Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes

Robotic surgery governance structures: a systematic review

Since the Food and Drug Administration in the United States approved the first robotic platform for use in humans in 2000, there has been a steady increase in the popularity of robotic approaches to surgery. Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) offers enhanced 3D visualisation of the operative field and increased flexibility and agility of the instruments, amongst other benefits. However, robotic platforms are complex systems and there is evidence that they may be associated with increased patient risk, particularly in the initial learning curve of a surgeon's robotic training. To ensure the continued safe use of RAS, adequate governance policies must be in place to regulate training, ensure patient safety and maximise the benefits of RAS programs. This systematic review synthesises all available evidence on RAS governance structures internationally for the first time. It was conducted and reported per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. This systematic review identified, for the first time, three guidelines offering recommendations on the Governance Structures for RAS programs. We extracted the key recommendations to provide a holistic set of guidelines. Through consensus, we offer recommendations for the composition of a RAS governance committee, the frequency with which the committee should sit, and the remit of the committee, including training, granting of privileges, quality assurance and continued professional development. We also stress future research needs in RAS team credentialing and vendor-agnostic training pathways. These recommendations may serve as a template for establishing future RAS programs.

Feasibility of the hinotori™ surgical robot system in right colectomy: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery, represented by the da Vinci™ system (hereafter da Vinci), has been adopted worldwide owing to its high precision and improved surgical outcomes. After key patents for da Vinci expired, the hinotori™ system (hereafter hinotori), Japan's first domestically developed surgical robot system, was introduced and received clinical approval in November 2022. Although hinotori is introduced as an alternative to da Vinci, its clinical performance in gastrointestinal surgery, particularly in colectomy, remains unclear. This study provided an overview of the surgical techniques for right colectomy using hinotori and retrospectively compared its short-term clinical outcomes with those of da Vinci, post-adjusting for background factors using propensity score matching (PSM).

METHODS

Data from 88 consecutive patients who underwent robotic right colectomy at our institute between 2020 and 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into the hinotori (n = 28) and da Vinci (n = 60) groups. PSM resulted in 26 patients being assigned to each group. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, pathological findings, and complication rates were analyzed and compared between the groups. Patients in both groups underwent standardized surgical procedures performed by the same surgeons using intracorporeal anastomosis. Role switching between the assistant and primary surgeon was required for some procedural steps owing to instrumentation limitations of hinotori.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in patient demographics between the propensity score-matched groups. Operative (277.5 vs. 242.5 min, p = 0.044) and console (210 vs. 184.5 min, p = 0.047) times were significantly longer in the hinotori group than in the da Vinci group. No significant differences in blood loss, Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications, or postoperative hospital stay were found between the groups. Both groups had comparable histopathological outcomes, including lymph node yield and resection margins.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that perioperative outcomes in robotic right colectomy using hinotori are comparable to those of da Vinci.

Robotic Laser Tissue Soldering for Atraumatic Soft Tissue Fusion Guided by Fluorescent Nanothermometry

Minimally invasive surgical techniques, including endoscopic and robotic procedures, continue to revolutionize patient care, for their ability to minimize surgical trauma, thus promoting faster recovery and reduced hospital stays. Yet, the suturing of soft tissues ensuring damage-free tissue bonding during these procedures remains challenging due to missing haptics and the fulcrum effect. Laser tissue soldering has potential in overcoming these issues, offering atraumatic seamless tissue fusion. To ensure the precision and safety of laser tissue soldering, the study introduces feedback-controlled fluorescent nanothermometry-guided laser tissue soldering using nanoparticle-protein solders within endoscopic and robotic contexts. Temperature-sensitive fluorescent nanoparticles embedded in the solder provide surgeons with immediate feedback on tissue temperatures during laser application, all while within the confines of minimally invasive (robotic) surgical setups. By integrating fluorescent nanothermometry-guided laser tissue surgery into endoscopic and robotic surgery, the study paves the way for a new approach for safe and atraumatic soft tissue joining, especially in regions where traditional suturing is unfeasible.

An Augmented Reality Visor for Intraoperative Visualization, Guidance, and Temperature Monitoring Using Fluorescence

Fluorescence-guided surgeries, including tumor resection and tissue soldering, are advancing the frontiers of surgical precision by offering enhanced control that minimizes tissue damage, improving recovery and outcomes. However, integrating fluorescence visualization with real-time temperature monitoring remains a challenge, limiting broader clinical use. We address this issue with an augmented reality (AR) visor that combines nanomaterial excitation, fluorescence detection, and temperature monitoring. Using advanced fluorescent nanoparticles like indocyanine green-doped particles and carbon nanotubes, the visor provides a comprehensive view of both the surgical field and sub-surface conditions invisible to the naked eye. This integration improves the safety and efficacy of fluorescence-guided surgeries, including laser tissue soldering, by ensuring optimal temperatures and laser guidance in real time. The presented technology enhances existing surgical techniques and supports the development of new strategies and sensing technologies in areas where traditional methods fall short, marking significant progress in precision surgery and potentially improving patient care.

Comparison of short-term outcomes and perioperative costs in laparoscopic versus robotic surgery for rectal cancers: A real-world cohort study using Japanese nationwide inpatient database

Aim

Many studies have revealed the benefits of robotic surgery for rectal cancer; however, real-world data are insufficient. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes and perioperative costs of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for rectal cancer using a real-world database.

Methods

The data of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for rectal cancer between January 2018 and January 2021 from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database provided by Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd. were analyzed. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) analysis to compare the in-hospital mortality, morbidity, readmission rate, reoperation rate, length of postoperative stay, and medical costs between the two groups.

Results

We performed PSM analysis on 18 952 eligible patients. After PSM, 1396 patients in the laparoscopic group and 1396 in the robotic group were compared. The robotic group had a lower surgical site infection rate (2.9% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.010), lower respiratory failure rate (1.3% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.049), and higher operative medical costs (1 291 371 vs. 1 312 462 JPY, p = 0.013). The total medical costs of the two groups were comparable (1 862 439 vs. 1 895 822 JPY, p = 0.051).

Conclusions

PSM analysis revealed that robotic surgery was associated with better outcomes than laparoscopic surgery in terms of surgical site infection and respiratory failure rates. The operative medical costs of robotic surgery were significantly higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. However, there was no significant difference in the total medical costs between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

Robotic colorectal surgery in Latin America: a systematic review on surgical outcomes

Background and objectives

Robotic approach in colorectal surgery is rapidly gaining interest, particularly in the context of rectal cancer resection. Despite economic barriers, substantial proliferation of robotic colorectal procedures has been observed throughout Latin America. However, there is a lack of data regarding intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, as well as oncological and long-term results. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal approaches across Latin America.

Material and methods

A systematic literature search of electronic databases, including PubMed, LILACS, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Scielo, was performed and reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The main target of the literature search was studies that reported outcomes of colorectal robotic surgery in Latin America.

Results

A total of 9,694 published articles were identified from the initial search. Nine thousand six hundred thirty-six publications were excluded after title and abstract review and removal of duplicates. Fifty-eight articles were thoroughly reviewed, and 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. The critical appraisal of study quality (biases risk assessment) was performed according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Evidence Synthesis. In general, the overall study quality was poor. Of the 11 studies included in the analysis, ten addressed intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, seven addressed oncological/pathological outcomes, and just one addressed long-term outcomes. Ten studies evaluated intraoperative and early postoperative outcomes, encompassing a total of 425 patients, the majority of whom were diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Morbidity rates exhibited a range between 0% and 45.9%, while mortality ranged from 0% to 2.5%.

Conclusion

Few studies have been published addressing intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and oncological outcomes of robotic colorectal surgery in this region. Undoubtedly, there are unique challenges not encountered by developed countries, including economic obstacles in establishing structured training programmes and high-quality centres for the development of robotic surgery. Further studies are needed to assess the real extent of robotic surgery in the region and its results.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/, PROSPERO (CRD42023494112).

Feasibility, clinical outcomes, and learning curves of robotic-assisted colorectal cancer surgery in a high-volume district general hospital: a cohort study

Introduction

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is one of the most influential surgical advances with widespread clinical and health-economic benefits. West Hertfordshire Teaching Hospital NHS Trust was the first in the UK to simultaneously integrate two CMR Surgical Versius robots. This study aims to investigate clinical outcomes of RAS, explore surgeon learning curves and assess the feasibility of implementation within a district general hospital (DGH).

Methods

A prospective cohort study of 100 consecutive patient data were collected between July 2022 and August 2023, including demographics, operative and clinical variables, and compared with laparoscopic surgery (LS) data from the National Bowel Cancer Audit. Surgeon learning curves were analysed using sequential surgical and console times.

Results

In the RAS cohort, the median age was 70 (IQR 57-78 years) and 60% were male. Retrieval of a minimum of 12 lymph nodes significantly increased in RAS compared to LS (95% vs. 88%, P=0.05). The negative mesorectal margin rate was similar between RAS and LS (97% vs. 91%, P=0.10), as well as length of stay greater than 5 days (42% vs. 39%, P=0.27). For anterior resections performed by the highest volume surgeon (n=16), surgical time was reduced over 1 year by 35% (304.9-196.9 min), whilst console time increased by 111% (63.0-132.8 min).

Conclusions

Key quality performance indicators were either unchanged or improved with RAS. There is potential for improved theatre utilisation and cost-savings with increased RAS. This study demonstrates the feasibility and easy integration of robotic platforms into DGHs, offering wider training opportunities for the next generation of surgeons.

Automatic and real-time tissue sensing for autonomous intestinal anastomosis using hybrid MLP-DC-CNN classifier-based optical coherence tomography

Anastomosis is a common and critical part of reconstructive procedures within gastrointestinal, urologic, and gynecologic surgery. The use of autonomous surgical robots such as the smart tissue autonomous robot (STAR) system demonstrates an improved efficiency and consistency of the laparoscopic small bowel anastomosis over the current da Vinci surgical system. However, the STAR workflow requires auxiliary manual monitoring during the suturing procedure to avoid missed or wrong stitches. To eliminate this monitoring task from the operators, we integrated an optical coherence tomography (OCT) fiber sensor with the suture tool and developed an automatic tissue classification algorithm for detecting missed or wrong stitches in real time. The classification results were updated and sent to the control loop of STAR robot in real time. The suture tool was guided to approach the object by a dual-camera system. If the tissue inside the tool jaw was inconsistent with the desired suture pattern, a warning message would be generated. The proposed hybrid multilayer perceptron dual-channel convolutional neural network (MLP-DC-CNN) classification platform can automatically classify eight different abdominal tissue types that require different suture strategies for anastomosis. In MLP, numerous handcrafted features (∼1955) were utilized including optical properties and morphological features of one-dimensional (1D) OCT A-line signals. In DC-CNN, intensity-based features and depth-resolved tissues' attenuation coefficients were fully exploited. A decision fusion technique was applied to leverage the information collected from both classifiers to further increase the accuracy. The algorithm was evaluated on 69,773 testing A-line data. The results showed that our model can classify the 1D OCT signals of small bowels in real time with an accuracy of 90.06%, a precision of 88.34%, and a sensitivity of 87.29%, respectively. The refresh rate of the displayed A-line signals was set as 300 Hz, the maximum sensing depth of the fiber was 3.6 mm, and the running time of the image processing algorithm was ∼1.56 s for 1,024 A-lines. The proposed fully automated tissue sensing model outperformed the single classifier of CNN, MLP, or SVM with optimized architectures, showing the complementarity of different feature sets and network architectures in classifying intestinal OCT A-line signals. It can potentially reduce the manual involvement of robotic laparoscopic surgery, which is a crucial step towards a fully autonomous STAR system.

The downtrending cost of robotic bariatric surgery: a cost analysis of 47,788 bariatric patients

The surgical robot is assumed to be a fixed, indirect cost. We hypothesized rising volume of robotic bariatric procedures would decrease cost per patient over time. Patients who underwent elective, initial gastric bypass (GB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) for morbid obesity were selected from Florida Agency for Health Care Administration database from 2017 to 2021. Inflation-adjusted cost per patient was collected. Cost-over-time ($/patient year) and change in cost-over-time were calculated for open, laparoscopic, and robotic cases. Linear regression on cost generated predictive parameters. Density plots utilizing area under the curve demonstrated cost overlap. Among 76 hospitals, 11,472 bypasses (223 open, 6885 laparoscopic, 4364 robotic) and 36,316 sleeves (26,596 laparoscopic, 9724 robotic) were included. Total cost for robotic was approximately 1.5-fold higher (p < 0.001) than laparoscopic for both procedures. For GB, laparoscopic had lower total ($15,520) and operative ($6497) average cost compared to open (total $17,779; operative $9273) and robotic (total $21,756; operative $10,896). For SG, laparoscopic total cost was significantly less than robotic ($10,691 vs. $16,393). Robotic GB cost-over-time increased until 2021, when there was a large decrease in cost (-$944, compared with 2020). Robotic SG total cost-over time fluctuated, but decreased significantly in 2021 (-$490 compared with 2020). While surgical costs rose significantly in 2020 for bariatric procedures, our study suggests a possible downward trend in robotic bariatric surgery as total and operative costs are decreasing at a higher rate than laparoscopic costs.

Comparison of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic rectal surgery for rectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis using the Japanese Nationwide diagnosis procedure combination database

Background

The use of robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer is increasing, but its short-term results remain unclear. We compared the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer using a nationwide inpatient database.

Methods

We analyzed patients registered in the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database who underwent robot-assisted or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer from April 2018 to March 2020. Postoperative complication rates, anesthesia time, length of hospital stay, and cost were compared using propensity score matching for low anterior resection (LAR), high anterior resection (HAR), and abdominoperineal resection (APR).

Results

Among 38 090 rectal cancer cases, 1992 LAR, 357 HAR, and 310 APR pairs were generated by propensity score matching and analyzed. Anesthesia time was longer for robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopic surgery (LAR: 388.6 vs. 452.8 min, p < 0.001; HAR: 300.9 vs. 393.5 min, p < 0.001; APR: 4478.5 vs. 533.5 min, p < 0.001). Robot-assisted surgery was associated with significantly shorter hospital stay for LAR (22.3 vs. 20.0 days, p < 0.001) and APR (29.2 vs. 25.9 days, p = 0.029). Total costs for LAR were significantly lower for robot-assisted surgery (2031511.6 vs. 1955216.6 JPY, p < 0.001). The complication rates for robot-assisted surgery tended to be fewer than laparoscopic surgery for all procedures, but the differences were not significant.

Conclusions

Although the anesthesia time was longer for robot-assisted surgery, the procedure resulted in shorter hospital stay for LAR and APR, and lower costs for LAR compared with laparoscopic surgery. Robot-assisted surgery can thus help to reduce costs and can be performed safely.

Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy outcomes in colon adenocarcinoma in the elderly population: a propensity-score matched analysis of the National Cancer Database

PURPOSE

While robotic surgery is more costly and involves longer intra-operative time, it has a technical advantage over laparoscopic surgery. With our aging population, patients are being diagnosed with colon cancer at older ages. The aim of this study is to compare laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy short- and long-term outcomes in elderly patients diagnosed with colon cancer at a national level.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted using the National Cancer Database. Subjects ≥ 80-years-old who were diagnosed with stage I to III colon adenocarcinoma and underwent a robotic or laparoscopic colectomy from 2010-2018 were included. The laparoscopic group was propensity-score matched in a 3:1 ratio to the robotic group with 9343 laparoscopic and 3116 robotic cases matched. The main outcomes evaluated were 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission rate, median survival, and length of stay.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the 30-day readmission rate (OR = 1.1, CI = 0.94-1.29, p = 0.23) or 30-day mortality rate (OR = 1.05, CI = 0.86-1.28, p = 0.63) between both groups. Robotic surgery was associated with higher overall survival (42 vs 44.7 months, p < 0.001) using a Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Robotic surgery had a statistically significant shorter length of stay (6.4 vs. 5.9 days, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Robotic colectomies are associated with higher median survival rates and decrease in the length of hospital stay compared to laparoscopic colectomies in the elderly population.

Factors contributing to the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Some studies have suggested disparities in access to robotic colorectal surgery, however, it is unclear which factors are most meaningful in the determination of approach relative to laparoscopic or open surgery. This study aimed to identify the most influential factors contributing to robotic colorectal surgery utilization.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of published studies that compared the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery versus laparoscopic or open surgery. Eligible studies were identified through PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertations in September 2021.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included in the analysis. Patients were less likely to undergo robotic versus laparoscopic surgery if they were female (OR = 0.91, 0.84-0.98), older (OR = 1.61, 1.38-1.88), had Medicare (OR = 0.84, 0.71-0.99), or had comorbidities (OR = 0.83, 0.77-0.91). Non-academic hospitals had lower odds of conducting robotic versus laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.73, 0.62-0.86). Additional disparities were observed when comparing robotic with open surgery for patients who were Black (OR = 0.78, 0.71-0.86), had lower income (OR = 0.67, 0.62-0.74), had Medicaid (OR = 0.58, 0.43-0.80), or were uninsured (OR = 0.29, 0.21-0.39).

CONCLUSION

When determining who undergoes robotic surgery, consideration of factors such as age and comorbid conditions may be clinically justified, while other factors seem less justifiable. Black patients and the underinsured were less likely to undergo robotic surgery. This study identifies nonclinical disparities in access to robotics that should be addressed to provide more equitable access to innovations in colorectal surgery.

The current status of robotic colorectal surgery training programmes

Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) is steadily increasing in popularity with an annual growth in the number of colorectal procedures undertaken robotically. Further upscaling of RACS requires structured and standardised robotic training to safeguard high-quality clinical outcomes. The aims of this systematic review were to assess the structure and assessment metrics of currently established RACS training programmes. A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines was performed. Searches were performed of the Ovid Medline, Embase and Web of Science databases between 2000 and 27th November 2021 to identify studies reporting on training curricula in RACS. Core components of training programmes and their relevant outcome assessment metrics were extracted. Thirteen studies were identified, with all training programmes designed for the da Vinci platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA). Common elements of multimodal programmes included theoretical knowledge (76.9%), case observation (53.8%), simulation (100%) and proctored training (76.9%). Robotic skills acquisition was assessed primarily during the simulation phase (n = 4, 30.1%) and proctoring phase (n = 10, 76.9%). Performance metrics, consisting of time or assessment scores for VR simulation were only mandated in four (30.1%) studies. Objective assessment following proctored training was variably reported and employed a range of assessment metrics, including direct feedback (n = 3, 23.1%) or video feedback (n = 8, 61.5%). Five (38.4%) training programmes used the Global Assessment Score (GAS) forms. There is a broad consensus on the core multimodal components across current RACS training programmes; however, validated objective assessment is limited and needs to be appropriately standardised to ensure reproducible progression criteria and competency-based metrics are produced to robustly assess progression and competence.

Robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional robotic resection for patients with colorectal neoplasms

Background

Laparoscopic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) has been widely used in colorectal neoplasms. However, only a few studies have focused on robotic NOSES. This study compared the short-term clinical outcomes and long-term survival outcomes between robotic NOSES and conventional robotic resection (CRR) groups.

Methods

From March 2016 to October 2018, a consecutive of 143 patients who underwent robotic sigmoid and rectal resection at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, were considered for inclusion in this study. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was conducted to account for differences in the baseline characteristics. After PSM, 39 patients were included in the robotic NOSES group, and 39 patients in the CRR group. The baseline characteristics between the two groups were all balanced and comparable.

Results

Patients in the NOSES group experienced less intraoperative blood loss (p=0.001), lower requirements for additional analgesia (p=0.020), shorter time to first flatus (p=0.010), and a shorter time to first liquid diet (p=0.003) than the CRR group. The 3-year overall survival rates (NOSES: 92.3% vs. CRR: 89.7% p=1.000) and 3-year disease-free survival rates (NOSES: 82.1% vs. CRR: 84.6% p=0.761) between the two groups were comparable.

Conclusion

Robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery is a safe and feasible surgery for patients with colorectal neoplasms. Robotic NOSES is associated with better short-term clinical outcomes and similar long-term survival outcomes to conventional robotic resection.

Anastomotic Leak in Colorectal Surgery: Predictive Factors and Survival

<br><b>Introduction:</b> Anastomotic leak (AL) is a serious complication following colorectal surgery.</br> <br><b>Aim:</b> The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with the development of AL and to analyze its impact on survival.</br> <br><b>Materials and methods:</b> All consecutive adult colorectal cancer resections performed between 2007 and 2020 with curative intent and anastomosis formation were included from a prospectively maintained database. The primary outcome measure was the rate of AL. The secondary outcome measure was 5-year overall survival (OS).</br> <br><b>Results:</b> There were 6837 eligible patients. The rate of AL was 2.2% and 4.0% in patients with colon and rectal cancer, respectively. AL was a significant independent predictor of reduced 5-year OS in patients who underwent curative surgery for rectal cancer (odds ratio 2.293, p = 0.009). Emergency surgery (p = 0.015), surgery at a public hospital (p = 0.002), and an open surgical approach (p = 0.021) were all associated with a significantly higher risk of AL in patients with colon cancer, with higher rates of AL noted in left colectomies as compared to right hemicolectomies (4.4% <i>vs.</i> 1.3%, p < 0.001). In rectal cancer patients, AL was associated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (p = 0.038) and male gender (p = 0.002). The anastomosis formation technique (hand-sewn <i>vs.</i> stapled) did not impact the rate of AL (p = 0.116 and p = 0.198 with colon and rectal cancer, respectively).</br> <br><b>Discussion:</b> Clinicians should be cognizant of the predictive factors for AL and should consider early intervention for at-risk patients.</br>.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic-thoracoscopic technique. Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence comparing conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (CMIE) via laparoscopy and thoracoscopy with robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is scarce. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare surgical outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE. Main surgical outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, anastomotic leak rates, pneumonia, overall morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day mortality. Oncologic outcomes included lymph node yield and R0 resections rates. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 6,249 patients were included for analysis; 5,275 (84%) underwent CMIE and 974 (16%) RAMIE. Robotic esophagectomy had longer operative time and less intraoperative blood loss. Anastomotic leakage rates were similar with both approaches. Patients undergoing RAMIE had significantly lower rates of postoperative pneumonia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.61, P < .0001) and overall morbidity (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.79, P < .0001). Median LOS was similar in both procedures (RAMIE: 12.1 versus CMIE: 11.9 days, P = .64). Similar mortality rates were found after RAMIE and CMIE (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34-1.38, P = .29). Lymph node yield was similar in both procedures, but RAMIE was associated with higher rates of R0 resection (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.53-5.26, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing robotic esophagectomy have less intraoperative blood loss, lower rates of postoperative pneumonia, reduced overall morbidity, and higher rates of R0 resections, as compared with those undergoing a laparoscopic-thoracoscopic esophageal resection.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection: Are We There Yet?

Background: Laparoscopy-assisted surgery (LAS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) was first described in 1991 and robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) for CRC was first reported in 2002; robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RACS) is becoming increasingly popular. However, data comparing its outcomes to other established techniques remain limited to small case series. Our primary goal was to review the mortality outcome difference between laparoscopic versus robotic elective colon resection at a small, community hospital.

Study design: We conducted a retrospective review of 2089 patients at the South Atlantic division for cases who underwent robotic and laparoscopic colectomies at our division in 2014-2018. All cases were elective surgeries and analysis was performed within these two subgroups.

Results: In this study, 306 patients underwent robotic colorectal surgery versus 1783 patients who underwent laparoscopic-assisted colorectal surgery. Readmission rate within 30 days of operation was significantly lower for laparoscopic-assisted colorectal resection (LACR) versus RACS (445.4% vs. 53.9%, p= 0.006). However, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter for RACS with a median of three days (interquartile range {IQR}: 2-5) versus four days (IQR: 3-7) for LACR (p=0.0001). There were no significant differences between the two groups for post-operative incisional hernias, anastomotic leaks, post-operative pain control, surgical site infections, or rate of conversion to an open procedure.

Conclusion: Our study showed a similar outcome between LACR and RACS for post-operative incisional hernias, anastomotic leaks, post-operative pain control, surgical site infections, and rate of conversion to an open procedure. Also, our study showed a readmission rate within 30 days of operation was significantly lower for LACR versus RACS. However, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter for RACS with a median of three days when compared to LACR. Future research should focus on surgeon-specific variables, such as comfort, ergonomics, distractibility, and ease of use, as other ways to potentially distinguish robotic from laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Predictors and Consequences of Unplanned Conversion to Open During Robotic Colectomy: An ACS-NSQIP Database Analysis

Robotic-assisted surgery has become a desired modality for performing colectomy; however, unplanned conversion to an open procedure may be associated with worse outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine predictors and consequences of unplanned conversion to open in a large, high fidelity data set. A retrospective analysis of 11 061 robotic colectomies was conducted using the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) 2012-2017 database. Predictors of conversion and the effect of conversion on outcomes were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression resulting in risk-adjusted odds ratios of conversion and morbidity/mortality. Overall, 10 372 (93.8%) patients underwent successful robotic colectomy, and 689 (6.2%) had an unplanned conversion. Predictors of conversion included age ≥ 65 years, male gender, obesity, functional status not independent, American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) classification IV-V, non-oncologic indication, emergency case, smoking, recent weight loss, bleeding disorder, and preoperative organ space infection. Conversion is an independent risk factor for mortality, overall morbidity, cardiac morbidity, pulmonary morbidity, renal morbidity, venous thromboembolism morbidity, wound morbidity, sepsis, bleeding, readmission, return to the operating room, and extended length of stay (LOS). Unplanned conversion to open during robotic colectomy is an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality.

National disparities in use of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is safe and improves outcomes in older persons with rectal cancer but may be underutilized. As older persons are the largest surgical population, investigation of the current use and factors impacting MIS use is warranted. Our goal is to investigate the trends and disparities that affect utilization of MIS in older persons with rectal cancer.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was reviewed for persons 65 years and older who underwent curative resection for rectal adenocarcinoma from 2010 to 2017. Cases were stratified by surgical approach (open or MIS [laparoscopic or robotic]). Univariate analysis compared patient and provider demographics across approaches. Multivariate analysis investigated variables associated with MIS use. Main outcome measures were trends and factors associated with MIS use in older persons.

RESULTS

Of 31,910 patients analyzed, 51.9% (n = 16,555) were open and 48.1% (n = 15,355) MIS. The MIS cohort was 66.7% (n = 10,236) laparoscopic and 33.3% (n = 5119) robotic. MIS increased from 29% in 2010 (n = 1197; 25% laparoscopic, 4% robotic) to 65% in 2017 (n = 2382; 35% laparoscopic, 30% robotic), likely from annual increases in robotics (OR 1.24/year, p < 0.0001). In the unadjusted analysis, there were significant differences in MIS use by age, race, comorbidity, socioeconomic status, and facility type. In multivariate analysis, patients with advancing age (OR 0.93, p < 0.001), major comorbidity (OR 0.75, p < 0.001), total proctectomy (OR0.78, p < 0.001), and advanced pathologic stage (OR 0.51, p < 0.001) were less likely to undergo MIS.

CONCLUSION

Nationwide, less than half of rectal cancer cases in older persons were performed with MIS, despite steady robotic growth. Patient and facility factors impacted MIS use. Further work on regionalizing rectal cancer care and ensuring equitable MIS access and training could improve utilization.

Safety with Innovation in Colon and Rectal Robotic Surgery

Robotic colorectal surgery has been touted as a possible way to overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery and has shown promise in rectal resections, thus shifting traditional open surgeons to a minimally invasive approach. The safety, efficacy, and learning curve have been established for most colorectal applications. With this and a robust sales and marketing model, utilization of the robot for colorectal surgery continues to grow steadily. However, this disruptive technology still requires standards for training, privileging and credentialing, and safe implementation into clinical practice.

Robotic Surgery for Complicated Diverticular Disease

Diverticular disease is common, and increasing in prevalence worldwide. The treatment for acute and chronic diverticular disease has a huge clinical and economic burden. Surgery is standard for complicated diverticulitis, and there are several benefits to using robotic surgery in these cases. Complicated diverticular disease can result in fistula, fibrosis, and deranged anatomy, which present technical challenges to the surgeon. Understanding and anticipating these anatomical challenges is key to successful surgery. While fears of conversion in complicated cases may stop surgeons from using traditional laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery is especially promising for enhancing dexterity, visualization, and facilitating completely minimally invasive surgery in these complicated cases. In this chapter, we review end-to-end technical strategies of robotic colorectal surgery for complicated diverticular disease, including cases with colovesicular, colovaginal, and colocutaneous fistulae.

The impact of operative approach on postoperative outcomes and healthcare utilization after colectomy

BACKGROUND

To evaluate national trends in adoption of different surgical approaches for colectomy and compare clinical outcomes and resource utilization between approaches.

METHODS

Retrospective study of patients aged ≥18 years who underwent elective inpatient left or right colectomy between 2010 and 2019 from the Premier Healthcare Database. Patients were classified by operative approach: open, minimally invasive: either laparoscopic or robotic. Postoperative outcomes assessed within index hospitalization include operating room time, hospital length of stay, rates of conversion to open surgery, reoperation, and complications. Post-discharge readmission, hospital-based encounters, and costs were collected to 30 days post-discharge. Multivariable regression models were used to compare outcomes between operative approaches adjusted for patient baseline characteristics and clustering within hospitals.

RESULTS

Among 206,967 patients, the robotic approach rates increased from 2.1%/1.6% (2010) to 32.6%/26.8% (2019) for left/right colectomy, offset by a decrease in both open and laparoscopic approaches. Median length of stay for both left and right colectomies was significantly longer in open (6 days) and laparoscopic (5 days) compared to robotic surgery (4 days; all P values <.001). Robotic surgery compared to open and laparoscopic was associated with a significantly lower conversion rate, development of ileus, overall complications, and 30-day hospital encounters. Robotic surgery further demonstrated lower mortality, reoperations, postoperative bleeding, and readmission rates for left and right colectomies than open. Robotic surgery had significantly longer operating room times and higher costs than either open or laparoscopic.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery is increasingly being used in colon surgery, with outcomes equivalent and in some domains superior to laparoscopic.

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

Robotic resections represent a novel approach to treatment of colorectal cancer. The aim of our study was to critically assess the implementation of robotic colorectal surgical program at our institution and to compare it to the established laparoscopically assisted surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective case-control study was designed to compare outcomes of consecutively operated patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or robotic colorectal resections at a tertiary academic centre from 2019 to 2020. The associations between patient characteristics, type of operation, operation duration, conversions, duration of hospitalization, complications and number of harvested lymph nodes were assessed by using univariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 83 operations met inclusion criteria, 46 robotic and 37 laparoscopic resections, respectively. The groups were comparable regarding the patient and operative characteristics. The operative time was longer in the robotic group (p < 0.001), with fewer conversions to open surgery (p = 0.004), with less patients in need of transfusions (p = 0.004) and lower reoperation rate (p = 0.026). There was no significant difference between the length of stay (p = 0.17), the number of harvested lymph nodes (p = 0.24) and the overall complications (p = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

The short-term results of robotic colorectal resections were comparable to the laparoscopically assisted operations with fewer conversions to open surgery, fewer blood transfusions and lower reoperation rate in the robotic group.

Optimizing outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery with robotic platforms

Advanced robotic technology makes it easier to perform total mesorectal excision procedures in the narrow pelvis for rectal cancer while maintaining the advantages of minimally invasive surgery. Robotic surgery for rectal cancer leads to lower conversion rates and faster recovery of urogenital function than conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, longer operative time and high cost are major weaknesses of robotic surgery. To date, most other short-term surgical outcomes, pathologic outcomes, and long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery have not shown significant advantages over laparoscopic surgery. However, robotic surgery is still a valid and highly anticipated surgical approach for rectal cancer because it greatly reduces the surgeon's workload and learning curve. There are also advantages when robotic techniques are applied to technically demanding procedures such as lateral pelvic lymph node dissection or intersphincteric resection. The introduction of new surgical robot systems, including the da Vinci® SP system, is expected to expand the applications of robotic surgery and provide new advantages.

Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is superior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the initial training for surgical novices in an ex vivo porcine model: a randomized crossover study

Background

Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) potentially reduces workload and shortens the surgical learning curve compared to conventional laparoscopy (CL). The present study aimed to compare robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the initial learning phase for novices.

Methods

In a randomized crossover study, medical students (n = 40) in their clinical years performed both LC and RAC on a cadaveric porcine model. After standardized instructions and basic skill training, group 1 started with RAC and then performed LC, while group 2 started with LC and then performed RAC. The primary endpoint was surgical performance measured with Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) score, secondary endpoints included operating time, complications (liver damage, gallbladder perforations, vessel damage), force applied to tissue, and subjective workload assessment.

Results

Surgical performance was better for RAC than for LC for total OSATS (RAC = 77.4 ± 7.9 vs. LC = 73.8 ± 9.4; p = 0.025, global OSATS (RAC = 27.2 ± 1.0 vs. LC = 26.5 ± 1.6; p = 0.012, and task specific OSATS score (RAC = 50.5 ± 7.5 vs. LC = 47.1 ± 8.5; p = 0.037). There were less complications with RAC than with LC (10 (25.6%) vs. 26 (65.0%), p = 0.006) but no difference in operating times (RAC = 77.0 ± 15.3 vs. LC = 75.5 ± 15.3 min; p = 0.517). Force applied to tissue was similar. Students found RAC less physical demanding and less frustrating than LC.

Conclusions

Novices performed their first cholecystectomies with better performance and less complications with RAS than with CL, while operating time showed no differences. Students perceived less subjective workload for RAS than for CL. Unlike our expectations, the lack of haptic feedback on the robotic system did not lead to higher force application during RAC than LC and did not increase tissue damage. These results show potential advantages for RAS over CL for surgical novices while performing their first RAC and LC using an ex vivo cadaveric porcine model.

Registration number

researchregistry6029

Graphic abstract

Robotic colorectal surgery in Australia: evolution over a decade

BACKGROUND

Despite reports of increasing adoption of robotics in colorectal surgery worldwide, data regarding its uptake in Australasia are lacking. This study examines the trends of robotic colorectal surgery in Australia during the last 10 years.

METHODS

Data from patients undergoing robotic colorectal surgery with the da Vinci robotic platform between 2010 and 2019 were obtained. Overall, numbers of specific colorectal procedures across Australia were obtained from the Medicare Benefit Schedule data over the same period. Pearson's correlation analysis was used to determine the statistical trends of overall and specific robotic colorectal procedures over time.

RESULTS

A total of 6110 robotic general surgery procedures were performed across Australia during the study period. Of these, 3522 (57.6%) were robotic colorectal procedures. An increasing trend of overall robotic colorectal procedures was seen over 10 years (Pearson's coefficient of 0.875; P = 0.001). While this applied to both the public and private sectors, 90.7% of the procedures were undertaken in the private sector. Restorative rectal resections, rectopexies, and right hemicolectomies accounted for 82.6% of the robotic colorectal procedures performed during this period with an increasing trend seen over time for each intervention. Moreover, a robotic approach was utilized in 12.5%, 41.0% and 9.0% of all restorative rectal resections, rectopexies and right hemicolectomies undertaken in Australia during 2019, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Robotic colorectal surgery has increased dramatically in Australia over the last 10 years, especially in the private sector. Penetration of robotic colorectal surgery in the public healthcare system will require focussed cost-benefit evaluations and governmental investment.

Evolution of Robotic Surgery in a Colorectal Cancer Unit in India

Only a handful of institutions in the country have an established robotic surgery program. Evolution of robotic surgery in the colorectal division, from inception to recent times, is presented here. All the patients undergoing robotic colorectal surgery from the inception of the program (September 2014) to August 2019 were identified. The patient and treatment details and short-term outcomes were collected retrospectively from the prospectively maintained database. The cohort was divided into four chronological groups (group 1 being the oldest) to assess the surgical trends. There were 202 patients. Seventy-one percent were male. Mean BMI was 23.25. Low rectal tumours were most common (47%). A total of 74.3% patients received neo-adjuvant treatment. Multivisceral resection was done in 22 patients, including 4 synchronous liver resections. Average operating time for standard rectal surgery was 280 min with average blood loss of 235 ml. The mean nodal yield was 14. Circumferential resection margin positivity was 6.4%. The mean hospital stay for pelvic exenteration was significantly higher than the rest of the surgeries (except for posterior exenteration and total proctocolectomy) (p = 0.00). Clavin-Dindo grade 3 and 4 complications were seen in 10% patients. As the experience of the team increased, more complex cases were performed. Blood loss, margin positivity, nodal yield, leak rates and complications were evaluated group wise (excluding those with additional procedures) to assess the impact of experience. We did not find any significant change in the parameters studied. With increasing experience, the complexity of surgical procedures performed on da Vinci Xi platform can be increased in a systematic manner. Our short-term outcomes, i.e. nodes harvested, margin positivity, hospital stay and morbidity, are on par with world standards. However, we did not find any significant improvement in these parameters with increasing experience.

Initial clinical experience with Single-Port robotic (SP r) left colectomy using the SP surgical system: description of the technique

BACKGROUND

The daVinci Single-Port (SP) robot is a new robotic platform designed to overcome the challenges of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery. The objective of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility and technical aspects of SP robotic (SP r) left colectomy using the SP platform.

METHODS

Under Institutional Review Board approval and registration on ClinicalTrials.gov, we performed SP rLeft colectomy using the daVinci SP surgical system on four patients. The primary end-point of this study was to report and describe the technical feasibility to perform SP rLeft colectomy. The secondary end-points included perioperative metrics and outcomes.

RESULTS

Four patients underwent successful SP rLeft colectomy for diverticulitis through a single incision (average size: 4.4 cm) without intraoperative complications or conversions. The robot was docked 2.7 times on average (range 2-4). The average docking time was 8.4 min (range: 3-33 min). The mean estimated blood loss was 91 mL (range: 20-250 mL). There were no morbidities or mortalities. Patients were discharged on POD 2 and 3.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrated in this initial clinical series the SP rLeft colectomy to be feasible and safe to perform in select patients. The SP robot's single-arm design and flexible instruments have shown to provide excellent visualization and retraction with minimal collisions. We predict that the SP robot will be widely utilized in the field of colorectal surgery as it becomes available to colorectal surgeons. Further experience and larger studies are needed to define the advantages and identify the problems with the SP rLeft colectomy.

Trends in the diffusion of robotic surgery in prostate, uterus, and colorectal procedures: a retrospective population-based study

This study aimed to propose quantifiable metrics on the adoption lifecycle of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) within and across prostate, hysterectomy, and colorectal procedures. This was a retrospective population-based cohort study of commonly performed RAS procedures in the US conducted from July 2001 to July 2015. The patients were identified from the Premier Hospital Database using International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification codes denoting prostate, uterus, and colorectal procedures. The Diffusion of Innovations theory was applied to percent RAS utilization to determine discrete eras of technology adoption. Overall and by-era patient baseline characteristics were compared between robotic and non-robotic groups. This study included a total of 2,098,440 RAS procedures comprising prostate (n = 155,342), uterus (n = 1,300,046), and colorectal (n = 643,052) procedures. Prostate (76.7%) and uterus (28.9%) procedures had the highest robotic utilization by the end of the study period and appear to be in the last adoption era (Laggard). However, robotic utilization in colorectal procedures (7.5%) was low and remained in the first era (Innovator) for a longer time (15 vs 60 vs 135 months). Whites, privately insured, patients with fewer comorbidities, and those admitted in large teaching hospitals were more likely to undergo RAS in the early study period. AS-associated patient and hospital profiles changed over time, suggesting that selected patient cohorts should be contextualized by overall adoption of a novel medical technology. The time-discretized analysis may also inform patient selection criteria and appropriate timing for clinical study stages proposed by the Idea, Development, Exploration, Assessment, Long-term study-Devices framework.

Trends of robotic-assisted surgery for thyroid, colorectal, stomach and hepatopancreaticobiliary cancer: 10 year Korea trend investigation

BACKGROUND

The current position of robotic surgery in the field of minimally invasive surgery remains ambiguous. We evaluated long-term trends of robotic general surgery and the future direction of its development.

METHODS

Data on robotic cancer surgeries between 2005 and 2014 were retrospectively collected by volunteer institutions in the Republic of Korea. Spearman's correlation and logistic regression analyses were used to compare robotic and laparoscopic surgery trends in general surgery.

RESULTS

The odds that robotic surgery was performed instead of laparoscopic surgery significantly decreased in the fields of colorectal, stomach, and hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery (odds ratio [OR]: 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93-0.97; OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.88-0.92; and OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.65-0.78, respectively), except for thyroid surgery (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.25-1.30). Of the total numbers of each procedure, proportions of robotic intersphincteric resections, abdominoperineal resections, and pylorus-preserving surgery performed significantly increased (r = 0.98, P < .001; r = 0.78, P = .01; and r = 0.86, P = .007, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of robotic surgery failed to preponderate that of laparoscopic surgery, except for thyroid surgery. Robotic surgery is increasingly preferred for limited fields or complex surgeries, but the use of robotics in simple surgeries has decreased.

Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Operative Technique and Review of the Literature

The number of patients undergoing robotic surgery for rectal cancer has rapidly increased in Japan, since the government approved the procedure for national insurance coverage in April 2018. Robotic surgery has the potential to overcome some limitations of laparoscopic surgery, especially in the narrow pelvis, providing a three-dimensional view, articulated instruments, and a stable camera platform. Although meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate the superiority of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery with respect to the short-term clinical outcomes, the published findings suggest that robotic surgery may be potentially beneficial for patients who are obese, male, or patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. The safety and feasibility of robotic surgery for lateral lymph node dissection, the standard procedure for locally advanced lower rectal cancer in Japan, have been demonstrated in some retrospective studies. However, additional prospective, randomized trials are required to determine the actual benefits of robotic surgery to ameliorate the urogenital and oncological outcomes. The cost of this approach is a long-standing principal concern. A literature search showed that the cost of robotic surgery for rectal cancer was 1.3-2.5 times higher per patient than that for the laparoscopic approach. We herein describe our surgical technique using a da Vinci Surgical System (S/Si/Xi) with 10 years of experience in performing robotic surgery. We also review current evidence regarding short-term clinical and long-term oncological outcomes, lateral lymph node dissection, and the cost of the procedure.

A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing conventional Intuitive® procedure card recommended port placement with the modified Indian (Manipal) technique

Introduction

The da Vinci^® X hybrid systems (Intuitive Surgical^®, Sunnyvale CA) provides standard sites recommendations for port placement during robotic surgery; including that for colorectal procedures. The author's encountered challenges while adhering to the provided instructions, such as clash of instruments and arms and need for additional ports, and hence to overcome these challenges attempted a few innovative technical modifications. The surgical results as well as merits of the revised Indian (Manipal) port placement with single docking technique are presented here.

Methods

Twenty patients underwent robotic rectal resection at the Department of Surgical Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Manipal Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Bengaluru, India, between December 2017 and June 2018. A randomised controlled study was conducted to compare the two techniques. Ten patients were operated using hybrid da Vinci^® 'X' system using the manufacturer's recommendations and 10 by the modified Indian (Manipal) port placement with a single docking technique.

Result and Conclusions

The Indian (Manipal) modifications of port placements are optimal for colorectal procedures such as low anterior resection as well as for ultralow anterior resections. The intraoperative parameters compared between the recommendations of the Intuitive^® (da Vinci^® systems) and attempted modifications demonstrated statistically significant advantages with the use of the revised techniques. The improvements offered by this modification include no additional requirements of ports or staplers, lesser clash amongst instruments as well as arms, better mobilisation of splenic flexure amongst others.

Comparison Between Robotic and Laparoscopic or Open Anastomoses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery has been increasingly used in fashioning various surgical anastomoses. Our aim was to collect and analyze outcomes related to anastomoses performed using a robotic approach and compare them with those done using laparoscopic or open approaches through meta-analysis.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted for articles comparing robotic with laparoscopic and/or open operations (colectomy, low anterior resection, gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), pancreaticoduodenectomy, radical cystectomy, pyeloplasty, radical prostatectomy, renal transplant) published up to June 2019 searching Medline, Scopus, Google Scholar, Clinical Trials and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies containing information about outcomes related to hand-sewn anastomoses were included for meta-analysis. Studies with stapled anastomoses or without relevant information about the anastomotic technique were excluded. We also excluded studies in which the anastomoses were performed extracorporeally in laparoscopic or robotic operations.

RESULTS

We included 83 studies referring to the aforementioned operations (4 randomized controlled and 79 non-randomized, 10 prospective and 69 retrospective) apart from colectomy and low anterior resection. Anastomoses done using robotic instruments provided similar results to those done using laparoscopic or open approach in regards to anastomotic leak or stricture. However, there were lower rates of stenosis in robotic than in laparoscopic RYGB (p=0.01) and in robotic than in open radical prostatectomy (p<0.00001). Moreover, all anastomoses needed more time to be performed using the robotic rather than the open approach in renal transplant (p≤0.001).

CONCLUSION

Robotic anastomoses provide equal outcomes with laparoscopic and open ones in most operations, with a few notable exceptions.

Robotic surgery in colorectal cancer: the way forward or a passing fad

Introduced mainly to overcome the technical limitations of laparoscopy, robotic colorectal surgery (CRS) has been touted to provide superior optics, ergonomics, and surgeon autonomy. This technological advancement is nonetheless associated with certain drawbacks, mainly involving its cost and the lack of unequivocal benefit over conventional laparoscopy. In this era of evidence-based medicine, robotic CRS remains predominantly a subject of individual institution case series, retrospective studies, matched comparisons at best, and repeated reviews of the above literature. This article provides a critique of the more contemporary data regarding the use of robotics in colorectal cancer surgery and the controversies surrounding the literature.

Global hospital and operative costs associated with various ventral cavity procedures: a comprehensive literature review and analysis across regions

Objectives: The aim of this literature review was to provide a comprehensive report on hospital costs, and cost components, for a range of ventral cavity surgical procedures across three regions of focus: (1) Americas, (2) Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA), and (3) Asia-Pacific. Methods: A structured search was performed and utilized a combination of controlled vocabulary (e.g., "Hepatectomy", "Colectomy", "Costs and Cost Analysis") and keywords (e.g. "liver resection", "bowel removal", "economics"). Studies were considered eligible for inclusion if they reported hospital-related costs associated with the procedures of interest. Cost outcomes included operating room (OR) time costs, total OR costs, ward stay costs, total admission costs, OR cost per minute and ward cost per day. All costs were converted to 2018 USD. Results: Total admission costs were observed to be highest in the Americas, with an average cost of $15,791. The average OR time cost per minute was found to vary by region: $24.83 (Americas), $14.29 (Asia-Pacific), and $13.90 (EMEA). A cost-breakdown demonstrated that OR costs typically comprised close to 50%, or more, of hospital admission costs. This review also demonstrates that decreasing OR time by 30 min provides cost savings approximately equivalent to a 1-day reduction in ward time. Conclusion: This literature review provided a comprehensive assessment of hospital costs across various surgical procedures, approaches, and geographical regions. Our findings indicate that novel processes and healthcare technologies that aim to reduce resources such as operating time and hospital stay, can potentially provide resource savings for hospital payers.

Variation in the utilization of robotic surgical operations

The appropriate use of the robot in surgery continues to evolve. Robotic operations (RO) are particularly advantageous for deep pelvic and retroperitoneal procedures, but the implementation of RO is unknown. We aimed to examine regional variation for the most commonly performed RO in general, gynecologic, and urologic surgery. A three-state inpatient database from 2008 to 2011 was used. Nine common robotic inpatient general, gynecologic and urologic surgery procedures were analyzed. States were divided into hospital service areas (HSAs). The percentage of RO was calculated for each operation. Hospital service areas that had < 50% or > 150% of the RO average were outliers. Hospital service areas were compared based on demographics, patterns of adoption, variation in usage, and association with population, physician and hospital density. Hysterectomies were the procedure that was performed most often robotically. Over 50% of radical prostatectomies were performed robotically. Procedures with the highest rate of RO performance were performed with the least variation. Characteristics that were significantly correlated with RO included provider and hospital density. Variation in the utilization of RO is common and differs by operation. Physician density impacts access to care and is associated with the variation in use of RO depending on procedure type. Further research is needed to understand the causes of variation and adoption of RO.

Safe surgery in the elderly: A review of outcomes following robotic proctectomy from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample in a cross-sectional study

Background

As our nation's population ages, operating on older and sicker patients occurs more frequently. Robotic operations have been thought to bridge the gap between a laparoscopic and an open approach, especially in more complex cases like proctectomy.

Methods

Our objective was to evaluate the use and outcomes of robotic proctectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer in the elderly. A retrospective cross-sectional cohort study utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS; 2006-2013) was performed. All cases were restricted to age 70 years old or greater.

Results

We identified 6740 admissions for rectal cancer including: 5879 open, 666 laparoscopic, and 195 robotic procedures. The median age was 77 years old. The incidence of a robotic proctectomy increased by 39%, while the open approach declined by 6% over the time period studied. Median (interquartile range) length of stay was shorter for robotic procedures at 4.3 (3-7) days, compared to laparoscopic 5.8 (4-8) and open at 6.7 (5-10) days (p < 0.01), while median total hospital charges were greater in the robotic group compared to laparoscopic and open cases ($64,743 vs. $55,813 vs. $50,355, respectively, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the risk of total complications between the different approaches following multivariate analysis.

Conclusion

Robotic proctectomy was associated with a shorter LOS, and this may act as a surrogate marker for an overall improvement in adverse events. These results demonstrate that a robotic approach is a safe and feasible option, and should not be discounted solely based on age or comorbidities.

Cost-effectiveness of current approaches in rectal surgery

Colorectal cancer is ranked as the fourth malignant cause of mortality. With the tremendous revolution in the modern medical techniques, minimally invasive approaches have been incorporated into rectal surgery. The effectiveness of surgical procedures is usually measured by a combination of qualitative (quality of life) and quantitative (years of life) measures, while the costs should reflect the use of different resources that were involved in delivering the medical care and they are affected by several factors, including length of hospital stay. In this review, we provide an insight into the cost-effectiveness of the different types of rectal surgeries in order to present a systematic approach for future preferences. A comprehensive literature review using Medline (via PUBMED), Embase and Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials (via clinical trial.org) was performed. Minimally invasive rectal surgeries have considerable cost-effective properties that outweigh those of the open techniques in terms of earlier return to bowel function, lower morbidity rates, reduced pain, shorter length of hospital stay and the overall patients’ quality of life although there was no difference in long-term oncological and survival outcomes. The paucity of currently available long-term oncologic, quality of life, and economic outcomes may limit an adequate comparison of robotic surgeries to other surgical techniques. It is therefore recommended to conduct focused studies to help balance the cost/benefit factors along with other technical considerations aimed at reducing the cost of robotic systems with subsequent improvement of their cost-effectiveness.

•

Colorectal cancer is the fourth cause of mortality. Minimally invasive surgery is now considered the standard of care.

•

Cost of minimally invasive surgery is offset by the better outcomes due to less complications and shorter hospital stay.

•

TaTME requires two working teams and two sets of instruments which increases the total cost.

•

Robotic surgery in obese patients demonstrated superior results when it comes to hospital stay and overall complications.

•

Well conducted clinical trials looking at cost effectiveness of new technologies in colorectal surgery are needed.

Propensity-Matched Analysis of Sigmoidectomies for Diverticular Disease

Background and Objectives:

The role for the robotic-assisted approach as a minimally invasive alternative to open colorectal surgery is in the evaluation phase. While the benefits of minimally invasive colorectal surgery when compared to the open approach have been clearly demonstrated, the adoption of laparoscopy has been limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes, hospital and payer characteristics of patients undergoing robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open elective sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease in the United States.

Methods:

This is a retrospective propensity score–matched analysis. The Premier Healthcare Database was queried for patients with diverticular disease. Patients with diverticular disease who underwent robotic-assisted, laparoscopic, and open sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease from January 2013 through September 2015 were included. Propensity-score matching (1:1) facilitated comparison of robotic-assisted versus open approach and robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic approach. Peri-operative outcomes were assessed for both comparisons.

Results:

There were several outcomes advantages for the robotic-assisted approach when compared to laparoscopic and open sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease that included significantly fewer conversions to open (P = .0002), shorter hospital length of stay, fewer postoperative complications—ileus, wound complications, and acute renal failure—and more patients discharged directly to home.

Conclusions:

The robotic-assisted minimally invasive approach to elective sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease results in favorable intra-operative and postoperative outcomes when compared to laparoscopic and open approaches.

Feasibility and safety of robotic resection of complicated diverticular disease

This study aimed to assess intra- and postoperative outcomes of robotic resection of left-sided complicated diverticular disease. Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained institutional database on consecutive patients undergoing elective robotic resection for diverticular disease (2014-2018). All procedures were performed within an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP). Demographic, surgical and ERP-related items were compared between patients with simple and complicated diverticular disease according to intra-operative presentation. Postoperative complications and length of stay were compared between the two groups. Out of 150 patients, 78 (52%) presented with complicated and the remaining 72 (48%) with uncomplicated disease. Both groups were comparable regarding demographic baseline characteristics and overall ERP compliance. Surgery for complicated disease was longer (288 ± 96 vs. 258 ± 72 min, p = 0.04) and more contaminated (≥ class 3: 57.7 vs. 23.6%, p < 0.001) with a trend to higher conversion rates (10.3 vs. 2.8%, p = 0.1). While postoperative overall complications tended to occur more often after resections for complicated disease (28.2 vs. 15.3%, p = 0.075), major, surgical and medical complications did not differ between the two groups, and median length of stay was 3 days in both settings (p = 0.19). Robotic resection of diverticular disease was feasible and safe regardless of disease presentation by the time of surgery.

The Current Role of Robotics in Colorectal Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite the growth in laparoscopic surgery, comparable oncological outcomes, and reduced complication rates, the majority of colorectal surgery is still performed via an open approach. Reasons for this may include technical difficulties associated with operating in narrow spaces such as in the pelvis and inadequate experience. Robotic surgery provides potential solutions to some of these challenges. This review will summarize the state of the literature regarding robotic colorectal surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

The most consistent benefit of robotic surgery is decreasing operative conversions, specifically in rectal cancer. In partial colectomies, there is evidence to support quicker return to bowel function. Oncologic outcomes compared to the laparoscopic approach are equivalent. Robotic surgery provides solutions to the challenges posed by laparoscopy, including wristed instruments, ease of intracorporeal suturing, and ergonomic advantages. Randomized trials to evaluate peri-operative outcomes will be important. If robotics is able to facilitate conversion of open colectomies to their minimally invasive equivalent, robotics may end up proving to be advantageous in the peri-operative and post-operative period. Continued studies are warranted.