Technical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal tumors: a single-center safety and feasibility study

Purpose Robot-assisted surgery has a multi-joint function, which improves manipulation of the deep pelvic region and contributes significantly to perioperative safety. However, the superiority of robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopic surgery remains controversial. This study compared the short-term...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Surgery today (Tokyo, Japan) Japan), 2024-05, Vol.54 (5), p.478-486
Main Authors: Tajima, Jesse Y., Yokoi, Ryoma, Kiyama, Shigeru, Takahashi, Takao, Hayashi, Hirokata, Higashi, Toshiya, Fukada, Masahiro, Asai, Ryuichi, Sato, Yuta, Yasufuku, Itaru, Tanaka, Yoshihiro, Okumura, Naoki, Murase, Katsutoshi, Ishihara, Takuma, Matsuhashi, Nobuhisa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anastomotic Leak - surgery
Feasibility Studies
Humans
Laparoscopy - methods
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Original Article
Postoperative Complications - etiology
Rectal Neoplasms - surgery
Retrospective Studies
Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods
Surgery
Surgical Oncology
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose Robot-assisted surgery has a multi-joint function, which improves manipulation of the deep pelvic region and contributes significantly to perioperative safety. However, the superiority of robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopic surgery remains controversial. This study compared the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery for rectal tumors. Methods This single-center, retrospective study included 273 patients with rectal tumors who underwent surgery with anastomosis between 2017 and 2021. In total, 169 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery (Lap group), and 104 underwent robot-assisted surgery (Robot group). Postoperative complications were compared via propensity score matching based on inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Results The postoperative complication rates based on the Clavien–Dindo classification (Lap vs. Robot group) were as follows: grade ≥ II, 29.0% vs. 19.2%; grade ≥ III, 10.7% vs. 5.8%; anastomotic leakage (AL), 6.5% vs. 4.8%; and urinary dysfunction (UD), 12.1% vs. 3.8%. After adjusting for the IPTW method, although AL rates did not differ significantly between groups, postoperative complications of both grade ≥ II (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50–0.87, p  
ISSN:0941-1291
1436-2813
DOI:10.1007/s00595-023-02758-x