Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2018

31.08.2018 | Colorectal Cancer

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Sphincter-Saving Surgery: Results of a Single-Center Series of 400 Consecutive Patients and Perspectives

verfasst von: Philippe Rouanet, MD, PhD, Martin Marie Bertrand, MD, Marta Jarlier, MSc, Anne Mourregot, MD, Drissa Traore, MD, Christophe Taoum, MD, Hélène de Forges, PhD, Pierre-Emmanuel Colombo, MD, PhD

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 12/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study is to compare robotic total mesorectal excision (R-TME) with laparoscopic TME (L-TME) in a series of consecutive rectal cancer patients.

Background

R-TME and L-TME have drawn contradictory reports. A recent phase III trial (ROLARR) concluded that R-TME performed by surgeons with varying experience did not confer an advantage in rectal cancer resection.

Patients and Methods

In this retrospective single-center cohort study (8/2008 to 4/2015), data were prospectively registered. A total of 200 L-TME and 200 R-TME were operated consecutively without selection. The primary outcome was the conversion rate to open laparotomy or transanal TME. The secondary endpoints were type of anastomosis, operative time, postoperative morbidity, circumferential radial (CRM) and distal margins, quality of life, bladder and sexual dysfunction, and oncological outcomes.

Results

Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Type of anastomosis [colo-anal anastomosis (CAA) 40% vs 49%; p < 0.001], transanal TME (5% vs 13%; p = 0.005), and conversion rate (2% vs 9.5%; odd ratio (OR): 0.19 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.05–0.60]) were significantly different. Intersphincteric resection (39% vs 47%), diverting stoma (66.5% vs 68%), CRM involvement, median operative time (243 vs 232 min), and R0 resection rate were similar. Conversion risk was lower for R-TME in male patients and those with small tumors (< 5 cm). The 3-year overall survival rate was 84.1% [77.3–88.9%] and 88.4% [82.9–92.2%] in the R-TME and L-TME group. No significant differences were reported in quality of life, and urinary or sexual function.

Conclusions

R-TME is less likely to be converted to open surgery than L-TME; operative time and curative pathologic criteria are equivalent. Future prospective trial should compare standardized procedures performed by experienced surgeons for subgroups of high-risk patients.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2015;261:129–137.CrossRefPubMed Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2015;261:129–137.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Gómez Ruiz M, Alonso Martin J, Cagigas Fernández C, et al. Short- and mid-term outcomes of robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Our experience after 198 consecutive cases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42:848–854.CrossRefPubMed Gómez Ruiz M, Alonso Martin J, Cagigas Fernández C, et al. Short- and mid-term outcomes of robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Our experience after 198 consecutive cases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42:848–854.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Kang J, Yoon KJ, Min BS, 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. Ann Surg. 2013;257:95–101.CrossRefPubMed Kang J, Yoon KJ, Min BS, 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. Ann Surg. 2013;257:95–101.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hara M, Sng K, Yoo BE, et al. Robotic-assisted surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma: short-term and midterm outcomes from 200 consecutive cases at a single institution. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:570–577.CrossRefPubMed Hara M, Sng K, Yoo BE, et al. Robotic-assisted surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma: short-term and midterm outcomes from 200 consecutive cases at a single institution. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:570–577.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Tang B, Zhang C, Li C, et al. Robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a series of 392 cases and mid-term outcomes from a single center in China. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21:569–576.CrossRefPubMed Tang B, Zhang C, Li C, et al. Robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a series of 392 cases and mid-term outcomes from a single center in China. J Gastrointest Surg. 2017;21:569–576.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, et al. Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318:1569–1580.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, et al. Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318:1569–1580.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Wright JD. Robotic-assisted surgery: balancing evidence and implementation. JAMA. 2017;318:1545–1547.CrossRefPubMed Wright JD. Robotic-assisted surgery: balancing evidence and implementation. JAMA. 2017;318:1545–1547.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Colombo P-E, Bertrand MM, Alline M, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for sphincter-saving surgery: Is there any difference in the transanal TME rectal approach? A single-center series of 120 consecutive patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:1594–1600.CrossRefPubMed Colombo P-E, Bertrand MM, Alline M, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for sphincter-saving surgery: Is there any difference in the transanal TME rectal approach? A single-center series of 120 consecutive patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:1594–1600.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Bertrand MM, Colombo P-E, Mourregot A, et al. Standardized single docking, four arms and fully robotic proctectomy for rectal cancer: the key points are the ports and arms placement. J Robot Surg. 2016;10:171–174.CrossRefPubMed Bertrand MM, Colombo P-E, Mourregot A, et al. Standardized single docking, four arms and fully robotic proctectomy for rectal cancer: the key points are the ports and arms placement. J Robot Surg. 2016;10:171–174.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Rouanet P, Mourregot A, Azar CC, et al. Transanal endoscopic proctectomy: an innovative procedure for difficult resection of rectal tumors in men with narrow pelvis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:408–415.CrossRefPubMed Rouanet P, Mourregot A, Azar CC, et al. Transanal endoscopic proctectomy: an innovative procedure for difficult resection of rectal tumors in men with narrow pelvis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:408–415.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Kwak JM, Kim SH, Kim J, et al. Robotic vs laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54:151–156.CrossRefPubMed Kwak JM, Kim SH, Kim J, et al. Robotic vs laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011;54:151–156.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Pigazzi A, Luca F, Patriti A, et al. Multicentric study on robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1614–1620.CrossRefPubMed Pigazzi A, Luca F, Patriti A, et al. Multicentric study on robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1614–1620.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Baek SJ, Kim CH, Cho MS, et al. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer can overcome difficulties associated with pelvic anatomy. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:1419–1424.CrossRefPubMed Baek SJ, Kim CH, Cho MS, et al. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer can overcome difficulties associated with pelvic anatomy. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:1419–1424.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, et al. Short and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94:e522.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, et al. Short and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94:e522.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Lin S, Jiang H-G, Chen Z-H, et al. Meta-analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17:5214–5220.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lin S, Jiang H-G, Chen Z-H, et al. Meta-analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2011;17:5214–5220.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R, et al. Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:e134–156.CrossRefPubMed Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R, et al. Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis. 2012;14:e134–156.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Memon S, Heriot AG, Murphy DG, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2095–2101.CrossRefPubMed Memon S, Heriot AG, Murphy DG, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2095–2101.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3727–3736.CrossRefPubMed Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3727–3736.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat González Fernández AM, Mascareñas González JF. Total laparoscopic mesorectal excision versus robot-assisted in the treatment of rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Cirugia Espanola. 2012;90:348–354.CrossRefPubMed González Fernández AM, Mascareñas González JF. Total laparoscopic mesorectal excision versus robot-assisted in the treatment of rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Cirugia Espanola. 2012;90:348–354.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Ortiz-Oshiro E, Sánchez-Egido I, Moreno-Sierra J, et al. Robotic assistance may reduce conversion to open in rectal carcinoma laparoscopic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg MRCAS. 2012;8:360–370.CrossRef Ortiz-Oshiro E, Sánchez-Egido I, Moreno-Sierra J, et al. Robotic assistance may reduce conversion to open in rectal carcinoma laparoscopic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot Comput Assist Surg MRCAS. 2012;8:360–370.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. J Surg Res. 2014;188:404–414.CrossRefPubMed Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. J Surg Res. 2014;188:404–414.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Li X, Wang T, Yao L, et al. The safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic TME in patients with rectal cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:e7585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Li X, Wang T, Yao L, et al. The safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic TME in patients with rectal cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96:e7585.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Rubio-Dorado-Manzanares M, Díaz-Pavón JM, et al. Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2016;31:1807–1815.CrossRefPubMed Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Rubio-Dorado-Manzanares M, Díaz-Pavón JM, et al. Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2016;31:1807–1815.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HJ, Choi G-S, Park JS, et al. Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: lessons from a single surgeon’s experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:1066–1074.CrossRefPubMed Kim HJ, Choi G-S, Park JS, et al. Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: lessons from a single surgeon’s experience. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:1066–1074.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Díaz-Pavón JM, de la Portilla de Juan F, et al. Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013;28:815–821.CrossRefPubMed Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Díaz-Pavón JM, de la Portilla de Juan F, et al. Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013;28:815–821.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Green BL, Marshall HC, Collinson F, et al. Long-term follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of conventional versus laparoscopically assisted resection in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2013;100:75–82.CrossRefPubMed Green BL, Marshall HC, Collinson F, et al. Long-term follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of conventional versus laparoscopically assisted resection in colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2013;100:75–82.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Haglind E, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:194.PubMed Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Haglind E, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:194.PubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Jeong S-Y, Park JW, Nam BH, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:767–774.CrossRefPubMed Jeong S-Y, Park JW, Nam BH, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:767–774.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Stevenson ARL, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1356–1363.CrossRefPubMed Stevenson ARL, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1356–1363.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1346–1355.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1346–1355.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, et al. Transanal total mesorectal excision: international registry results of the first 720 cases. Ann Surg. 2017;266:111–117.CrossRefPubMed Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, et al. Transanal total mesorectal excision: international registry results of the first 720 cases. Ann Surg. 2017;266:111–117.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Escal L, Nougaret S, Guiu B, et al. MRI-based score to predict surgical difficulty in patients with rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2018;105:140–146.CrossRefPubMed Escal L, Nougaret S, Guiu B, et al. MRI-based score to predict surgical difficulty in patients with rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2018;105:140–146.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Rouanet P, Gourgou S, Gogenur I, et al. Rectal Surgery Evaluation Trial (RESET): protocol for a parallel cohort trial of outcomes using surgical techniques for total mesorectal excision with low anterior resection in high-risk rectal cancer patients. Colorectal Dis. (submitted). Rouanet P, Gourgou S, Gogenur I, et al. Rectal Surgery Evaluation Trial (RESET): protocol for a parallel cohort trial of outcomes using surgical techniques for total mesorectal excision with low anterior resection in high-risk rectal cancer patients. Colorectal Dis. (submitted).
Metadaten
Titel
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision for Sphincter-Saving Surgery: Results of a Single-Center Series of 400 Consecutive Patients and Perspectives
verfasst von
Philippe Rouanet, MD, PhD
Martin Marie Bertrand, MD
Marta Jarlier, MSc
Anne Mourregot, MD
Drissa Traore, MD
Christophe Taoum, MD
Hélène de Forges, PhD
Pierre-Emmanuel Colombo, MD, PhD
Publikationsdatum
31.08.2018
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 12/2018
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6738-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2018

Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

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

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.