Perioperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

• Published in: World journal of surgical oncology 2023-08, Vol.21 (1), p.1-272, Article 272
• Main Authors: Farah, Emile, Abreu, Andres A, Rail, Benjamin, Salgado, Javier, Karagkounis, Georgios, Zeh, Herbert J, Polanco, Patricio M
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Antibiotics; Cancer; Care and treatment; Cohort analysis; Colorectal cancer; Colorectal carcinoma; Colorectal surgery; Complications; Datasets; Diagnosis; Hypothesis testing; Laparoscopic; Laparoscopic surgery; Laparoscopy; Length of stay; Matching; Morbidity; Mortality; Oncology, Experimental; Ostomy; Patient outcomes; Patients; Robotic; Robotic surgery; Surgical anastomosis; Textbooks; Trends; Variables
• ISSN: 1477-7819; 1477-7819
• DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-03138-y

Background Robotic colorectal surgery is becoming the preferred surgical approach for colorectal cancer (CRC). It offers several technical advantages over conventional laparoscopy that could improve patient outcomes. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared robotic and laparoscopic surgery for CRC using a national cohort of patients. Methods Using the colectomy-targeted ACS-NSQIP database (2015-2020), colorectal procedures for malignant etiologies were identified by CPT codes for right colectomy (RC), left colectomy (LC), and low anterior resection (LAR). Optimal pair matching was performed. "Textbook outcome" was defined as the absence of 30-day complications, readmission, or mortality and a length of stay < 5 days. Results We included 53,209 out of 139,759 patients screened for eligibility. Laparoscopic-to-robotic matching of 2:1 was performed for RC and LC, and 1:1 for LAR. The largest standardized mean difference was 0.048 after matching. Robotic surgery was associated with an increased rate of textbook outcomes compared to laparoscopy in RC and LC, but not in LAR (71% vs. 64% in RC, 75% vs. 68% in LC; p < 0.001). Robotic LAR was associated with increased major morbidity (7.1% vs. 5.8%; p = 0.012). For all three procedures, the mean conversion rate of robotic surgery was lower than laparoscopy (4.3% vs. 9.2%; p < 0.001), while the mean operative time was higher for robotic (225 min vs. 177 min; p < 0.001). Conclusions Robotic surgery for CRC offers an advantage over conventional laparoscopy by improving textbook outcomes in RC and LC. This advantage was not found in robotic LAR, which also showed an increased risk of serious complications. The associations highlighted in our study should be considered in the discussion of the surgical management of patients with colorectal cancer. Keywords: Colorectal cancer, Colorectal surgery, Robotic, Laparoscopic