A universal port design for the da Vinci Xi® system allowing access to the entire colon for colorectal cancer surgery

Short-term outcomes of da Vinci SP versus Xi for rectal cancer surgery: a propensity score matching analysis of two tertiary center cohorts

BACKGROUND

This study compares the perioperative outcomes of robotic rectal cancer surgery between da Vinci single-port (SP) system, the most recent system allowing minimally invasive surgery with reduced ports, and the da Vinci Xi system.

METHODS

Patients who underwent robotic surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma from January 2016 to September 2023 at two tertiary referral centers were included. A retrospective analysis was conducted to compare key parameters between patient cohorts before and after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

A total of 378 patients (SP, 65 vs. Xi, 313) were analyzed. The SP group comprised a higher proportion of females (44.6% vs. 28.4%; p = 0.016) and a higher tumor location (8.25 cm vs. 6.71 cm from the anal verge; p < 0.001) than did the Xi group. SP surgery promoted a shorter total incision length (4.9 cm vs. 9.2 cm; p < 0.001), lower maximum pain scores (5 vs. 7; p < 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (6 vs. 7 days; p < 0.001) than did Xi surgery. Operation time (175 vs. 182 min; p = 0.829) and postoperative complications (9.2% vs. 12.1%; p = 0.650) did not significantly differ between the groups. Lower lying rectal tumors were more frequently treated using the Xi system than the SP system, promoting a higher diverting stoma rate (13.8% vs. 45.4%; p < 0.001) and a lower anastomosis level (4.6 cm vs. 3.3 cm; p < 0.001). After 1:1 matching, SP maintained its advantages over Xi in terms of incision length (p < 0.001), maximum pain scores (p = 0.001), and hospital stay (p < 0.001). Overall postoperative complication rates were similar between both groups (10.8% vs. 12.3%; p = 0.777).

CONCLUSIONS

The da Vinci SP system continues to offer minimal invasive benefits in rectal cancer surgery. However, the Xi system's instrument diversity provides a certain advantage, particularly in cases involving low-lying rectal tumors. Tailoring robotic approaches based on individual patient characteristics remains pivotal for optimizing outcomes of rectal cancer surgery.

Short-term outcomes of da Vinci SP versus Xi for colon cancer surgery: a propensity-score matching analysis of multicenter cohorts

Recent advancements in robotic systems have led to the introduction of the da Vinci SP system, which allows surgeons to perform colon cancer surgery through fewer ports. This study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of colon cancer surgeries conducted using the da Vinci SP and Xi systems. Patients who underwent robotic colon cancer surgeries between November 2020 and December 2022 at two tertiary referral centers were considered for inclusion. Following propensity-score matching, short-term outcomes between the two systems were retrospectively analyzed. Out of 189 patients included in the study, 106 from 53 propensity-score matched pairs were analyzed. Patients operated on with the SP system exhibited smaller incision lengths (5.0 cm vs. 9.4 cm, p < 0.001) experienced less pain at 8 h (3.0 vs. 3.5, p < 0.001) and at 24 h post-operation (2.9 vs. 3.3, p = 0.001) and had a shorter duration of hospital stay (5 days vs. 6 days, p = 0.002). The overall rate of postoperative complications was 10.4%, with no significant difference between the SP and Xi groups (7.5% vs. 13.2%). Robotic-assisted colon cancer surgery using the da Vinci SP system is feasible and demonstrates favorable short-term outcomes. Compared to the Xi system, the SP system offers advantages in terms of cosmesis, postoperative pain, and recovery duration for colon cancer patients.

Minimally invasive vs. open segmental resection of the splenic flexure for cancer: a nationwide study of the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology-Colorectal Cancer Network (SICO-CNN)

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes.

METHODS

This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate.

RESULTS

A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray's tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray's tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group (p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI - 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference - 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI - 5.0% to ∞).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

Implementation of robot-assisted curative resection for rare anorectal tumours on the basis of individualised treatment

PURPOSE

To evaluate the validity of robot-assisted curative operation for rare anorectal tumours, characterised by biological heterogeneity and anatomical complexity.

METHODS

The present study evaluated 16 consecutive patients including three with anorectal squamous cell carcinoma (ARSCC), four with anorectal mucosal melanoma (ARMM), seven with anorectal neuroendocrine tumour (ARNET), and two with other types of anorectal tumours.

RESULTS

Of the three patients with ARSCC after chemoradiotherapy, two underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR), and one underwent ultralow anterior resection (uLAR)/total intersphincteric resection (ISR), surviving 56-76 months without recurrence. Of the four ARMM patients, APR and uLAR/total ISR were conducted in two patients, respectively, with variable survival outcomes. All seven patients with ARNET were treated with uLAR/ISR and LAR, surviving for 5-106 months to date.

CONCLUSIONS

Because most anorectal tumours are confined to the dermal and submucosal layers, robotic anorectal function preserving ISR is expected to achieve R0 resection.

Robotic surgery for colorectal disease: review of current port placement and future perspectives

Purpose

As robotic surgery is increasingly performed in patients with colorectal diseases, understanding proper port placement for robotic colorectal surgery is necessary. This review summarizes current port placement during robotic surgery for colorectal diseases and provides future perspective on port placements.

Methods

PubMed were searched from January 2009 to December 2018 using a combination of the search terms “robotic” [MeSH], “colon” [MeSH], “rectum” [MeSH], “colorectal” [MeSH], and “colorectal surgery” [MeSH]. Studies related to port placement were identified and included in the current study if they used the da Vinci S, Si, or Xi robotic system and if they described port placement.

Results

This review included 77 studies including a total of 3,145 operations. Fifty studies described port placement for left-sided and mesorectal excision; 17, 3, and 7 studies assessed port placement for right-sided colectomy, rectopexy, transanal surgery, respectively; and one study assessed surgery with reduced port placement. Recent literatures show that the single-docking technique included mobilization of the second and third robotic arms for the different parts without movement of patient cart and similar to previous dual or triple-docking technique. Besides, use of the da Vinci Xi system allowed a more simplified port configuration.

Conclusion

Robot-assisted colorectal surgery can be efficiently achieved with successful port placement without movement of patient cart dependent on the type of surgery and the robotic system.

Robotic left colectomy with complete mesocolectomy for splenic flexure and descending colon cancer, compared with a laparoscopic procedure

BACKGROUND

Its relatively low incidence and its surgical complexity mean that a standardized technique for left colectomy has not yet been established for splenic flexure and descending colon cancer (SF-DCC).

METHODS

Seventy-three patients (robot-assisted left colectomy with complete mesocolectomy [R-LCCM], n = 20; laparoscopic left colectomy with complete mesocolectomy [L-LCCM], n = 53) with SF-DCC were enrolled at the Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea).

RESULTS

R-LCCM conveniently enables dexterous dissection for the multi-directional approaches during left mesocolic mobilization. A conversion to open surgery was required in two patients of the L-LCCM group, but not in the R-LCCM group. A positive circumferential resection margin was exclusively identified in two patients in the L-LCCM group. Mean lymph node harvest was 21 with no difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although R-LCCM provided few remarkable advantages over L-LCCM, it could be considered as an efficient approach in patients with SF-DCC.