Comparison of early surgical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection in a single centre: A cohort study

Author:

Sultana Momotaz1,Butnari Valentin1,Mansuri Ahmer1,Rao Christopher2,Kaul Sandeep1,Boulton Richard1,Huang Joseph1,Rajendran Nirooshun1

Affiliation:

1. Barking Havering Redbridge NHS Trust, Queens Hospital

2. North Cumbria Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust

Abstract

AbstractIntroduction: Robotic platforms provide a stable tool with high-definition views and improved ergonomics compared to laparoscopic approaches. Purpose The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the intra- and short-term postoperative results of oncological resections performed robotically (RCR) and laparoscopically (LCR) at a single centre. Methods Between February 2020 and October 2022, retrospective data on RCR were compared to LCR undertaken during the same period. Parameters compared include total operative time (TOT), length of stay (LOS), re-admission rates, 30-day morbidity. Results 100 RCR and 112 LCR satisfied inclusion criteria. There was no difference between the two group’s demographic and tumour characteristics. Overall, median operative time was shorter in LCR group [200 vs 247.5 min,p < 0.005], but this advantage was not observed with pelvic and muti-quadrant resections. There was no difference in the rate of conversion [5(5%) vs 5(4.5%),p > 0.9]. With respects to perioperative outcomes, there was no difference in the overall morbidity, or mortality between RCR and LCR, in particular requirement for blood transfusion [3(3%) vs 5(4.5%),p 0.72], prolonged ileus [9(9%) vs 15(13.2%),p 0.38], surgical site infections [5(4%) vs 5(4.4%),p > 0.9] anastomotic leak [7(7%) vs 5(4.4%),p 0.55], and re-operation rate [9(9%) vs 7(6.3%),p 0.6]. RCR had shorter LOS by one night, but this did not reach statistical significance. No difference was observed in completeness of resection but there was a statically significant increase in lymph node harvest in the robotic series. Conclusion Robotic approach to oncological colorectal resections is safe, with comparable intra- and peri-operative morbidity and mortality to laparoscopic surgery.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3