Initial experiences of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer, focusing on short-term outcomes: a matched case-control study

• Published in: World journal of surgical oncology 2015-03, Vol.13 (1), p.103-103, Article 103
• Main Authors: Sawada, Hiroyuki, Egi, Hiroyuki, Hattori, Minoru, Suzuki, Takahisa, Shimomura, Manabu, Tanabe, Kazuaki, Okajima, Masazumi, Ohdan, Hideki
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Body mass index; Cancer; Care and treatment; Case-Control Studies; Colorectal cancer; Colorectal Neoplasms - pathology; Colorectal Neoplasms - surgery; Comparative analysis; Diagnosis; Economic aspects; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Health aspects; Humans; Laparoscopic surgery; Laparoscopy; Laparoscopy - methods; Length of Stay; Male; Medical societies; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Staging; Oncology, Experimental; Operative Time; Patient outcomes; Physiological aspects; Postoperative Complications; Prognosis; Propensity Score; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Robotic surgery; Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods; Technical Innovations; Tumor staging
• ISSN: 1477-7819; 1477-7819
• DOI: 10.1186/s12957-015-0517-6

Robotic surgery is a new technique with the benefits of a three-dimensional view, the ability to use multi-degree-of-freedom forceps, the elimination of physiological tremors, and a stable camera view. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and short-term outcomes of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer as initial cases, compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery. From July 2010 to June 2013, ten patients with left-sided colon and rectal cancer underwent robotic surgery, and 121 received conventional laparoscopic surgery. Both groups were balanced in terms of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, body mass index (BMI), operative history, TNM staging, and tumor location. Moreover, in order to improve objectivity and approximate a randomized controlled study, we used the propensity score matching method. The matching was successful because the ROC analysis showed a well-balanced curve (C = 0.535). Following propensity score matching, ten patients were included in the robotic surgery group and 20 patients were included in the conventional laparoscopic surgery group. There were no significant differences in the short-term clinicopathologic outcomes between the robotic surgery group and the conventional laparoscopic surgery group. However, the operative time was significantly longer in the robotic surgery group than in the conventional laparoscopic surgery group. There were no significant differences between the robotic surgery group and the conventional laparoscopic surgery group with respect to short-term clinicopathologic outcomes, with the exception of the operative time. Our early experience indicates that robotic surgery is a promising tool, particularly in patients with rectal cancer.