Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery of the colon and rectum. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:1-11. [PMID: 21858568 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-1867-y]

Emergency robotic surgery: the experience of a single center and review of the literature

BACKGROUNDS

Laparoscopic surgery is widely used in abdominal emergency surgery (AES), and the possibility of extending this approach to the more recent robotic surgery (RS) arouses great interest. The slow diffusion of robotic technology mainly due to high costs and the longer RS operative time when compared to laparoscopy may represent disincentives, especially in AES. This study aims to report our experience in the use of RS in AES assessing its safety and feasibility, with particular focus on intra- and post-operative complications, conversion rate, and surgical learning curve. Our data were also compared to other experiences though an extensive literature review.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed a single surgeon series of the last 10 years. From January 2014 to December 2023, 36 patients underwent urgent or emergency RS. The robotic devices used were Da Vinci Si (15 cases) and Xi (21 cases).

RESULTS

36 (4.3%) out of 834 robotic procedures were included in our analysis: 20 (56.56%) females. The mean age was 63 years and 30% of patients were ≥ 70 years. 2 (5.55%) procedures were performed at night. No conversions to open were reported in this series. According to the Clavien-Dindo classification, 2 (5.5%) major complications were collected. Intraoperative and 30-day mortality were 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that RS may be a useful and reliable approach also to AES and intraoperative laparoscopic complications when performed in selected hemodynamically stable patients in very well-trained robotic centers. The technology may increase the minimally invasive use and conversion rate in emergent settings in a completely robotic or hybrid approach.

Perceptions of theatre team members to robotic assisted surgery and the aid of technology in colorectal surgery

The implementation of robotic assisted surgery (RAS) has brought in a change to the perception and roles of theatre staff, as well as the dynamics of the operative environment and team. This study aims to identify and describe current perceptions of theatre staff in the context of RAS. 12 semi-structured interviews were conducted in a tertiary level university hospital, where RAS is utilised in selected elective settings. Interviews were conducted by an experienced research nurse to staff of the colorectal department operating theatre (nursing, surgical and anaesthetics) with some experience in operating within open, laparoscopic and RAS surgical settings. Thematic analysis on all interviews was performed, with formation of preliminary themes. Respondents all discussed advantages of all modes of operating. All respondents appreciated the benefits of minimally invasive surgery, in the reduced physiological insult to patients. However, interviewees remarked on the current perceived limitations of RAS in terms of logistics. Some voiced apprehension and anxieties about the safety if an operation needs to be converted to open. An overarching theme with participants of all levels and backgrounds was the 'Teamwork' and the concept of the [robotic] team. The physical differences of RAS changes the traditional methods of communication, with the loss of face-to-face contact and the physical 'separation' of the surgeon from the rest of the operating team impacting theatre dynamics. It is vital to understand the staff cultures, concerns and perception to the use of this relatively new technology in colorectal surgery.

BFE-Net: bilateral fusion enhanced network for gastrointestinal polyp segmentation

Accurate segmentation of polyp regions in gastrointestinal endoscopic images is pivotal for diagnosis and treatment. Despite advancements, challenges persist, like accurately segmenting small polyps and maintaining accuracy when polyps resemble surrounding tissues. Recent studies show the effectiveness of the pyramid vision transformer (PVT) in capturing global context, yet it may lack detailed information. Conversely, U-Net excels in semantic extraction. Hence, we propose the bilateral fusion enhanced network (BFE-Net) to address these challenges. Our model integrates U-Net and PVT features via a deep feature enhancement fusion module (FEF) and attention decoder module (AD). Experimental results demonstrate significant improvements, validating our model's effectiveness across various datasets and modalities, promising advancements in gastrointestinal polyp diagnosis and treatment.

Robotic colorectal surgery: quality assessment of patient information available on the internet using webscraping

The primary goal of this study is to assess current patient information available on the internet concerning robotic colorectal surgery. Acquiring this information will aid in patients understanding of robotic colorectal surgery. Data was acquired through a web-scraping algorithm. The algorithm used two Python packages: Beautiful Soup and Selenium. The long-chain keywords incorporated into Google, Bing and Yahoo search engines were 'Da Vinci Colon-Rectal Surgery', 'Colorectal Robotic Surgery' and 'Robotic Bowel Surgery'. 207 websites resulted, were sorted and evaluated according to the ensuring quality information for patients (EQIP) score. Of the 207 websites visited, 49 belonged to the subgroup of hospital websites (23.6%), 46 to medical centers (22.2%), 45 to practitioners (21.7%), 42 to health care systems (20,2%), 11 to news services (5.3%), 7 to web portals (3.3%), 5 to industry (2.4%), and 2 to patient groups (0.9%). Only 52 of the 207 websites received a high rating. The quality of available information on the internet concerning robotic colorectal surgery is low. The majority of information was inaccurate. Medical facilities involved in robotic colorectal surgery, robotic bowel surgery and related robotic procedures should develop websites with credible information to guide patient decisions.

A Comparative Analysis of Short-term Patient Outcomes After Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Rectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

The popularity of robot-assisted colorectal surgery has risen over recent years; however, patient-related advantages over laparoscopic surgery remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to compare short-term patient outcomes following robotic and laparoscopic partial or complete rectal resections.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at 5 large tertiary care Kaiser Permanente medical centers across Southern California.

PATIENTS

There were 863 consecutive robotic and laparoscopic pelvic rectal surgeries, including low anterior resections, proctectomies with coloanal anastomosis, and abdominoperineal resections, performed between January 2010 and December 2019.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Short-term patient outcomes, including postoperative length of hospital stay, emergency department returns, and 30-day readmissions, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 458 surgical procedures were performed via robotic versus 405 via laparoscopic approaches. The robotic group had a higher proportion of male patients (57.4% vs 50.4%; p = 0.04) and a higher proportion of obese (27.1% vs 26.9%; p = 0.02) and overweight patients (36.9% vs 35.1%; p = 0.01). There was no difference in underlying comorbidities of diabetes or smoking, or in the rate of ileostomy creation. After adjusting for Charlson Comorbidity Index, no significant difference was found in emergency department returns between robotic and laparoscopic surgical patients ( p = 0.17). There were no significant outcome differences between the 2 groups with regards to length of stay during procedure, 30-day readmission, or death rates.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the lack of randomization in its design, selection of patients for surgical approach, and training and familiarity with robotic rectal surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows length of stay during the procedure and postoperative 30-day readmission rates were generally similar between robotic and laparoscopic patients. Male patients and those with a higher BMI were more likely to have been operated via a robotic method. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B857 .

UN ANLISIS COMPARATIVO DE LOS RESULTADOS A CORTO PLAZO DE LOS PACIENTES DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA RECTAL LAPAROSCPICA VERSUS LA ROBTICA

ANTECEDENTES:La popularidad de la cirugía colorrectal asistida por robot ha aumentado en los últimos años. Sin embargo, las ventajas relacionadas con el paciente siguen siendo inciertas sobre la cirugía laparoscópica.OBJETIVO:Nuestro objetivo era comparar los resultados de los pacientes a corto plazo después de resecciones rectales completas o parciales robóticas y laparoscópicas.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:El estudio se llevó a cabo en cinco grandes centros médicos de Kaiser Permanente de atención terciaria en el sur de California.PACIENTES:Se realizaron 863 cirugías robóticas y laparoscópicas rectales pélvicas consecutivas, incluidas resecciones anteriores bajas, proctectomías con anastomosis coloanal y resecciones abdominoperineales, realizadas entre enero de 2010 y diciembre de 2019.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Resultados de los pacientes a corto plazo, incluida la duración de la estancia hospitalaria después del procedimiento, los retornos al departamento de emergencias y los reingresos y la mortalidad a los 30 días.RESULTADOS:Se realizaron un total de 458 procedimientos quirúrgicos a través del robot versus 405 con laparoscopia. El grupo robótico tuvo una mayor proporción de pacientes masculinos (57,4 vs 50,4%, p = 0,04) y una mayor proporción de pacientes obesos (27,1 vs 26,9%, p = 0,02) y con sobrepeso (36,9 vs 35,1%, p = 0,01). No hubo diferencia en las comorbilidades subyacentes de la diabetes y el tabaquismo, y en la tasa de creación de ileostomía. Después de ajustar por el índice de comorbilidad de Charlson, no se encontraron diferencias significativas en los retornos al servicio de urgencias entre los pacientes robóticos y laparoscópicos ( p = 0,17). No hubo diferencias significativas en los resultados entre los dos grupos con respecto a la duración de la estadía durante el procedimiento, las tasas de readmisión a los 30 días y las tasas de muerte.LIMITACIONES:Falta de aleatorización en el diseño del estudio, selección de pacientes para abordaje quirúrgico, capacitación y familiaridad con la cirugía rectal robótica.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio muestra la duración de la estadía durante el procedimiento y las tasas de reingreso a los 30 días después del procedimiento fueron generalmente similares entre los pacientes robóticos y laparoscópicos. Los pacientes masculinos y aquellos con un índice de masa corporal más alto tenían más probabilidades de haber sido operados mediante un método robótico. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B857 . (Traducción-Dr Yolanda Colorado ).

Systemic inflammatory response in robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer (SIRIRALS): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Background

Robot-assisted surgery is being increasingly adopted in treating colorectal cancer, and the transition from laparoscopic surgery to robot-assisted surgery is a trend. The evidence of the benefits of robot-assisted surgery is sparse. However, findings are associated with improved patient-related outcomes and overall morbidity rates compared to laparoscopic surgery. This induction is unclear, considering both surgical modalities are characterized as minimally invasive. This study aims to evaluate the systemic and peritoneal inflammatory stress response induced by robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopic surgery for elective colon cancer resections in a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial.

Methods

This study is a single-centre randomized controlled superiority trial with 50 colon cancer participants. The primary endpoint is the level of systemic inflammatory response expressed as serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin 6 (IL-6) levels between postoperative days one and three. Secondary endpoints include (i) levels of systemic inflammation in serum expressed by a panel of inflammatory and pro-inflammatory cytokines measured during the first three postoperative days, (ii) postoperative surgical and medical complications (30 days) according to Clavien-Dindo classification and Comprehensive Complication Index, (iii) intraoperative blood loss, (iv) conversion rate to open surgery, (v) length of surgery, (vi) operative time, (vii) the number of harvested lymph nodes, and (viii) length of hospital stay. The exploratory endpoints are (i) levels of peritoneal inflammatory response in peritoneal fluid expressed by inflammatory and pro-inflammatory cytokines between postoperative day one and three, (ii) patient-reported health-related quality of recovery-15 (QoR-15), (iii) 30 days mortality rate, (iv) heart rate variability and (v) gene transcript (mRNA) analysis.

Discussion

To our knowledge, this is the first clinical randomized controlled trial to clarify the inflammatory stress response induced by robot-assisted or laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer resections.

Trial registration This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04687384) on December, 29, 2020, Regional committee on health research ethics, Region of Southern Denmark (N75709) and Data Protection Agency, Hospital Sønderjylland, University Hospital of Southern Denmark (N20/46179).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12893-021-01355-4.

Technical essential aspects in robotic colorectal surgery: mastering the Da Vinci Si and Xi platforms

BACKGROUND

laparoscopy surgery has many proven clinical advantages over conventional surgery and more recently, robotic surgery has been the emerging platform in the minimally invasive era. In the colorectal field, although overcoming limitations of standard laparoscopy, robotic surgery still faces challenging situations even by the most experienced colorectal surgeons. This study reports essentials technical aspects and comparison between Da Vincis Si and Xi platforms aiming to master and maximize efficiency whenever performing robotic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

this study overviews the most structured concepts and practical applications in robotic colorectal surgery in both Si and Xi Da Vinci platforms. Possible pitfalls are emphasized and step-wise approach is described from port placement and docking process to surgical technique. We also present data collected from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

our early experience includes forty-four patients following a standardized total robotic left-colon and rectal resection. Guided information and practical applications for a safe and efficient robotic colorectal surgery are described. We also present illustrations and describe technical aspects of a standardized procedure.

CONCLUSION

performing robotic colorectal surgery is feasible and safe in experienced surgeons hands. Although the Da Vinci Xi platform demonstrates greater versatility in a more user-friendly design with technological advances, the correct mastery of technology by the surgical team is an essential condition for its fully robotic execution in a single docking approach.

Application of nano-carbon and titanium clip combined labeling in robot-assisted laparoscopic transverse colon cancer surgery

Background

Robot-assisted laparoscopic transverse colon tumor surgery requires precise tumor localization. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nano-carbon and titanium clip combination labeling methods in robot-assisted transverse colon tumor surgery.

Methods

From January 2018 to January 2019, the clinical data of 16 patients who come from FuZhou, China underwent preoperative nano-carbon and titanium clip combined with robot-assisted laparoscopic transverse colon cancer surgery were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

Of the 16 patients, no signs of abdominal pain, fever, or diarrhea were observed after colonoscopy. Two titanium clips were seen on all of the 16 patients' abdominal plain films. Nano-carbon staining sites were observed during the operation, and no staining disappeared or abdominal cavity contamination. All patients underwent R₀ resection. The average number of lymph nodes harvsted was 18.23 ± 5.04 (range, 9–32). The average time to locate the lesion under the laparoscopic was 3.03 ± 1.26 min (range, 1–6 min), and the average operation time was 321.43 ± 49.23 min (range, 240–400 min). All were consistent with the surgical plan, and there was no intraoperative change of surgical procedure or conversion to open surgery.

Conclusion

Preoperative colonoscopy combined with nano-carbon and titanium clip is safe and effective in robot-assisted transverse colon cancer surgery. A At the same time, the labeling method shows potential in shortening the operation time, ensuring sufficient safety margin and reducing complications.

A rare cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding treated with robotic colorectal surgery

Background

Metastatic melanoma to the colon is rarely diagnosed with an incidence of only 0.3% and more than 95% of cases identified post-mortem. Survival for patients with metastatic melanoma to the colon is poor, with 5-year survival rates of 26.5%. Nonetheless, surgical resection of the colonic metastatic melanoma lesions is recommended as it is associated with improved survival. Additionally, surgical resection is also indicated for palliative reasons, as symptom resolution is achieved in 90% of such patients. Use of the surgical robot has increased dramatically in the past decades, especially in the field of colorectal surgery. Furthermore, recent studies have demonstrated comparable outcomes between patients undergoing either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted colorectal surgery for cancer. Here, we describe the first case, to the authors knowledge, of a robot-assisted sigmoid colectomy for metastatic melanoma.

Case presentation

A 72-year-old male with a history of metastatic melanoma diagnosed in 2015 with a favorable response to immunotherapy presented to the emergency department with symptomatic lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Endoscopy demonstrated a friable melanotic lesion of the sigmoid colon with biopsy demonstrating histopathologic evidence of metastatic melanoma. After further evaluation, the patient consented for an elective robot-assisted segmental colectomy for palliative intent. Diagnostic laparoscopy identified no evidence of further intra-abdominal metastatic disease. After identifying the metastatic lesion in the sigmoid colon, the mesentery of involved segment of sigmoid colon adjacent to the lesion was divided using the bipolar electrosurgical vessel sealer device. The colon was divided both proximal and distal to the lesion using a robotic stapler and a tension-free colo-colonic anastomosis was created intracorporeally. Postoperatively, the patient had an unremarkable course and was discharged home on post-operative day 3. On follow-up, the patient was doing well with resolution of preoperative LGIB.

Conclusion

 This case highlights a rare presentation of metastatic melanoma to the colon in a patient presenting with LGIB. Furthermore, this case demonstrates the feasibility of the minimally invasive robotic-assisted approach for an uncommon pathology.

Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Proctectomy Outcomes: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis

BACKGROUND

The robotic platform is increasingly used in colorectal surgery. Recent upgrades in the robotic platform and introduction of proctectomy-specific reports from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) warrant updated evaluation of minimally invasive proctectomy outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes in robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy using ACS-NSQIP data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The ACS-NSQIP data set was used to identify adult patients undergoing elective robotic and laparoscopic proctectomy in 2016 and 2017. Demographics, preoperative and intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were collected. Propensity-weighted analysis was used to estimate the effect of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery on outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 3845 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 2681 (70%) underwent a laparoscopic approach and 1164 (30%) underwent a robotic approach. Patients undergoing a robotic procedure were more likely to be older, have higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, low rectal tumors, and have undergone chemotherapy or radiation before surgery. After propensity adjustment, a robotic approach was associated with a decrease in conversion to open operation (estimated mean difference, -6.7%; P < 0.01), length of stay (-0.6 d; P = 0.01), occurrence of postoperative ileus (-3.7%; P = 0.01), and an increase in operative time (20.3 min; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Using data from a national cohort, we found that compared with laparoscopy, robotic proctectomy is associated with decreased conversion to open operation, longer operation time, decreased length of stay, and decreased postoperative ileus. Our study identified several advantages to a robotic approach; however, further work is needed to assess cost-effectiveness in conjunction with clinical outcomes.

Successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer - a systematic review

AIM

Minimally invasive surgical approaches for cancer of the right colon have been well described with significant patient and equivalent oncological benefits. Robotic surgery has advanced in its ability to provide multi-quadrant abdominal access, leading the surgical community to widen its application outside of the pelvis to other abdominal compartments. Globally it is being realized that a patient's surgical episode of care is becoming the epicentre of cancer treatment. In order to establish the role of robotic surgery in a patient's episode of care, 'successful patient-oriented surgical' parameters in right hemicolectomy for malignancy were measured. The objective was to examine the rates of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH) compared to laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH) for cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid: 1946-present), PubMed (NCBI), Embase (Ovid: 1966-present) and Cochrane Library was conducted using PRISMA for parameters of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes in RRH and LRH for malignancy alone. The parameters measured included postoperative ileus, anastomotic complication, surgical wound infection, length of stay (LOS), incisional hernia rate, conversion to open, margin status, lymph node harvest and overall morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 15 studies which included 831 RRH patients and 3241 LRH patients, with a median age of 62-74 years. No study analysed the concept of successful patient-oriented surgical outcomes. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative ileus, with less time to first flatus in RRH (2.0-2.7 days, compared with 2.5-4.0 days, P < 0.05). Anastomotic leak rate in one study reported a significant increase in LRH compared to RRH (P < 0.05, 0% vs 8.3%). Significantly decreased LOS following RRH was outlined in six studies. One study reported a significantly higher rate of incisional hernias following LRH with extracorporeal anastomoses compared to RRH with intracorporeal anastomoses. Overall rates of conversion to open surgery were less with RRH (0%-3.9% vs 0%-18%, P < 0.001, 0.05). One study outlined significantly higher rates of incomplete resection with an open right hemicolectomy compared with minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic resections, with positive margin rates of 2.3%, 0.9% and 0% respectively (P < 0.001). Two studies reported significantly higher lymph node harvest in RRH (P < 0.05). Overall morbidity and 30-day mortality were comparable in both approaches.

CONCLUSION

Thirty-day morbidity and mortality were comparable between the two approaches, with patients undergoing RRH having lower anastomotic complications, increased lymph node harvest, and reduced LOS, conversion to open and incisional hernia rates in a number of studies. There are limited data on surgical approach and impact on quality of life and what patients deem successful surgical outcomes. There is a further need for a randomized controlled trial examining successful patient-oriented outcomes in right hemicolectomy for malignancy.

Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer and Cost-Effectiveness

Robotic surgery is considered as one of the advanced treatment modality of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. Robotic rectal surgery has been performed for three decades and its application is gradually expanding along with technology development. It has several technical advantages which include magnified three-dimensional vision, better ergonomics, multiple articulated robotic instruments, and the opportunity to perform remote surgery. The technical benefits of robotic system can help to manipulate more meticulously during technical challenging procedures including total mesorectal excision in narrow pelvis, lateral pelvic node dissection, and intersphincteric resection. It is also reported that robotic rectal surgery have been shown more favorable postoperative functional outcomes. Despite its technical benefits, a majority of studies have been reported that there is rarely clinical or oncologic superiority of robotic surgery for rectal cancer compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery. In addition, robotic rectal surgery showed significantly higher costs than the standard method. Hence, the cost-effectiveness of robotic rectal surgery is still questionable. In order for robotic rectal surgery to further develop in the field of minimally invasive surgery, there should be an obvious cost-effective advantages over laparoscopic surgery, and it is crucial that large-scale prospective randomized trials are required. Positive competition of industries in correlation with technological development may gradually reduce the price of the robotic system, and it will be helpful to increase the cost-effectiveness of robotic rectal surgery.

Comparison of outcome and cost between the open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgical treatments for colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis using nationwide hospital record database

BACKGROUND

There are limited studies that compare the cost and outcome of robotic-assisted surgery to open and laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer treatment. We aimed to compare the three surgical modalities for colon cancer treatment.

METHODS

We performed a cohort study using the population-based Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Patients with a primary diagnosis of colon cancer who underwent robotic, laparoscopic, or open surgeries between 2008 and 2014 were eligible for enrollment. We compared in-hospital mortality, complications, length of hospital stay, and cost for patients undergoing one of these three procedures using a multivariate adjusted logistic regression analysis and propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Of the 531,536 patients undergoing surgical treatment for colon cancer during the study period, 348,645 (65.6%) patients underwent open surgeries, 174,748 (32.9%) underwent laparoscopic surgeries, and 8143 (1.5%) underwent robotic surgeries. In-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay, wound complications, general medical complications, general surgical complications, and costs of the three surgical treatment modalities. Compared to those undergoing laparoscopic surgery, patients undergoing open surgery had a higher mortality rate (OR 2.98, 95% CI 2.61-3.40), more general medical complications (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.67-1.87), a longer length of hospital stay (6.60 vs. 4.36 days), and higher total cost ($18,541 vs. $14,487) in the propensity score matched cohort. Mortality rate and general medical complications were equivalent in the laparoscopic and robotic surgery groups, but the median cost was lower in the laparoscopic group ($14641 vs. $16,628 USD).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colon cancer surgery was associated with a favourable short-term outcome and lower cost compared with open surgery. Robot-assisted surgery had comparable outcomes but higher cost as compared to laparoscopic surgery.

Robotic pelvic dissection as surgical treatment of complicated diverticulitis in elective settings: a comparative study with fully laparoscopic procedure

BACKGROUND

Recently, minimally invasive treatment of complicated sigmoid diverticulitis is becoming a valid alternative to standard procedures. Robotic approach may be useful to allow more precise dissection in arduous pelvic dissection as in complicated diverticulitis. The aim of this study is to investigate effectiveness, potential benefits and short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical resection, compared with fully laparoscopic resection in complicated diverticulitis.

METHODS

Between January 2009 and December 2017, 156 consecutive patients with history of complicated diverticular disease were referred to our Department of General, Mininvasive and Robotic Surgery. All patients underwent elective colonic resections performed by the same colorectal surgeon and followed a perioperative ERAS program. Demographic and clinical features, surgical data, postoperative data, 30-day morbidity and mortality, VAS for surgeon's compliance were evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-six consecutive patients underwent elective colonic resection: 92 fully laparoscopic (FL) colorectal resections and 64 procedures with robotic hybrid approach (RHA). Conversion rate was none in the RHA group versus 6.5% in the FL group, because of poor vision due to bowel distension, inflammatory pseudotumor and peritoneal adhesions. No 30-day mortality was observed. Mean operative time was 167.5 ± 54.4 min (80-420) in the FL group and 172.5 ± 55.64 min (110-325) in the RHA group (p 0.079), mean intraoperative blood loss was 144.6 ± 40.6 ml (40-200) with the FL technique and 138.4 ± 28.3 ml (20-185) with the RHA (p 0.295). Mean hospital stay for FL was 5 ± 4.1 days (range 3-45) and 5 ± 2.7 days (range 3-20) for RHA (p 0.974). Overall postoperative morbidity rate was 21.6% in the FL group and 12.3% in the RHA (p 0.067). Major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo 3 and 4) represented 13% and 4.6%, respectively (p 0.091). VAS for surgeon's compliance revealed a better performance in the robotic arm (p 0.059).

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary study highlights the potential benefits of robotic-assisted laparoscopy in colorectal resections for complicated diverticular disease in terms of surgical efficacy, postoperative morbidity and better surgeon's compliance.

Trends in the Use of Laparoscopy and Robotics for Colorectal Cancer in Florida

Background: Laparoscopy and more recently robotics are increasingly used for colorectal cancer surgery in the United States. We examined the current trends of minimally invasive surgical resections for colorectal cancer in Florida. Methods: The Florida Inpatient Discharge Dataset was used to examine the clinical data of patients who underwent elective surgery for colorectal cancer during 2013-2015. Multivariate analyses were performed to compare patient characteristics associated with the use of open and minimally invasive surgeries. Results: A total of 10,513 patients were analyzed; 5451 (52%) had open surgery, 4403 (42%) laparoscopy, and 659 (6%) robotic surgery. The rates of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) increased from 46.95% in 2013 to 48.72% in 2015. Among minimally invasive surgical procedures, the use of robotics increased from 9.82% in 2013 to 15.48% in 2015. Metastatic cancer (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.67), Elixhauser score of 3-5 (OR 0.85, CI 0.76-0.95) or more than 5 (OR 0.78, CI 0.63-0.97), Medicaid insurance (OR 0.73, CI 0.6-0.89), Black race (OR 0.88, CI 0.77-0.99), and rural residence (OR 0.83, CI 0.69-0.99) were associated with lower odds of MIS than open surgery. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the overall rates of MIS for colorectal cancer in Florida increased from 2013 to 2015. Socially deprived and very sick patient populations with colorectal cancer are less likely to undergo MIS.

Working towards clinical effectiveness-a multi-disciplinary approach to robotic surgery

The importance of a multi-disciplinary team (MDT) approach to conventional surgical techniques has strong empirical support. The MDT approach to robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has not been clearly defined, which encourages prospectively poor MDT performance. Poor performance of the MDT approach, allied to the constant evolution of technology-assisted surgery, can generate unacceptable operative and patient outcomes. This review offers a nursing perspective to the complex paradigm of thoracic RAS, demonstrating key indicators to perioperative MDT engagement. This will be achieved by offering a rationale for RAS in pulmonary resection, identifying additional surgeries where utility is demonstrated. Evaluation of the available evidence will synthesize clinical quality indicators, while key strategies in effective MDT development can be summarised. Conclusively, bespoke and experiential knowledge will be shared, based upon the investigatory findings discussed throughout this article. Allied to a recommended developmental framework, this perspective should allow for transfer of knowledge, creation and replication of useful interventions. Lung cancer is an ever-increasing global concern, currently being the co-modal cancer with an estimated 2.09 million cases worldwide. Populations are ageing and with annual global costs of at least $1.16 trillion, effective treatments are required. RAS shows promise in treating large and complex lesions when compared to a video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) approach. A critical indicator being enhanced vision and dexterity in comparison to a VATS approach. Economically, RAS has proven to be an expensive technique, however, when initial purchase costs are excluded, intra-operatively, there are ways to narrow the expense gap and make RAS cheaper. When assessing per hospital stay, exclusive of initial purchase cost, RAS is found to be cheaper than open thoracotomy. This article demonstrates that RAS for pulmonary resection has utility for complex lesions where a VATS approach would be unsuitable. Crucially, as with all complex surgery, the MDT must be performed effectively for optimum patient outcomes.

Robot-assisted gallbladder-preserving hepatectomy for treating S5 hepatoblastoma in a child: A case report and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Hepatoblastoma (HB) is the most common hepatic malignant tumour in children, accounting for approximately 50%-60% of primary hepatic malignant tumours in children, mostly in children under 3 years old. In Western countries, the incidence of hepatoblastoma is approximately 1-2/100000. Da Vinci surgical system is fast becoming a key instrument in microinvasive surgery. The past decade has seen the rapid development of robot-assisted laparoscopy, which expends many fields including the liver surgery. This paper discusses the significance and feasibility of robot-assisted gallbladder-preserving hepatectomy for treating S5 hepatoblastoma in children. The aim of this essay is to compare the safety and effectiveness of robotic surgery with conventional laparoscopic surgery, and explore the meaning of preservation of the gallbladder by sharing this case.

CASE SUMMARY

A 3-year-old child with a liver mass in the 5th segment was treated using the Da Vinci surgical system, and the gallbladder was retained. The child was admitted to the hospital for 20 d for the discovery of the right hepatic lobe mass. Ultrasonography revealed a low echo mass, 46 mm × 26 mm × 58 mm in size, indicating hepatoblastoma in the right lobe, and enhanced computed tomography showed continuous enhancement of iso-low-density lesions with different sizes and nodules and unclear boundaries, without the dilation of the intrahepatic bile duct, no enlargement of the gallbladder, and uniform thickness of the wall. The diagnosis was "liver mass, hepatoblastoma". It was decided to perform S5 liver tumour resection. During surgery, the tumour and gallbladder were isolated first, and the gallbladder could be completely separated from the tumour surface without obvious infiltration; therefore, the gallbladder was preserved. The cutting line was marked with an electric hook. The hepatic duodenal ligament was blocked with a urethral catheter using the Pringle method, and the tumour and part of the normal liver tissue were completely resected with an ultrasound knife along the incision. The hepatic portal interdiction time was approximately 25 min. An abdominal drainage tube was inserted. The auxiliary hole was connected to the lens, and the specimen was removed. The patient's status was uneventful, and the operation time was 166 min. The robotic time was 115 min, and the bleeding amount was approximately 200 mL. In total, 300 mL of red blood cell suspension and 200 mL of plasma were injected. No serious complications occurred. Pathological findings confirmed fetal hepatoblastoma and R0 resection. A gallbladder contraction test was performed two weeks after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Robot-assisted S5 hepatectomy with gallbladder preservation is safe and feasible for specific patients.

Colorectal Cancer Surgery Using the Da Vinci Xi and Si Systems: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes

PURPOSE

Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer is an emerging technique. Potential benefits as compared with the conventional laparoscopic surgery have been demonstrated. However, experience with the previous da Vinci Si robotic system revealed several unsolved problems. The novel features of the new da Vinci Xi increase operational flexibility and maneuverability and are expected to facilitate the performance of multiquadrant surgery.

METHODS

Between December 2011 and May 2015, 120 patients with colon or rectal cancer were operated on using the Si robotic system (the Si group). Between May 2015 and October 2017, 60 more patients with colon or rectal cancer were operated on using the Xi robotic system (the Xi group). The clinicopathological characteristics and perioperative outcomes of these 2 groups of patients were compared.

RESULTS

The 2 groups of patients were comparable with regard to baseline clinical characteristics, types of resection performed, and the proportion of patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. The statuses of resection margin, the numbers of lymph nodes harvested, and the rates of postoperative complications were also similar between the 2 groups. Nevertheless, a lower rate of diverting ileostomy, a shorter operation time, less estimated blood loss, and a faster postoperative recovery was observed in the Xi group.

CONCLUSIONS

Colorectal cancer surgery using the Xi robotic system was associated with improved perioperative outcomes. These benefits may be attributed to its improved, more user-friendly design.

A 3E8.scFv.Cys-IR800 Conjugate Targeting TAG-72 in an Orthotopic Colorectal Cancer Model

PURPOSE

Optical surgical navigation (OSN) will be a potent tool to help surgeons more accurately and efficiently remove tumors. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a novel humanized 3E8 antibody (3E8 MAb) fragment site-specifically conjugated with IR800, 3E8.scFv.Cys-IR800, as a potential OSN agent to target colorectal adenocarcinoma.

PROCEDURES

An engineered single-chain variable fragment of 3E8 MAb (targeted to TAG-72), appending a C-terminal cysteine residue (3E8.scFv.Cys), was created and reacted with IRDye800-maleimide. 3E8.scFv.Cys-IR800 identity and purity were verified by MALDI-TOF mass spectra and 800 nm detected size exclusion column HPLC. In vitro human colon adenocarcinoma LS-174 T cells binding and competition assay validated biological functionality. We further evaluated the imaging ability and receptor-specific binding of 3E8.scFv.Cys-IR800 in an orthotopic LS-174 T mouse model.

RESULTS

A 1:1 dye to protein conjugate was achieved at greater than 90 % HPLC purity. A 1 nmol dose of 3E8.scFv.Cys-IR800 via intraperitoneal injection administration was sufficient to produce high tumor to background fluorescence contrast. Blocking competition studies both in vitro and in vivo using a different blocking protein, 3E8ΔCH2, demonstrated 3E8.scFv.Cys-IR800 binding specificity for TAG-72 antigen.

CONCLUSIONS

3E8.scFv.Cys-IR800 shows properties useful in a clinically viable OSN agent for colorectal cancer.

Advantages of Robotic Right Colectomy With Intracorporeal Anastomosis

Through retrospective review of consecutive charts, we compare the short-term and long-term clinical outcomes after robotic-assisted right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis (RIA) (n=89) and laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal anastomosis (LEA) (n=135). Cohorts were similar in demographic characteristics, comorbidities, pathology, and perioperative outcomes (conversion, days to flatus and bowel movement, and length of hospitalization). The RIA cohort experienced statistically significant: less blood loss, shorter incision lengths, and longer specimen lengths than the LEA cohort. Operative times were significantly longer for the RIA group. No incisional hernias occurred in the RIA group, whereas the LEA group had 5 incisional hernias; mean follow-up was 33 and 30 months, respectively. RIA is effective and safe and provides some clinical advantages. Future studies may show that, in obese and other technically challenging patients, RIA facilitates resection of a longer, consistent specimen with less mesentery trauma that can be extracted through smaller incisions.

A single surgeon's experience transitioning to robotic-assisted right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Despite substantial evidence demonstrating benefits of minimally invasive surgery, a large percentage of right colectomies are still performed via an open technique. Most laparoscopic right colectomies are completed as a hybrid procedure with extracorporeal anastomosis. As part of a pure minimally invasive procedure, intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) may confer additional benefits for patients. The robotic platform may shorten the learning curve for minimally invasive right colectomy with ICA.

METHODS

From January 2014 to May 2016, 49 patients underwent robotic-assisted right colectomy by a board-certified colorectal surgeon (S.R). Extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) was used in the first 20 procedures, whereas ICA was used in all subsequent procedures. Outcomes recorded in a database for retrospective review included operating time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), conversion rate, complications, readmissions, and mortality rate.

RESULTS

Comparison of average OT, EBL, and LOS between extracorporeal and intracorporeal groups demonstrated no significant differences. For all patients, average OT was 141.6 ± 25.8 (range 86-192) min, average EBL was 59.5 ± 83.3 (range 0-500) mL, and average LOS was 3.4 ± 1.19 (range 1.5-8) days. Four patients required conversion, all of which occurred in the extracorporeal group. There were no conversions after the 18th procedure. The 60-day mortality rate was 0%. There were no anastomotic leaks, ostomies created, or readmissions. As the surgeon gained experience, a statistically significant increase in lymph node sampling was observed in oncologic cases (p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The robotic platform may help more surgeons safely and efficiently transition to a purely minimally invasive procedure, enabling more patients to reap the benefits of less invasive surgery. Transitioning from ECA to ICA during robotic right colectomy resulted in no significant change in OT or LOS. A lower rate of conversion to open surgery was noted with increased experience.

Surgical Management of Diverticular Disease in the Elective Setting

Diverticulosis is a common condition that has increased in prevalence in industrialized countries over the past century. Estimates of developing diverticular disease in the United states range from 5% by 40 years of age up, to over 80% by age 80. It is estimated that approximately 20% of patients with diverticulosis develop diverticulitis over the course of their lifetime. Diverticular disease can be divided into simple and chronic diverticulitis with various sub categories. There are various instances and circumstances where elective resection is indicated for both complex and simple forms of this disease process. When planning surgery there are general preoperative considerations that are important to be reviewed prior to surgery. There are also more specific considerations depending on secondary problem attributed to diverticulitis, that is, fistula vs stricture. Today, treatment for elective resection includes open, laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Over the last several years we have moved away from open surgery to laparoscopic surgery for elective resection. With the advent of robotic surgery and introduction of 3D laparoscopic surgery the discussion of superiority, equivalence between these modalities, is and should remain an important discussion topic.

Successful Robotic Gastrectomy Does Not Require Extensive Laparoscopic Experience

Purpose

We evaluated the learning curve and short-term surgical outcomes of robot-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) performed by a single surgeon experienced in open, but not laparoscopic, gastrectomy. We aimed to verify the feasibility of performing RADG without extensive laparoscopic experience.

Materials and Methods

Between July 2012 and December 2016, 60 RADG procedures were performed by a single surgeon using the da Vinci^® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical). Patient characteristics, the length of the learning curve, surgical parameters, and short-term postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared before and after the learning curve had been overcome.

Results

The duration of surgery rapidly decreased from the first to the fourth case; after 25 procedures, the duration of surgery was stabilized, suggesting that the learning curve had been overcome. Cases were divided into 2 groups: 25 cases before the learning curve had been overcome (early cases) and 35 later cases. The mean duration of surgery was 420.8 minutes for the initial cases and 281.7 minutes for the later cases (P<0.001). The console time was significantly shorter during the later cases (168.6 minutes) than during the early cases (247.1 minutes) (P<0.001). Although the volume of blood loss during surgery declined over time, there was no significant difference between the early and later cases. No other postoperative outcomes differed between the 2 groups. Pathology reports revealed the presence of mucosal invasion in 58 patients and submucosal invasion in 2 patients.

Conclusions

RADG can be performed safely with acceptable surgical outcomes by experts in open gastrectomy.

Comparison of outcome and cost among open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgical treatments for rectal cancer: A propensity score matched analysis of nationwide inpatient sample data

BACKGROUND

Population-based studies evaluating outcomes of different approaches for rectal cancer are scarce.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database between 2008 and 2012. We compared the outcomes and costs among rectal cancer patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, or open surgeries using propensity scores for adjusted and matched analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 194 957 rectal cancer patients. Over the 5-year period, the annual admission number decreased by 13.9%, the in-hospital mortality rate decreased by 32.2%, while the total hospitalization cost increased by 13.6%. Compared with laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery had significantly lower length of stay (LOS) (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.57-0.84), comparable wound complications (OR 1.08, 95%CI 0.70-1.65) and higher cost (OR 1.42, 95%CI 1.13-1.79), while open surgery had significantly longer LOS (OR 1.38, 95%CI 1.19-1.59), more wound complications (OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.08-1.79), and comparable cost (OR 0.92, 95%CI 0.79-1.07). There were no difference in in-hospital mortality among three approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery was associated with better outcomes than open surgery. Robotic surgery was associated with higher cost, but no advantage over laparoscopic surgery in terms of mortality and complications. Studies on cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery may be warranted.

A realist process evaluation of robot-assisted surgery: integration into routine practice and impacts on communication, collaboration and decision-making

Background

The implementation of robot-assisted surgery (RAS) can be challenging, with reports of surgical robots being underused. This raises questions about differences compared with open and laparoscopic surgery and how best to integrate RAS into practice.

Objectives

To (1) contribute to reporting of the ROLARR (RObotic versus LAparoscopic Resection for Rectal cancer) trial, by investigating how variations in the implementation of RAS and the context impact outcomes; (2) produce guidance on factors likely to facilitate successful implementation; (3) produce guidance on how to ensure effective teamwork; and (4) provide data to inform the development of tools for RAS.

Design

Realist process evaluation alongside ROLARR. Phase 1 – a literature review identified theories concerning how RAS becomes embedded into practice and impacts on teamwork and decision-making. These were refined through interviews across nine NHS trusts with theatre teams. Phase 2 – a multisite case study was conducted across four trusts to test the theories. Data were collected using observation, video recording, interviews and questionnaires. Phase 3 – interviews were conducted in other surgical disciplines to assess the generalisability of the findings.

Findings

The introduction of RAS is surgeon led but dependent on support at multiple levels. There is significant variation in the training provided to theatre teams. Contextual factors supporting the integration of RAS include the provision of whole-team training, the presence of handpicked dedicated teams and the availability of suitably sized operating theatres. RAS introduces challenges for teamwork that can impact operation duration, but, over time, teams develop strategies to overcome these challenges. Working with an experienced assistant supports teamwork, but experience of the procedure is insufficient for competence in RAS and experienced scrub practitioners are important in supporting inexperienced assistants. RAS can result in reduced distraction and increased concentration for the surgeon when he or she is supported by an experienced assistant or scrub practitioner.

Conclusions

Our research suggests a need to pay greater attention to the training and skill mix of the team. To support effective teamwork, our research suggests that it is beneficial for surgeons to (1) encourage the team to communicate actions and concerns; (2) alert the attention of the assistant before issuing a request; and (3) acknowledge the scrub practitioner’s role in supporting inexperienced assistants. It is beneficial for the team to provide oral responses to the surgeon’s requests.

Limitations

This study started after the trial, limiting impact on analysis of the trial. The small number of operations observed may mean that less frequent impacts of RAS were missed.

Future work

Future research should include (1) exploring the transferability of guidance for effective teamwork to other surgical domains in which technology leads to the physical or perceptual separation of surgeon and team; (2) exploring the benefits and challenges of including realist methods in feasibility and pilot studies; (3) assessing the feasibility of using routine data to understand the impact of RAS on rare end points associated with patient safety; (4) developing and evaluating methods for whole-team training; and (5) evaluating the impact of different physical configurations of the robotic console and team members on teamwork.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Re-appraisal and consideration of minimally invasive surgery in colorectal cancer

Throughout history, surgeons have been on a quest to refine the surgical treatment options for their patients and to minimize operative trauma. During the last three decades, there have been tremendous advances in the field of minimally invasive colorectal surgery, with an explosion of different technologies and approaches offered to treat well-known diseases. Laparoscopic surgery has been shown to be equal or superior to open surgery. The boundaries of laparoscopy have been pushed further, in the form of single-incision laparoscopy, natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and robotics. This paper critically reviews the pathway of development of minimally invasive surgery, and appraises the different minimally invasive colorectal surgical approaches available to date.

Evaluation of the robotic approach concerning pitfalls in rectal surgery

INTRODUCTION

The feasibility and advantages of robotic rectal surgery (RRS) in comparison to conventional open or laparoscopic rectal resections have been postulated in several reports. But well-known challenges and pitfalls of minimal invasive rectal surgery have not been evaluated by a prospective, multicenter setting so far. Aim of this study was to analyze the perioperative outcome of patients following RRS especially in regard to the pitfalls such as obesity, male patients and low tumors by a European multicenter setting.

METHODS

This prospective study included 348 patients undergoing robotic surgery due to rectal cancer in six major European centers. Clinicopathological parameters, morbidity, perioperative recovery and short-term outcome were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 283 restorative surgeries and 65 abdominoperineal resections were carried out. The conversion rate was 4.3%, mean blood loss was 191 ml, and mean operative time was 315 min. Postoperative complications with a Clavien-Dindo score >2 were observed in 13.5%. Obesity and low rectal tumors showed no significant higher rates of major complications or impaired oncological parameters. Male patients had significant higher rates of major complications and anastomotic leakage (p = 0.048 and p = 0.007, respectively).

DISCUSSION

RRS is a promising tool for improvement of rectal resections. The well-known pitfalls of minimal-invasive rectal surgery like obesity and low tumors were sufficiently managed by RRS. However, RRS showed significantly higher rates of major complications and anastomotic leakage in male patients, which has to be evaluated by future randomized trials.

Technique of totally robotic delta-shaped anastomosis in distal gastrectomy

BACKGROUND:

We aimed to clarify the utility of delta-shaped anastomosis (Delta), an intracorporeal Billroth-I anastomosis-based reconstruction technique used after laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy (LADG), in robot-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG).

METHODS:

RADG was performed in patients with clinical Stage I gastric cancer, and reconstruction was performed using Delta. The Delta procedure was the same as that performed after LADG, and the operator practiced the procedure in simulated settings with surgical assistants before the operation. After gastrectomy, the scope and robotic first arm were reinserted from separate ports on the right side of the patient. Then, a port on the left side of the abdomen was used as the assistant port from which a stapler was inserted, with the robotic arm in a coaxial mode. The surgical assistant performed functional end-to-end anastomosis of the remnant stomach and duodenal stump using a powered stapler.

RESULTS:

The mean anastomotic time in four patients who underwent Delta after RADG was 16.5 min. All patients were discharged on the post-operative day 7 without any post-operative complications or need for readmission.

CONCLUSIONS:

Pre-operative simulation, changes in ports for insertion of the scope and robotic first arm, continuation of the coaxial operation, and use of a powered stapler made Delta applicable for RADG. Delta can be considered as a useful reconstruction method.

Robotic Right Colectomy with Modified Complete Mesocolic Excision: Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes

BACKGROUND

A modified complete mesocolic excision (mCME) technique for the treatment of right-sided colon cancer recently was shown by Hohenberger and colleagues to provide impressive long-term oncologic outcomes. This report aims to describe the authors' experience with robotic right colectomy using mCME. The safety, feasibility, and efficacy of this procedure are measured by complications, conversion rates, and 4-year oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study analyzed 100 consecutive patients who underwent robotic right colectomy with mCME and intracorporeal anastomosis at the authors' institution between November 2005 and November 2013. Intra- and postoperative clinical outcomes, pathologic data, and survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

Robotic right colectomy with mCME was successfully performed for all the patients. No conversions or intraoperative complications occurred. The major complication rate (Dindo 3 or 4) was 4 %. During a median follow-up period of 48.5 months (range 24-114 months), the survival rates were 94.5 % for disease-specific survival, 91.4 % for disease-free survival, and 90.3 % for overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' experience confirms the feasibility and safety of mCME for the treatment of right-sided colon cancer. This technique provided satisfying short-term outcomes with promising 4-year oncologic results. However, the real benefits of the CME technique should be evaluated further by well-conducted randomized studies before its adoption in routine practice is recommended.

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Colectomy Results in Increased Operative Time Without Improved Perioperative Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Interest in robotic technology is burgeoning within the field of colorectal surgery. However, benefits of robotic-assisted colectomy (RAC) compared with laparoscopic colectomy (LC) remain ambiguous.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent minimally invasive colectomy during 2012-2013 were identified from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Short-term perioperative outcomes were compared between 1:1 propensity-matched groups. A subset analysis was performed among patients who underwent segmental resections.

RESULTS

Among the 15,976 patients included, 498 (3.1 %) colectomies were performed with robotic assistance. After matching for demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics, there were no differences between RAC and LC in complications such as wound infection, urinary tract infection, cardiopulmonary or thromboembolic events, renal insufficiency, anastomotic leaks, transfusions, readmissions, or 30-day mortality (all p > 0.05). However, operative time was markedly higher for RAC (196 vs. 166 min, p < 0.001). Among segmental resections, operative time remained significantly longer for RAC (190 vs. 153 min, p < 0.001) without differences in perioperative outcomes (all p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this early experience, RAC resulted in similar perioperative outcomes when compared to LC but was associated with longer operative time. Given the focus on value-based healthcare, utilizing RAC in straightforward colectomies may not be financially justifiable at this stage of adoption.

Current training on the basics of robotic surgery in the Netherlands: Time for a multidisciplinary approach?

Introduction

The following research questions were answered: (1) What are the training pathways followed by the current robot professionals? (2) Are there any differences between the surgical specialties in robot training and robot use? (3) What is their opinion about multidisciplinary basic skills training?

Methods

An online questionnaire was sent to 91 robot professionals in The Netherlands. The questionnaire contained 21 multiple-choice questions focusing on demographics, received robot training, and their opinion on basic skills training in robotic surgery.

Results

The response rate was 62 % (n = 56): 13 general surgeons, 16 gynecologists, and 27 urologists. The urologists performed significantly more robotic procedures than surgeons and gynecologists. The kind of training of all professionals varied from a training program by Intuitive Surgical, master-apprenticeship with or without duo console, fellowship, and self-designed training programs. The training did neither differ significantly among the different specialties nor the year of starting robotic surgery. Majority of respondents favor an obliged training program including an examination for the basics of robot skills training.

Conclusion

Training of the current robot professionals is mostly dependent on local circumstances and the manufacturer of the robot system. Training is independent of the year of start with robotic surgery and speciality. To guarantee the quality of future training of residents and fellows in robot-assisted surgery, clear training goals should be formulated and implemented. Since this study shows that current training of different specialities does not differ, training in robotic surgery could be started by a multidisciplinary basic skills training and assessment.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00464-016-4970-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Minimally invasive surgery of rectal cancer: current evidence and options

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) of colorectal cancer has become more popular in the past two decades. Laparoscopic colectomy has been accepted as an alternative standard approach in colon cancer, with comparable oncologic outcomes and several better short-term outcomes compared to open surgery. Unlike the treatment for colon cancer, however, the minimally invasive approach in rectal cancer has not been established. In this article, we summarize the current status of MIS for rectal cancer and explore the various technical options.

Robot-assisted surgery for the radical treatment of deep infiltrating endometriosis with colorectal involvement: short- and mid-term surgical and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

Sexual and urinary dysfunctions are complications in radical treatment of deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) with colorectal involvement. The aim of this article is to report the preliminary results of our single-institution experience with robotic treatment of DIE, evaluating intraoperative and postoperative surgical outcomes and focusing on the impact of this surgical approach on autonomic functions such as urogenital preservation and sexual well-being.

METHODS

From January 2011 through December 2013, a case series of 10 patients underwent robotic radical treatment of DIE with colorectal resection using the da Vinci System. Surgical data were evaluated, together with perioperative urinary and sexual function as assessed by means of self-administered validated questionnaires.

RESULTS

None of the patients reported significant postoperative complications. Questionnaires concerning sexual well-being, urinary function, and impact of symptoms on quality of life demonstrated a slight worsening of all parameters 1 month after surgery, while data were comparable to the preoperative period 1 year after surgery. Dyspareunia was the only exception, as it was significantly improved 12 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted surgery seems to be advantageous in highly complicated procedures where extensive dissection and proper anatomy re-establishment is required, as in DIE with colorectal involvement. Our preliminary results show that robot-assisted surgery could be associated with a low risk of complications and provide good preservation of urinary function and sexual well-being.

Robotic versus laparoscopic resections of posterosuperior segments of the liver: a propensity score-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

Open parenchymal-preserving resection is the current standard of care for lesions in the posterosuperior liver segments. Laparoscopy and robot-assisted surgery are emergent surgical approaches for liver resections, even in posteriorly located lesions. The objective of this study was to compare robot-assisted to laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections for lesions located in segments 7, 8, 4a, and 1.

METHODS

Demographics, comorbidities, clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical treatments, and outcomes from patients who underwent laparoscopic and robot-assisted liver resection in two centers for lesions in the posterosuperior segments between June 2008 and February 2014 were reviewed. A 1:2 matched propensity score analysis was performed by individually matching patients in the robotic cohort to patients in the laparoscopic cohort based on demographics, comorbidities, performance status, tumor stage, location, and type of resection.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients who underwent robot-assisted liver resection were matched with 72 patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. Matched patients displayed no significant differences in postoperative outcomes as measured by blood loss, hospital stay, R0 negative margin rate, and mortality. The overall morbidity according to the comprehensive complication index was also similar (34.6 ± 33 vs. 18.4 ± 11.3, respectively, for robotic and laparoscopic approach, p = 0.11). Patients undergoing robotic liver surgery had significantly longer inflow occlusion time (77 vs. 25 min, p = 0.001) as compared with their laparoscopic counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Although number and severity of complications in the robotic group appears to be higher, robotic and laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections in the posterosuperior segments display similar safety and feasibility.

Robotic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: A National Perspective on Short-term Oncologic Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study examines short-term outcomes and pathologic surrogates of oncologic results among patients undergoing robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. A total of 6403 patients met inclusion criteria. Although the robotic approach required significantly fewer conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 approaches.

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) has gained popularity as an acceptable approach, the robotic low anterior resection (RLAR) remains largely unproven. We compared short-term oncologic outcomes between rectal cancer patients undergoing either RLAR or LLAR.

STUDY DESIGN

All patients with rectal cancer in the National Cancer Data Base undergoing RLAR or LLAR from 2010 to 2011 were included. Predictors of RLAR were modeled with multivariable logistic regression. Groups were matched on propensity to undergo RLAR. Primary endpoints included lymph node retrieval and margin status, whereas secondary 30-day outcomes were mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and unplanned readmission rates.

RESULTS

A total of 6403 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 956 (14.9%) underwent RLAR. RLAR patients were more likely to be treated at academic centers, receive neoadjuvant therapy, and have higher T-stage and longer time to surgery (all P < 0.001). Neoadjuvant therapy and treatment at an academic/research center remained the only significant predictors of robotic use after multivariable adjustment. After propensity matching, RLAR was associated with lower conversion (9.5 vs 16.4%, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in lymph node retrieval, margin status, 30-day mortality, readmission, or hospital LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

In this largest series to date, we demonstrated equivalent perioperative safety and patient outcomes for robotic compared to LLAR in the setting of rectal cancer. Although the robotic approach required significantly fewer conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 approaches, suggesting that a robotic approach may be a suitable alternative. Further studies comparing long-term cancer recurrence and survival should be performed.

Obesity is associated with decreased lung compliance and hypercapnia during robotic assisted surgery

Robotic assisted surgery (RAS) represents a great challenge for anesthesiology due to the increased intraabdomial pressures required for surgical optimal approach. The changes in lung physiology are difficult to predict and require fast decision making in order to prevent altered gas exchange. The aim of this study was to document the combined effect of patient physical status, medical history and intraoperative position during RAS on lung physiology and to determine perioperative risk factors for hypercapnia. We prospectively analyzed 62 patients who underwent elective RAS. Age, co-morbidities and body mass index (BMI) were recorded before surgery. Ventilatory parameters and arterial blood gas analysis were determined before induction of anesthesia, after tracheal intubation and on an hourly basis until the end of surgery. In RAS, the induction of pneumoperitoneum was associated with a significant decrease in lung compliance from a mean of 42.5–26.7 ml cm H₂O⁻¹ (p = 0.001) and an increase in plateau pressure from a mean of 16.1 mmHg to a mean of 23.6 mmHg (p = 0.001). Obesity, demonstrated by a BMI over 30, significantly correlates with a decrease in lung compliance after induction of anesthesia (p = 0.001). A significant higher increase in arterial CO₂ tension was registered in patients undergoing RAS in steep Trendelenburg position (p = 0.05), but no significant changes in end-tidal CO₂ were recorded. A higher arterial to end-tidal CO₂ tension gradient was observed in patients with a BMI > 30 (p < 0.001). In conclusion, patients’ physical status, especially obesity, represents the main risk factor for decreased lung compliance during RAS and patient positioning in either Trendelenburg or steep Trendelenburg during surgery has limited effects on respiratory physiology.

Robotic Rectal Cancer Surgery

There are an estimated 39,000 new cases of rectal cancer in the United States per year which makes it the third most prevalent cancer when paired with colon cancer. Given its complexity, there are now multiple modalities available for its successful treatment. This includes innovative chemotherapy, radiation, transanal resection techniques, and minimally invasive surgery. Robotic surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer represents the current pinnacle of minimally invasive technology for this disease process.

Laparoscopy Versus Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Single-Center Initial Experience

Background Minimally invasive approach has gained interest in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer. The purpose of this study is to analyze the differences between laparoscopy and robotics for colorectal cancer in terms of oncologic and clinical outcomes in an initial experience of a single center. Materials and Methods Clinico-pathological data of 100 patients surgically treated for colorectal cancer from March 2008 to April 2014 with laparoscopy and robotics were analyzed. The procedures were right colonic, left colonic, and rectal resections. A comparison between the laparoscopic and robotic resections was made and an analysis of the first and the last procedures in the 2 groups was performed. Results Forty-two patients underwent robotic resection and 58 underwent laparoscopic resection. The postoperative mortality was 1%. The number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in robotics. The conversion rate was 7.1% for robotics and 3.4% for laparoscopy. The operative time was lower in laparoscopy for all the procedures. No differences were found between the first and the last procedures in the 2 groups. Conclusions This initial experience has shown that robotic surgery for the treatment of colorectal adenocarcinoma is a feasible and safe procedure in terms of oncologic and clinical outcomes, although an appropriate learning curve is necessary. Further investigation is needed to demonstrate real advantages of robotics over laparoscopy.

Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review

AIM: To review current applications of the laparoscopic surgery while highlighting the standard procedures across different fields.

METHODS: A comprehensive search was undertaken using the PubMed Advanced Search Builder. A total of 321 articles were found in this search. The following criteria had to be met for the publication to be selected: Review article, randomized controlled trials, or meta-analyses discussing the subject of laparoscopic surgery. In addition, publications were hand-searched in the Cochrane database and the high-impact journals. A total of 82 of the findings were included according to matching the inclusion criteria. Overall, 403 full-text articles were reviewed. Of these, 218 were excluded due to not matching the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS: A total of 185 relevant articles were identified matching the search criteria for an overview of the current literature on the laparoscopic surgery. Articles covered the period from the first laparoscopic application through its tremendous advancement over the last several years. Overall, the biggest advantage of the procedure has been minimizing trauma to the abdominal wall compared with open surgery. In the case of cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and adrenalectomy, the procedure has become the gold standard without being proven as a superior technique over the open surgery in randomized controlled trials. Faster recovery, reduced hospital stay, and a quicker return to normal activities are the most evident advantages of the laparoscopic surgery. Positive outcomes, efficiency, a lower rate of wound infections, and reduction in the perioperative morbidity of minimally invasive procedures have been shown in most indications.

CONCLUSION: Improvements in surgical training and developments in instruments, imaging, and surgical techniques have greatly increased safety and feasibility of the laparoscopic surgical procedures.

A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database

BACKGROUND

Until randomized trials mature, large database analyses assist in determining the role of robotics in colorectal surgery. ACS NSQIP database coding now allows differentiation between laparoscopic (LC) and robotic (RC) colorectal procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare LC and RC outcomes by analyzing the ACS NSQIP database.

METHODS

The ACS NSQIP database was queried to identify patients who had undergone RC and LC during 2013. Demographic characteristics, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were identified. Using propensity score matching, abdominal and pelvic colorectal operative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 11,477 cases were identified. In the abdomen, 7790 LC and 299 RC cases were identified, and 2057 LC and 331 RC cases were identified in the pelvis. There were significant differences in operative time, conversion to an open procedure in the pelvis, and hospital length of stay. RC operative times were significantly longer in both abdominal and pelvic cases. Conversion rates in the pelvis were less for RC when compared to LC--10.0 and 13.7%, respectively (p = 0.01). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for RC abdominal cases than for LC abdominal cases (4.3 vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001) and for RC pelvic cases when compared to LC pelvic cases (4.5 vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in surgical site infection (SSI), organ/space SSI, wound complications, anastomotic leak, sepsis/shock, or need for reoperation within 30 days.

CONCLUSION

As the robotic platform continues to grow in colorectal surgery and as technical upgrades continue to advance, comparison of outcomes requires continuous reevaluation. This study demonstrated that robotic operations have longer operative times, decreased hospital length of stay, and decreased rates of conversion to open in the pelvis. These findings warrant continued evaluation of the role of minimally invasive technical upgrades in colorectal surgery.