Advertisement

Journal of Robotic Surgery

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 545–555 | Cite as

Robotic colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis is feasible with no operative conversions during the learning curve for an experienced laparoscopic surgeon developing a robotics program

  • David BlumbergEmail author
Original Article
  • 93 Downloads

Abstract

The benefits of performing a colectomy robotically instead of laparoscopically have not conclusively been demonstrated. Evaluation of studies is limited by sample size, retrospective design, heterogeneity of operative techniques, sparse adjustment for learning curve, and mixed results. Consequently, adoption of robotic colectomy by surgeons has been expectedly slow. The objectives of the study were to compare the outcomes of robotic colectomy to laparoscopic colectomy for patients with right-sided tumors undergoing a standardized completely intracorporeal operation and to examine the impact of prior experience with laparoscopic right colectomies on the performance of robotic right colectomies. Retrospective review of outcomes of consecutive patients undergoing a robotic right colectomy (robot) compared to those undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (LAP). LAP patients were further subdivided into a group during the learning curve (LC) and after the learning curve (post-LC). Data collected included operative time (OT), conversion to laparotomy, lymph nodes harvested (LN), length of stay (LOS), 30-day morbidity, and mortality. Comparison of continuous and categorical variables was assessed with the independent samples t test and Chi-square test, respectively. Data are expressed as mean ± SD, and significance defined as p < 0.05. 122 patients underwent robot (n = 21), LAP (n = 101), LC (n = 51), or post-LC (n = 50). OT was decreased for post-LC compared to LC (198 vs. 228 min). There were no conversions in robot and five with LAP. Morbidity was similar for robot (14%) compared to LAP (22%), LC (24%), or post-LC cases (20%). Median LOS was similar for robot vs. LAP (3 vs. 5 days). Robot had greater mean LN yield vs. LAP (19 vs. 14, p = 0.02). The initial outcomes with completely intracorporeal colectomy achieved robotically were equivalent to results during or after LC for laparoscopic resection. Proficiency gained with LAP seems to positively impact the initial results with the robot.

Keywords

Robotic colon surgery Laparoscopic colon surgery Colon tumor 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

David Blumberg, M.D. declares that he no conflicts of interest.

Ethical standards

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Data collection, informed consent, and presentation of this data were in compliance with the Lifebridge Health IRB protocol obtained prior to beginning this retrospective study.

References

  1. 1.
    Juo YY, Hyder O, Haider AH, Camp M, Lidor A, Ahuja N (2014) Is minimally invasive colon resection better than traditional approaches? First comprehensive national examination with propensity score matching. JAMA Surg 149(2):177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schootman M, Hendren S, Ratnapradipa K, Stringer L, Davidson NO (2016) Adoption of robotic technology for treating colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 59(11):1011–1018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Disbrow DE, Pannell SM, Shanker BA, Albright J, Wu J, Bastawrous A, Soliman M, Ferraro J, Cleary RK (2018) The effect of formal robotic residency training on the adoption of minimally invasive surgery by young colorectal surgeons. J Surg Educ 75(3):767–778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yeo HL, Isaacs AJ, Abelson JS, Milsom JW, Sedrakyan A (2016) Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomies using a large national database: outcomes and trends related to surgery center volume. Dis Colon Rectum 59(6):535–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weeks JC, Nelson H, Gelber S, Sargent D, Schroeder G, Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST) Study Group (2002) Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA 287(3):321–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown JM, Guillou PJ (2017) Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 31(6):2607–2615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Meijerink WJ, Jakimowicz JJ, Jeekel J, Kazemier G, Janssen IMC, Påhlman L, Haglind E, Bonjer HJ (2008) COLOR (COlon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection) study group. Ten-year outcomes of a randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colon cancer. Ann Surg 248(5):728–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hewett PJ, Allardyce RA, Bagshaw PF, Frampton CM, Frizelle FA, Rieger NA, Smith JS, Solomon MJ, Stephens JH, Stevenson AR (2008) Short-term outcomes of the Australasian randomized clinical study comparing laparoscopic and conventional open surgical treatments for colon cancer: the ALCCaS trial. Ann Surg 248(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lacy AM, Delgado S, Castells A, Prins HA, Arroyo V, Ibarzabal A, Pique JM (2012) The long-term results of a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopy-assisted versus open surgery for colon cancer. Br J Surg 99(9):1219–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marusch F, Gastinger I, Schneider C, Scheidbach H, Konradt J, Bruch HP, Köhler L, Bärlehner E, Köckerling F, Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group (LCSSG) (2001) Importance of conversion for results obtained with laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 44(2):207–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP (2005) Conversion rates in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a predictive model with, 1253 patients. Surg Endosc 19(1):47–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bhama AR, Wafa AM, Ferraro J, Collins SD, Mullard AJ, Vandewarker JF, Krapohl G, Byrn JC, Cleary RK (2016) Comparison of risk factors for unplanned conversion from laparoscopic and robotic to open colorectal surgery using the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) Database. J Gastrointest Surg 20(6):1223–1230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Solaini L, Bazzocchi F, Cavaliere D, Avanzolini A, Cucchetti A, Ercolani G (2018) Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 32(3):1104–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mirkin KA, Kulaylat AS, Hollenbeak CS, Messaris E (2018) Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for stages I–III colon cancer: oncologic and long-term survival outcomes. Surg Endosc 32(6):2894–2901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A, Tsang C, Barrie JM, Edlin R, Garbett C, Guillou P, Holloway I, Howard H, Marshall H, McCabe C, Pavitt S, Quirke P, Rivers CS, Brown JM (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(2):233–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Widmar M, Keskin M, Strombom P, Beltran P, Chow OS, Smith JJ, Nash GM, Shia J, Russell D, Garcia-Aguilar J (2017) Lymph node yield in right colectomy for cancer: a comparison of open, laparoscopic and robotic approaches. Colorectal Dis 19(10):888–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vignali A, Elmore U, Lemma M, Guarnieri G, Radaelli G, Rosati R (2018) Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomoses following laparoscopic right colectomy in obese patients: a case-matched study. Dig Surg 35(3):236–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu Q, Jin C, Hu T, Wei M, Wang Z (2017) Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 27(4):348–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Crawford DL (2006) Telerobotic surgery for right and sigmoid colectomies: 30 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc 20(11):1713–1718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    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(9):1219–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    D’Annibale A, Pernazza G, Morpurgo E, Monsellato I, Pende V, Lucandri G, Termini B, Orsini C, Sovernigo G (2010) Robotic right colon resection: evaluation of first 50 consecutive cases for malignant disease. Ann Surg Oncol 17(11):2856–2862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Trastulli S, Desiderio J, Farinacci F, Ricci F, Listorti C, Cirocchi R, Boselli C, Noya G, Parisi A (2013) Robotic right colectomy for cancer with intracorporeal anastomosis: short-term outcomes from a single institution. Int J Colorectal Dis 28(6):807–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morpurgo E, Contardo T, Molaro R, Zerbinati A, Orsini C, D’Annibale AJ (2013) Robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a case–control study. Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23(5):414–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    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(6):1512–1521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lujan HJ, Molano A, Burgos A, Rivera B, Plasencia GJ (2015) Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis: experience with 52 consecutive cases. Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 25(2):117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Parisi A, Scrucca L, Desiderio J, Gemini A, Guarino S, Ricci F1, Cirocchi R, Palazzini G, D’Andrea V, Minelli L, Trastulli S (2017) Robotic right hemicolectomy: analysis of 108 consecutive procedures and multidimensional assessment of the learning curve. Surg Oncol 26(1):28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kelley SR, Duchalais E, Larson DW (2017) Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis for malignancy. J Robot Surg 12(3):461–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lujan HJ, Plasencia G, Rivera BX, Molano A, Fagenson A, Jane LA, Holguin D (2018) Advantages of robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 28(1):36–41Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reitz ACW, Lin E, Rosen SA (2018) A single surgeon’s experience transitioning to robotic-assisted right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 32(8):3525–3532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Altieri MS, Yang J, Telem DA, Zhu J, Halbert C, Talamini M, Pryor AD (2016) Robotic approaches may offer benefit in colorectal procedures, more controversial in other areas: a review of 168,248 cases. Surg Endosc 30(3):925–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Raftopoulos I, Courcoulas AP, Blumberg D (2006) Should completely intracorporeal anastomosis be considered in obese patients who undergo laparoscopic colectomy for benign or malignant disease of the colon? Surgery 140:675–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Blumberg D (2009) Laparoscopic colectomy performed using a completely intracorporeal technique is associated with similar outcome in obese and thin patients. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 19(1):57–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Iorio T, Blumberg D (2013) Totally intracorporeal laparoscopic colectomy (TILC) is associated with similar surgical outcomes in high and low operative risk patients. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 23(2):154–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tou S, Duncan A, Giuratrabocchetta S, Bergamaschi R (2015) Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis—a video vignette. Colorectal Dis 17(11):1030–1031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Vegunta RK, Crawford DL (2007) Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 21(10):1701–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Vegunta RK, Crawford DL (2007) Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 21(10):1701–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chang K, Fakhoury M, Barnajian M, Tarta C, Bergamaschi R (2013) Laparoscopic right colon resection with intracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 27(5):1730–1736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ackerman SJ, Daniel S, Baik R, Liu E, Mehendale S, Tackett S, Hellan M (2018) Comparison of complication and conversion rates between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic rectal resection for rectal cancer: which patients and providers could benefit most from robotic-assisted surgery? J Med Econ 21(3):254–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division, Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of SurgerySinai Hospital of BaltimoreBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations