, Ragupathi M, Ramos-Valadez DI, Haas EM (2011) A three-arm (laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and robotic) matched-case analysis of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 54:144–150CrossRefPubMed

59.

Trinh BB, Jackson NR, Hauch AT, Hu T, Kandil E (2014) Robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery. JSLS. doi:10.4293/JSLS.2014.00187

60.

Byrn JC, Hrabe JE, Charlton ME (2014) An initial experience with 85 consecutive robotic-assisted rectal dissections: improved operating times and lower costs with experience. Surg Endosc 28:3101–3107CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database
verfasst von: Anuradha R. Bhama
Vincent Obias
Kathleen B. Welch
James F. Vandewarker
Robert K. Cleary
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 4/2016
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4381-9

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

21.05.2024 Allgemeine Chirurgie Nachrichten

Ein Frauenanteil von mindestens einem Drittel im ärztlichen Op.-Team war in einer großen retrospektiven Studie aus Kanada mit einer signifikanten Reduktion der postoperativen Morbidität assoziiert.

Klinikreform soll zehntausende Menschenleben retten

15.05.2024 Klinik aktuell Nachrichten

Gesundheitsminister Lauterbach hat die vom Bundeskabinett beschlossene Klinikreform verteidigt. Kritik an den Plänen kommt vom Marburger Bund. Und in den Ländern wird über den Gang zum Vermittlungsausschuss spekuliert.

Real-World-Daten sprechen eher für Dupilumab als für Op.

14.05.2024 Rhinosinusitis Nachrichten

Zur Behandlung schwerer Formen der chronischen Rhinosinusitis mit Nasenpolypen (CRSwNP) stehen seit Kurzem verschiedene Behandlungsmethoden zur Verfügung, darunter Biologika, wie Dupilumab, und die endoskopische Sinuschirurgie (ESS). Beim Vergleich der beiden Therapieoptionen war Dupilumab leicht im Vorteil.

Vorsicht, erhöhte Blutungsgefahr nach PCI!

10.05.2024 Koronare Herzerkrankung Nachrichten

Nach PCI besteht ein erhöhtes Blutungsrisiko, wenn die Behandelten eine verminderte linksventrikuläre Ejektionsfraktion aufweisen. Das Risiko ist umso höher, je stärker die Pumpfunktion eingeschränkt ist.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

Klinikreform soll zehntausende Menschenleben retten

Real-World-Daten sprechen eher für Dupilumab als für Op.

Vorsicht, erhöhte Blutungsgefahr nach PCI!

Update Chirurgie

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2016

Are there differences between right and left colectomies when performed by laparoscopy?

Laparoscopic narrow band imaging for detection of occult cancer metastases: a randomized feasibility trial

A multicenter study of using carbon nanoparticles to show sentinel lymph nodes in early gastric cancer

Management of a solitary pulmonary arteriovenous malformation by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and anatomic lingula resection: video and review

Initial experience of transanal total mesorectal excision with rigid or flexible transanal platforms in cadavers

Enterotomy closure using knotless and barbed suture in laparoscopic upper gastrointestinal surgeries

Update Chirurgie