Right colectomy: consecutive 100 patients treated with laparoscopic and robotic technique for malignancy. Cumulative experience in a single centre
- 57 Downloads
Robotic-assisted resections prove beneficial in overcoming potential limitation of laparoscopy, but clear evidences on patient’s benefits are still lacking. We report our experience on 100 consecutive patients who underwent right colectomy with either robotic or laparoscopic approaches. Data were prospectively collected on a dedicated database (ASA score, age, operative time, conversion rate, re-operation rate, early complications, length of stay, and pathological results). Median total operative time was 160 min in LS group (IQR = 140–180) and 204 min for RS group (IQR = 180–230). Median time to first flatus was 2.5 days for LS group (IQR = 2 - 3) and 2 days for RS group (IQR = 1–2). Length of stay (median) was 8 days in LS group (IQR = 6–10) and 5 days in RS group (IQR = 5–7). No statistically significant difference was found between the 2 groups when the number of harvested nodes, the anastomotic leakage and the postoperative bleeding were analyzed. The 30-day mortality was 0% in LS and RS groups. Conversion rate for LS group was 14% (7/50 pts) and for RS group was 0% (0/50). Minimally invasive surgery is a feasible and safe technique. The RS may overcome some technical limitations of laparoscopic surgery and it achieves the same oncological results compared to LS but with higher costs. The lower conversion rate allows to expect better clinical outcomes and lower complication rate.
KeywordsRobotic surgery Right colectomy Laparoscopy Colorectal cancer Intracorporeal anastomosis Learning curve
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The Authors have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Research involving human participants and/or animals
We declare that the study has been conducted according to GCP and ethical standards with no adoption of human or animal source of experimental investigation. This is a retrospective study.
Informed consent was obtained by all patients as per local protocol.
- 8.Hu JK, Zhou ZG, Chen ZX, Wang LL, Yu YY, Liu J, Zhang B, Li L, Shu Y, Chen JP (2003) Comparative evaluation of immune response after laparoscopical and open total mesorectal excisions with anal sphincter preservation in patients with rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 9(12):2690–2694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Germay O et al (2001) Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg 25:1467–1477Google Scholar
- 15.D’Annibale A, Pernazza G, Pende V, Monsellato I (2010) Minimally invasive robot. In: Baik SH (ed) Assisted colorectal resections robot surgery. INTECHGoogle Scholar
- 17.Rondelli F, Balzarotti R, Villa F, Guerra A, Avenia N, Mariani E, Bugiantella W (2015) Is robot-assisted laparoscopic right colectomy more effective than the conventional laparoscopic procedure? A meta-analysis of short-term outcomes. Int J Surg. 2015(18):75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.04.044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Trastulli S, Coratti A, Guarino S et al (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):1512–1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3835-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Spinoglio G, Marano A, Bianchi PP, Priora F, Lenti LM, Ravazzoni F, Formisano G (2016) Robotic right colectomy with modified complete mesocolic excision: long-term oncologic outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 23(Suppl 5):684–691. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5580x (Epub 2016 Oct 3) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Tong DKH, Law WL (2007) Laparoscopic versus open right hemicolectomy for carcinoma of the colon. JSLS 11:76–80Google Scholar