Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 6/2017

21.09.2016

Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis

verfasst von: Scott C. Dolejs, Joshua A. Waters, Eugene P. Ceppa, Ben L. Zarzaur

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 6/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Robotic colorectal surgery is being increasingly adopted. Our objective was to compare early postoperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic colectomy in a nationally representative sample.

Methods

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Colectomy Targeted Dataset from 2012 to 2014 was used for this study. Adult patients undergoing elective colectomy with an anastomosis were included. Patients were stratified based on location of colorectal resection (low anterior resection (LAR), left-sided resection, or right-sided resection). Bivariate data analysis was performed, and logistic regression modeling was conducted to calculate risk-adjusted 30-day outcomes.

Results

There were a total of 25,998 laparoscopic colectomies (30 % LAR’s, 45 % left-sided, and 25 % right-sided) and 1484 robotic colectomies (54 % LAR’s, 28 % left-sided, and 18 % right-sided). The risk-adjusted overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality were similar between laparoscopic and robotic approaches in all anastomotic groups. Patients undergoing robotic LAR had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.47, 95 % CI 1.20–1.76) and postoperative sepsis rate (OR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.29–0.85) but a higher rate of diverting ostomies (OR 1.45, 95 % CI 1.20–1.76). Robotic right-sided colectomies had significantly lower conversion rates (OR 0.58, 95 % CI 0.34–0.96). Robotic colectomy in all groups was associated with a longer operative time (by 40 min) and a decreased length of stay (by 0.5 days).

Conclusions

In a nationally representative sample comparing laparoscopic and robotic colectomies, the overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality between groups are similar while length of stay was shorter by 0.5 days in the robotic colectomy group. Robotic LAR was associated with lower conversion rates and lower septic complications. However, robotic LAR is also associated with a significantly higher rate of diverting ostomy. The reason for this relationship is unclear. Surgeon factors, patient factors, and technical factors should be considered in future studies.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Wright JD, Tergas AI, Hou JY et al (2016) Effect of regional hospital competition and hospital financial status on the use of robotic-assisted surgery. JAMA Surg. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.5508 Wright JD, Tergas AI, Hou JY et al (2016) Effect of regional hospital competition and hospital financial status on the use of robotic-assisted surgery. JAMA Surg. doi:10.​1001/​jamasurg.​2015.​5508
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Zarak A, Castillo A, Kichler K, de la Cruz L, Tamariz L, Kaza S (2015) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colonic disease: a meta-analysis of postoperative variables. Surg Endosc 29(6):1341–1347. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4197-7 CrossRefPubMed Zarak A, Castillo A, Kichler K, de la Cruz L, Tamariz L, Kaza S (2015) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colonic disease: a meta-analysis of postoperative variables. Surg Endosc 29(6):1341–1347. doi:10.​1007/​s00464-015-4197-7 CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Zerey M, Hawver LM, Awad Z, Stefanidis D, Richardson W, Fanelli RD, Members of the SGC (2013) SAGES evidence-based guidelines for the laparoscopic resection of curable colon and rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27(1):1–10. doi:10.1007/s00464-012-2592-x CrossRefPubMed Zerey M, Hawver LM, Awad Z, Stefanidis D, Richardson W, Fanelli RD, Members of the SGC (2013) SAGES evidence-based guidelines for the laparoscopic resection of curable colon and rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27(1):1–10. doi:10.​1007/​s00464-012-2592-x CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat 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(12):3727–3736. doi:10.1245/s10434-012-2429-9 CrossRefPubMed 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(12):3727–3736. doi:10.​1245/​s10434-012-2429-9 CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Wormer BA, Dacey KT, Williams KB, Bradley JF 3rd, Walters AL, Augenstein VA, Stefanidis D, Heniford BT (2014) The first nationwide evaluation of robotic general surgery: a regionalized, small but safe start. Surg Endosc 28(3):767–776. doi:10.1007/s00464-013-3239-2 CrossRefPubMed Wormer BA, Dacey KT, Williams KB, Bradley JF 3rd, Walters AL, Augenstein VA, Stefanidis D, Heniford BT (2014) The first nationwide evaluation of robotic general surgery: a regionalized, small but safe start. Surg Endosc 28(3):767–776. doi:10.​1007/​s00464-013-3239-2 CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat 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(4):e134–e156. doi:10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02907.x CrossRefPubMed 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(4):e134–e156. doi:10.​1111/​j.​1463-1318.​2011.​02907.​x CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Tam MS, Kaoutzanis C, Mullard AJ, Regenbogen SE, Franz MG, Hendren S, Krapohl G, Vandewarker JF, Lampman 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 Tam MS, Kaoutzanis C, Mullard AJ, Regenbogen SE, Franz MG, Hendren S, Krapohl G, Vandewarker JF, Lampman 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
14.
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Shiloach M, Frencher SK Jr, Steeger JE, Rowell KS, Bartzokis K, Tomeh MG, Richards KE, Ko CY, Hall BL (2010) Toward robust information: data quality and inter-rater reliability in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg 210(1):6–16. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.09.031 CrossRefPubMed Shiloach M, Frencher SK Jr, Steeger JE, Rowell KS, Bartzokis K, Tomeh MG, Richards KE, Ko CY, Hall BL (2010) Toward robust information: data quality and inter-rater reliability in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg 210(1):6–16. doi:10.​1016/​j.​jamcollsurg.​2009.​09.​031 CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Ezekian B, Sun Z, Adam MA, Kim J, Turner MC, Gilmore BF, Ong CT, Mantyh CR, Migaly J (2016) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy results in increased operative time without improved perioperative outcomes. J Gastrointest Surg. doi:10.1007/s11605-016-3124-0 Ezekian B, Sun Z, Adam MA, Kim J, Turner MC, Gilmore BF, Ong CT, Mantyh CR, Migaly J (2016) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy results in increased operative time without improved perioperative outcomes. J Gastrointest Surg. doi:10.​1007/​s11605-016-3124-0
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Bhama AR, Obias V, Welch KB, Vandewarker JF, Cleary RK (2015) A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4381-9 PubMed Bhama AR, Obias V, Welch KB, Vandewarker JF, Cleary RK (2015) A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Surg Endosc. doi:10.​1007/​s00464-015-4381-9 PubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Morris MS, Graham LA, Chu DI, Cannon JA, Hawn MT (2015) Oral antibiotic bowel preparation significantly reduces surgical site infection rates and readmission rates in elective colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 261(6):1034–1040. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001125 CrossRefPubMed Morris MS, Graham LA, Chu DI, Cannon JA, Hawn MT (2015) Oral antibiotic bowel preparation significantly reduces surgical site infection rates and readmission rates in elective colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 261(6):1034–1040. doi:10.​1097/​sla.​0000000000001125​ CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Scarborough JE, Mantyh CR, Sun Z, Migaly J (2015) Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation reduces incisional surgical site infection and anastomotic leak rates after elective colorectal resection: an analysis of colectomy-targeted ACS NSQIP. Ann Surg 262(2):331–337. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001041 CrossRefPubMed Scarborough JE, Mantyh CR, Sun Z, Migaly J (2015) Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation reduces incisional surgical site infection and anastomotic leak rates after elective colorectal resection: an analysis of colectomy-targeted ACS NSQIP. Ann Surg 262(2):331–337. doi:10.​1097/​sla.​0000000000001041​ CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Reichenbach DJ, Tackett AD, Harris J, Camacho D, Graviss EA, Dewan B, Vavra A, Stiles A, Fisher WE, Brunicardi FC, Sweeney JF (2006) Laparoscopic colon resection early in the learning curve: What is the appropriate setting? Ann Surg 243(6):730–735; discussion 735–737. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000220039.26524.fa Reichenbach DJ, Tackett AD, Harris J, Camacho D, Graviss EA, Dewan B, Vavra A, Stiles A, Fisher WE, Brunicardi FC, Sweeney JF (2006) Laparoscopic colon resection early in the learning curve: What is the appropriate setting? Ann Surg 243(6):730–735; discussion 735–737. doi:10.​1097/​01.​sla.​0000220039.​26524.​fa
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Fazio VW (2005) Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: comparison of right-sided and left-sided resections. Ann Surg 242(1):83–91CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Fazio VW (2005) Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: comparison of right-sided and left-sided resections. Ann Surg 242(1):83–91CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Dincler S, Koller MT, Steurer J, Bachmann LM, Christen D, Buchmann P (2003) Multidimensional analysis of learning curves in laparoscopic sigmoid resection: eight-year results. Dis Colon Rectum 46(10):1371–1378; discussion 1378–1379. doi:10.1097/01.dcr.0000089054.22223.41 Dincler S, Koller MT, Steurer J, Bachmann LM, Christen D, Buchmann P (2003) Multidimensional analysis of learning curves in laparoscopic sigmoid resection: eight-year results. Dis Colon Rectum 46(10):1371–1378; discussion 1378–1379. doi:10.​1097/​01.​dcr.​0000089054.​22223.​41
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, Min BS, Baik SH, Lee KY, Kim NK (2015) Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 261(1):129–137. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000613 CrossRefPubMed Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, Min BS, Baik SH, Lee KY, Kim NK (2015) Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 261(1):129–137. doi:10.​1097/​SLA.​0000000000000613​ CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Baik SH, Kim NK, Lim DR, Hur H, Min BS, Lee KY (2013) Oncologic outcomes and perioperative clinicopathologic results after robot-assisted tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 20(8):2625–2632. doi:10.1245/s10434-013-2895-8 CrossRefPubMed Baik SH, Kim NK, Lim DR, Hur H, Min BS, Lee KY (2013) Oncologic outcomes and perioperative clinicopathologic results after robot-assisted tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 20(8):2625–2632. doi:10.​1245/​s10434-013-2895-8 CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis
verfasst von
Scott C. Dolejs
Joshua A. Waters
Eugene P. Ceppa
Ben L. Zarzaur
Publikationsdatum
21.09.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 6/2017
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5239-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2017

Surgical Endoscopy 6/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

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

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis 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
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ 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
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

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

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
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
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.