Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
Erschienen in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2/2014

01.02.2014 | Evidence-Based Current Surgical Practice

Robotic Colorectal Surgery

verfasst von: Carrie Y. Peterson, Martin R. Weiser

Erschienen in: Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery | Ausgabe 2/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Minimally invasive surgery has many potential benefits, and the application of recently developed robotic technology to patients with colorectal diseases is rapidly gaining popularity.

Quality and Outcomes

However, the literature evaluating such techniques, including the outcomes, risks, and costs, is limited. In this review, we evaluate and summarize the existing information, calling attention to areas where future investigation should occur.
Literatur
1.
Jacobs, M., J.C. Verdeja, and H.S. Goldstein, Minimally invasive colon resection (laparoscopic colectomy). Surgical Laparoscopy & Endoscopy, 1991. 1(3): p. 144–50.
2.
Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 2004. 350(20): p. 2050–9.CrossRef
3.
Jayne, D.G., et al., Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. British Journal of Surgery, 2010. 97(11): p. 1638–45.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Jayne, D.G., et al., Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol, 2007. 25(21): p. 3061–8.PubMedCrossRef
5.
van der Pas, M.H., et al., Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology, 2013. 14(3): p. 210–8.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Li, J.C., et al., Institution learning curve of laparoscopic colectomy—a multi-dimensional analysis. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2012. 27(4): p. 527–33.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Peterson, C.Y., et al., Technical aspects of robotic proctectomy. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 2012. 22(3): p. 189–93.CrossRef
8.
Jimenez-Rodriguez, R.M., et al., Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2012. 28(6): p. 815–21.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Ragupathi, M., et al., Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for recurrent diverticulitis: experience in consecutive cases and a review of the literature. Surgical Endoscopy, 2011. 25(1): p. 199–206.PubMedCrossRef
10.
de Hoog, D.E., et al., Recurrence and functional results after open versus conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a case–control study. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2009. 24(10): p. 1201–6.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
11.
Wong, M.T., et al., Robotic versus laparoscopic rectopexy for complex rectocele: a prospective comparison of short-term outcomes. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 2011. 54(3): p. 342–6.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Ragupathi, M., et al., Robotic-assisted laparoscopic “salvage” rectopexy for recurrent ileoanal J-pouch prolapse. Gastroenterology Research and Practice, 2010. 2010: p. 790462.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
13.
McLemore, E.C., et al., Robotic-assisted laparoscopic stage II restorative proctectomy for toxic ulcerative colitis. International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, 2012. 8(2): p. 178–83.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Miller, A.T., et al., Robotic-assisted proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease: a case-matched comparison of laparoscopic and robotic technique. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2012. 16(3): p. 587–94.PubMedCrossRef
15.
16.
Asgeirsson, T. and A.J. Senagore, Colon Cancer, in Current Surgical Therapy, J.L. Cameron and A.M. Cameron, Editors. 2011, Elsevier Inc.: Philadelphia.
17.
18.
Kim, H. and M.R. Weiser, Rectal Cancer, in Clinical Scenarios in General Surgery: Decision Making and Operative Technique, J.B. Dimick, Editor. 2012, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia.
19.
Beets, G.L. and R.G. Beets-Tan, Pretherapy imaging of rectal cancers: ERUS or MRI? Surgical Oncology Clinics of North America, 2010. 19(4): p. 733–41.PubMedCrossRef
20.
21.
Sauer, R., et al., Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 2004. 351(17): p. 1731–40.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Kapiteijn, E., et al., Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 2001. 345(9): p. 638–46.PubMedCrossRef
23.
MacFarlane, J.K., R.D. Ryall, and R.J. Heald, Mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. The Lancet, 1993. 341(8843): p. 457–60.CrossRef
24.
Kang CY, H.W., Luo R, Pigazzi A, Nguyen NT, Stamos MJ., Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a better look into the latest trends. Arch Surg, 2012. 147(8): p. 724–731.
25.
Scarpinata, R. and E.H. Aly, Does robotic rectal cancer surgery offer improved early postoperative outcomes? Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 2013. 56(2): p. 253–62.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zhang, J.L. and G.D. Zhang, Risk factors analysis and scoring system application of conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 2011. 21(5): p. 322–6.CrossRef
27.
Patriti, A., et al., Short- and medium-term outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic rectal resection. Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 2009. 13(2): p. 176–83.PubMed
28.
deSouza, A.L., et al., Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the potential advantage of robotic assistance. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 2010. 53(12): p. 1611–7.
29.
D'Annibale, A., et al., Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surgical Endoscopy, 2013. 27(6): p. 1887–95.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Baik, S., et al., Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection of Rectal Cancer: Short-Term Outcome of a Prospective Comparative Study. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2009. 16(6): p. 1480–1487.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Pigazzi, A., et al., Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surgical Endoscopy, 2006. 20(10): p. 1521–1525.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Park, Y., et al., Totally robotic surgery for rectal cancer: from splenic flexure to pelvic floor in one setup. Surgical Endoscopy, 2010. 24(3): p. 715–720.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Hellan, M., H. Stein, and A. Pigazzi, Totally robotic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision and splenic flexure mobilization. Surgical Endoscopy, 2009. 23(2): p. 447–451.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Jafari, M.D., et al., The use of indocyanine green fluorescence to assess anastomotic perfusion during robotic assisted laparoscopic rectal surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, 2013. 27(8): p. 3003–8.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Adamina, M., et al., Randomized clinical trial comparing the cost and effectiveness of bipolar vessel sealers versus clips and vascular staplers for laparoscopic colorectal resection. British Journal of Surgery, 2011. 98(12): p. 1703–12.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Ramamoorthy, S. and V. Obias, Unique complications of robotic colorectal surgery. Surgical Clinics of North America, 2013. 93(1): p. 273–86.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Hung, C.F., et al., Bowel complication during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Anticancer Research, 2011. 31(10): p. 3497–501.PubMed
38.
Ou, Y.C., et al., The learning curve for reducing complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon. BJU International, 2011. 108(3): p. 420–5.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Wedmid, A., et al., Rectal injury during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: incidence and management. Journal of Urology, 2011. 186(5): p. 1928–33.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Patel, C.B., et al., A three-arm (laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and robotic) matched-case analysis of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 2011. 54(2): p. 144–50.PubMedCrossRef
41.
42.
Collinson, F.J., et al., An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2012. 27(2): p. 233–41.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Memon, S., et al., Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol, 2012. 19(7): p. 2095–101.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Lin, S., et al., Meta-analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of rectal cancer. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 2011. 17(47): p. 5214–20.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Trastulli, S., et al., Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Disease, 2012. 14(4): p. e134-56.PubMedCrossRef
46.
Yang, Y., et al., Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol, 2012. 19(12): p. 3727–36.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Tyler, J.A., et al., Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 2013. 56(4): p. 458–66.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Kang, J., et al., 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. Annals of Surgery, 2013. 257(1): p. 95–101.PubMedCrossRef
49.
deSouza, A.L., et al., A comparison of open and robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal adenocarcinoma. Diseases of the colon and rectum, 2011. 54(3): p. 275–82.CrossRef
50.
Leitao, M.M., Jr., et al., Introduction of a computer-based surgical platform in the surgical care of patients with newly diagnosed uterine cancer: outcomes and impact on approach. Gynecologic Oncology, 2012. 125(2): p. 394–9.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Kim, J.Y., et al., A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol, 2012. 19(8): p. 2485–93.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Alemozaffar, M., et al., Technical refinement and learning curve for attenuating neurapraxia during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy to improve sexual function. European Urology, 2012. 61(6): p. 1222–8.PubMedCrossRef
53.
54.
Woelk, J.L., et al., The learning curve of robotic hysterectomy. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2013. 121(1): p. 87–95.PubMed
55.
Kilic, G.S., et al., Effect of residents' previous laparoscopic surgery experience on initial robotic suturing experience. ISRN Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2012. 2012: p. 569456.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
56.
Perrenot, C., et al., The virtual reality simulator dV-Trainer((R)) is a valid assessment tool for robotic surgical skills. Surgical Endoscopy, 2012. 26(9): p. 2587–93.PubMedCrossRef
57.
deSouza, A.L., et al., Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 2010. 53(7): p. 1000–6.CrossRef
58.
Park, J.S., et al., Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. British Journal of Surgery, 2012. 99(9): p. 1219–26.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Trastulli, S., et al., Robotic right colectomy for cancer with intracorporeal anastomosis: short-term outcomes from a single institution. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 2012. 28(6): p. 807–14.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Huettner, F., et al., One hundred and two consecutive robotic-assisted minimally invasive colectomies--an outcome and technical update. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2011. 15(7): p. 1195–204.PubMedCrossRef
61.
62.
Luca, F., et al., Surgical and pathological outcomes after right hemicolectomy: case-matched study comparing robotic and open surgery. International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, 2011. doi: 10.​1002/​rcs.​398.PubMed
63.
Rawlings, A.L., et al., Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Surgical Endoscopy, 2007. 21(10): p. 1701–8.PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Robotic Colorectal Surgery
verfasst von
Carrie Y. Peterson
Martin R. Weiser
Publikationsdatum
01.02.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery / Ausgabe 2/2014
Print ISSN: 1091-255X
Elektronische ISSN: 1873-4626
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-013-2313-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2014

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 2/2014 Zur Ausgabe

2013 SSAT Plenary Presentation

Pharmacologic Prophylaxis, Postoperative INR, and Risk of Venous Thromboembolism after Hepatectomy

2013 SSAT Plenary Presentation

Overexpressing TNF-Alpha in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Cells and Fibroblasts Modifies Cell Survival and Reduces Fatty Acid Synthesis via Downregulation of Sterol Regulatory Element Binding Protein-1 and Activation of Acetyl CoA Carboxylase

2013 SSAT Plenary Presentation

Clinical Significance of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules in Esophageal Cancer Patients

2013 SSAT Poster Presentation

Weight Loss Interventions for Morbidly Obese Patients with Compensated Cirrhosis: A Markov Decision Analysis Model

2013 SSAT Poster Presentation

Clinical and Pathologic Features Influencing Survival in Patients Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

2013 SSAT Poster Presentation

Management of Acute Cholecystitis: Prevalence of Percutaneous Cholecystostomy and Delayed Cholecystectomy in the Elderly

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

23.04.2024 | Ablationstherapie | Nachrichten

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 | Appendizitis | Nachrichten

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 | Operationsvorbereitung | Nachrichten

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

19.04.2024 | EAU 2024 | Kongressbericht | Nachrichten

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich
weitere anzeigen

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
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

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
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

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
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.