An initial experience with a novel technique of single-port robotic resection for rectal cancer

Robotic Abdominal-Perineal Resection for Rectal Cancer Using da Vinci Single-Port System: Initial Clinical Experience in Japan

The da Vinci Single-Port (dV-SP) is an innovative robot that integrates the advantages of articulated robotic instruments and a single access approach. A 58-year-old man who presented to our hospital with abdominal pain was diagnosed with cStageIIc (cT4bN0M0) rectal cancer and underwent abdominal-perineal resection using dV-SP. Its characteristic properties (cobra position of the camera, the wrists and elbows, and the relocating) allowed surgeons to overcome the challenges associated with single-port laparoscopic surgery, namely no clear triangulation and countertraction in the surgical fields, collision between straight instruments, and in-line viewing, and provide better cosmetic outcomes than those obtained by a multiport robotic surgery. We report the first surgery performed using dV-SP for rectal cancer in Japan.

Evaluation of the da Vinci single-port system in colorectal cancer surgery: a scoping review

Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of colon and rectal cancer has gained popularity due to its association with reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, and quicker recovery. The Da Vinci Single-Port (SP) System combines single-port laparoscopy with robotic assistance. This scoping review aims to evaluate the safety and short-term postoperative outcomes of utilizing the Da Vinci SP platform in colorectal cancer surgery. A scoping review was conducted adhering to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Data were collected from PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science Library as of December 22, 2023. Studies were screened and selected based on predefined criteria, focusing on the application of the SP robotic system in colorectal procedures. Data extraction included demographics, surgical details, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. A narrative summary of the results was provided due to the heterogeneity in study designs. From an initial 2312 articles, 22 studies were selected for analysis, encompassing 465 patients undergoing robotic SP colorectal surgeries. Of these, 384 (82.6%) had a cancer diagnosis. The median age was 65 years, with approximately 60% being male. The median operative time was 225 min, with docking times averaging 12-20 min. Conversion to multi-port laparoscopy occurred in 4.2% of cases, with no conversions to open surgery. Mean intraoperative blood loss ranged from 50 to 150 ml. The mean number of lymph nodes retrieved ranged from 15 to 28. A diverting ileostomy was constructed in 20.3% of patients. Median times to flatus and soft diet were 2.5 and 3 days, respectively, with hospital stays ranging from 3 to 11 days. Perioperative complications occurred in 15.1% of patients, including wound infections (5.1%), anastomotic leakage (3.7%), and postoperative ileus (2.8%). Negative margin status (R0 resection) was achieved in 95% of cases. The Da Vinci SP robotic platform demonstrates promising safety and effectiveness in colorectal cancer surgery. It achieves high rates of successful oncological resection, adequate lymph node retrieval, and minimal intraoperative blood loss. Postoperative outcomes indicate quicker recovery times and manageable complication rates. However, longer follow-up studies are necessary to fully assess recurrence rates and long-term survival benefits associated with this innovative surgical approach.

Da Vinci single-port robotic system current application and future perspective in general surgery: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci Single-Port Robot System (DVSP) allows three robotic instruments and an articulated scope to be inserted through a single small incision. It received FDA approval in 2014 and was first introduced in 2018. The aim of this new system was to overcome the limitations of single-incision laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Since then, it has been approved for use only for urologic and transoral surgeries in some countries. It has been used as part of experimental protocols in general surgery.

OBJECTIVE

By obtaining the CE mark at the end of January 2024, DVSP will soon enter the European market. This review aims to comprehensively describe the applications of DVSP in general surgery.

DESIGN

A search of PubMed, Embase, and Ebsco databases up to March 2024 was conducted, with registration in PROSPERO (CRD42024536430), following the preferred reporting items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses for scoping review (PRISMA-Scr) guidelines. All the studies about the use of DVSP in general surgery were included.

RESULTS

Fifty-six studies were included. The following surgical areas of use were identified: transabdominal and transanal colorectal, cholecystectomy, abdominal wall repair, upper gastroesophageal tract, liver, pancreas, breast, and thyroid surgery. The reported surgical and short-term outcomes are promising; a wide range of procedures have been performed safely. Some groups have found advantages, such as faster discharge, shorter operative time, and less postoperative pain compared to multiport robotic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Five years after its initial clinical applications, the use of the DVSP in general surgery procedures has demonstrated feasibility and safety. Hernia repair, cholecystectomy, and colorectal surgery emerge as the most frequently conducted interventions with this robotic system. Nevertheless, there is anticipation for further studies with larger sample sizes and extended follow-up periods to provide more comprehensive insights and data on the long-term outcomes, including the incidence of incisional hernia.

Robotic colorectal surgery and future directions

As the adoption of robotic-assisted procedures expands across various surgical specialties, colorectal surgery stands out as a prominent beneficiary. This rise in usage can be traced back to the increased accessibility of robotic platforms and a growing institutional shift towards cutting-edge surgical methods. When compared with traditional laparoscopic methods, robotic techniques offer distinct advantages. Their true potential shines in surgeries involving complex anatomical regions, where the robot's enhanced dexterity and range of motion prove invaluable. The three-dimensional, magnified view provided by robotic systems further boosts surgical precision and clarity. These advantages render robotic assistance especially suitable for colorectal surgeries, notably in intricate areas such as the rectum and endoluminal spaces. As the medical world emphasizes minimally invasive surgical methods, there's a pressing need to evolve and optimize robotic techniques in colorectal surgery. This article traces the evolution of robotic interventions in colorectal surgeries, highlighting both its historical milestones and anticipated future trends. We'll also explore emerging robotic tools and systems set to reshape the colorectal surgical arena.

Endorobotic submucosal dissection of rectal lesions using the single port robot DaVinci-SP: initial experience of the first 10 cases

BACKGROUND

Endoluminal surgery is increasingly recognized as a mode of treatment for colorectal neoplasms with the latest robotic single port platform Da Vinci-SP (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale) facilitating submucosal dissection of benign rectal neoplasm.

METHOD

In this study, we present our initial experience with endorobotic submucosal dissection in the management of benign rectal neoplasms using the Da Vinci-SP (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale) between 2020 and 2021. The primary endpoint was the successful completion of submucosal dissection.

RESULTS

During the study period, 10 patients underwent endorobotic submucosal dissection for benign rectal neoplasms. The median age of the patients was 68 (range: 59-78) years, and the mean BMI was 29.38 (range: 22.9-38.5). The mean size of the lesion was 42.3 mm (range: 20-65 mm) and was located 7.3 cm (mean) from the anal verge (range: 2-10 cm). The mean operative time was 91.3 minutes (range: 57-137 minutes). All 10 dissections were completed successfully en bloc. There were no intraoperative complications or mortality. All patients were discharged on the same day and commenced on a normal diet. Late bleeding was observed in one patient receiving anticoagulation, and one patient had urinary retention. Pathology revealed two adenocarcinomas, six tubulovillous adenomas, one tubular adenoma, and one sessile serrated adenoma. There was no recurrence in all other patients during the median follow-up of 6 months (range: 4-16 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Endorobotic submucosal dissection using a single-port robotic platform is safe and feasible for benign rectal mucosal neoplasms. The semiflexible platform offers an alternative to endoscopic submucosal dissection with favourable outcomes.

Perioperative outcomes for single-port robotic versus single-incision laparoscopic surgery: a comparative analysis in colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) may offer improved cosmesis, reduced postoperative pain and faster recovery than conventional platforms, but widespread implementation was limited by technical demands. A single-port robotic platform was recently introduced, with components that further enhance SILS benefits without the technical challenges. No study to date has compared the two platforms to validate benefits. Our goal was to compare outcomes of SP robotics and SILS in colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

A prospective cancer registry was reviewed for CRC patients undergoing curative resection through a SILS or SP robotic approach from 2010 to 2022. Patient and cancer demographics, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes were compared in a 1:1 propensity score-matched cohort, adjusting for baseline characteristics. The main outcome measures were complications, operative time, and oncologic quality measures.

RESULTS

Matching resulted 50 SP robotic and 50 SILS patients. Cohorts were well matched in all demographics, but SP robotic rectal cancer cases were significantly closer to the anorectal ring than SILS (1.8 cm vs. 3.4 cm, p = 0.018). SP robotic and SILS platforms had similar operative times. Intraoperative conversions was comparable, but more SILS cases required additional ports to be placed (p = 0.040). The intraoperative complications rate, complete total mesorectal excision rates, and lymph node yield were not statistically significantly different. There were no positive margins in either group. Postoperatively, groups had analogous day of return of bowel function, comparable morbidity, and discharge destination. There was no mortality in either group. The length of stay was significantly shorter with SP robotics than SILS (mean 4.135 vs. 5.282 days, median 4 (2-8) vs. 5 (2-14) days; p = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-port robotics provided high quality oncologic surgery, adding the technical benefits of robotics to clinical and cosmetic benefits of single-port surgery. There were comparable operative time, complication rates, and oncologic outcomes in CRC cases, with shorter hospital stays with SP robotics. This early data is encouraging for expansion SP robotic technology.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of single-port versus multi-port robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

It is unknown whether the da Vinci single-port system performs similarly to the previous multi-port system during complicated procedures, such as rectal cancer surgery. Therefore, we compared the short-term clinical outcomes of single-port and multi-port robotic total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study reviewed 128 patients who underwent robotic total mesorectal excision between July 2020 and June 2022, of whom 84 (42 each: single-port versus multi-port) were included in the propensity score-matched cohort. Perioperative and pathologic outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Median tumor height was similar between groups (single-port versus multi-port, 5.9 ± 2.1 vs 5.6 ± 1.8 cm, P = .719). Preoperative chemoradiotherapy was performed equally. The total operative time was less (160.0 ± 42.2 minutes vs 199.6 ± 78.6 minutes, P = .005), the total length of incision was shorter (4.0 ±0.3 vs 5.4 ± 0.7 cm, P = .003), postoperative hospital stay was shorter (6.2 ±1.7 vs 7.2 ±2.8 days, P = .050), and C-reactive protein levels on postoperative day 3 trended to be lower (7.3 ± 4.7 vs 8.9 ± 5.6 mg/L, P = .096) in the single-port group, compared with the multi-port group. Postoperative complications did not differ between groups (single-port versus multi-port, 11.9% vs 16.6%, P = .864). Anastomotic leakage occurred in 1 and 2 patients in the single-port and multi-port groups, respectively. The circumferential resection margins were positive in 1 patient in the multi-port group.

CONCLUSION

The perioperative outcomes of single-port robotic total mesorectal excision were comparable to those of multi-port robotic TME. The single-port robot can be considered a surgical option for treating rectal cancer.

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

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

A prospective phase II clinical trial/IDEAL Stage 2a series of single-port robotic colorectal surgery for abdominal and transanal cases

AIM

Slow laparoscopy adoption accelerated the uptake of robotic surgery. However, the current robotic platforms have limitations in transanal applications and multiple port sites. The da Vinci single-port (SP) robot is currently used on trial for colorectal surgery, and broad assessment of outcomes is needed. We aimed to report findings of a phase II clinical trial of SP robotic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A sequentially reported prospective case series was performed on patients using SP robotics at a tertiary referral centre from 1 October 2018 to 31 August 2021. Cases were stratified into abdominal and transanal cohorts. Demographics, intra-operative variables and 30-day postoperative outcomes were evaluated. Univariate analysis was performed, with statistical process control for the docking process. Main outcomes were conversion rates, morbidity, mortality and point of standardization of docking.

RESULTS

In all, 133 patients were included: 93 (69.92%) abdominal and 40 (30.08%) transanal. The main diagnosis was rectal cancer (n = 59) and the procedure performed a robotic transanal abdominal transanal radical proctosigmoidectomy (n = 30). There were no conversions to open surgery. Two abdominal (2.15%) and three transanal cases (7.50%) were converted to laparoscopy. All colorectal adenocarcinomas had negative margins, proper lymph node harvest and complete mesorectal excision, as appropriate. Docking became a standardized process at cases 34 (abdominal) and 23 (anorectal). After surgery, bowel function returned on mean day 2 (abdominal) and 1 (transanal). The morbidity rate was 15.05% (abdominal) and 27.50% (transanal). There were two major morbidities in each cohort. Overall, there were three (2.65%) readmissions, one reoperation and no mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-port robotics is feasible for all types of colorectal procedures, with good clinical and oncological outcomes. With this development in colorectal surgery, further studies can develop best practices with this novel technology.

Robotic abdominoperineal resection for T4b rectal cancer using the da Vinci SP platform

PURPOSE

The aim of the present report wasto describe a novel technique of robotic abdominoperineal resection (APR) for the treatment of T4b low rectal cancer using the da Vinci® Single-Port (SP) system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA).

METHODS

A 3-cm transverse incision was made in the left lower quadrant of the abdomen, in the area designated for permanent colostomy. A Uniport® (Dalim Medical, Seoul, Korea) was introduced and a 25 mm multichannel SP trocar was inserted into the Uniport. A 5-mm laparoscopic assistant port was introduced on the upper midline. A video showing each step of the technique is attached.

RESULTS

Two consecutive female patients (70 and 74 years old) underwent SP robotic APR with partial resection of the vagina 8 weeks after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. In both cases, rectal cancer was located 1 cm above the anal verge and invaded the vagina (initial stage and ymrT stage T4b). Operative time was 150 and 180 min, respectively. Estimated blood loss was 10 and 25 ml, respectively. No postoperative complications occurred. The length of postoperative hospital stay was 5 days in both cases. The final pathological stage was ypT4bN0 and ypT3N0 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first experience, SP robotic APR appears to be a safe and feasible procedure for locally advanced low rectal cancer. In addition, the invasiveness of the procedure is reduced by means of the SP system, which only requires a single incision in the area designated for colostomy. Prospective studies on a larger number of patients are necessary to confirm the outcomes of this technique compared to other minimally invasive approaches.

Short-term outcomes of single-incision robotic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer

Since the da Vinci SP (dVSP) surgical system was introduced, single-incision robotic surgery (SIRS) for colorectal diseases has gained increasing acceptance. Comparison of the short-term outcomes between SIRS using dVSP and those of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CMLS) was performed to verify its efficacy and safety in colon cancer. The medical records of 237 patients who underwent curative resection for colon cancer by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to surgical modality: SIRS (RS group) and CMLS (LS group). Intra- and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Of the 237 patients, 140 were included in the analysis. Patients in the RS group (n = 43) were predominantly female, younger, and had better general performance than those in the LS group (n = 97). The total operation time was longer in the RS group than in the LS group (232.8 ± 46.0 vs. 204.1 ± 41.7 min, P < 0.001). The RS group showed faster first flatus passing (2.5 ± 0.9 vs. 3.1 ± 1.2 days, P = 0.003) and less opioid analgesic requirement (analgesic withdrawal within 3 postoperative days: 37.2% vs. 18.6%, P = 0.018) than the LS group. The RS group showed a higher immediate postoperative albumin level (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.6 ± 0.4 g/dL, P < 0.001) and lower C-reactive protein level (6.6 ± 5.2 vs. 9.3 ± 5.5 mg/dL, P = 0.007) than the LS group during the postoperative period. On multivariate analysis after adjusting for deviated patient characteristics, no significant difference was observed in short-term outcomes, except for operation time. SIRS with dVSP showed short-term outcomes comparable with those of CMLS for colon cancer.

International standardization and optimization group for intersphincteric resection (ISOG-ISR): modified Delphi consensus on anatomy, definition, indication, surgical technique, specimen description and functional outcome

AIM

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is an oncologically complex operation for very low-lying rectal cancers. Yet, definition, anatomical description, operative indications and operative approaches to ISR are not standardized. The aim of this study was to standardize the definition of ISR by reaching international consensus from the experts in the field. This standardization will allow meaningful comparison in the literature in the future.

METHOD

A modified Delphi approach with three rounds of questionnaire was adopted. A total of 29 international experts from 11 countries were recruited for this study. Six domains with a total of 37 statements were examined, including anatomical definition; definition of intersphincteric dissection, intersphincteric resection (ISR) and ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR); indication for ISR; surgical technique of ISR; specimen description of ISR; and functional outcome assessment protocol.

RESULTS

Three rounds of questionnaire were performed (response rate 100%, 89.6%, 89.6%). Agreement (≥80%) reached standardization on 36 statements.

CONCLUSION

This study provides an international expert consensus-based definition and standardization of ISR. This is the first study standardizing terminology and definition of deep pelvis/anal canal anatomy from a surgical point of view. Intersphincteric dissection, ISR and uLAR were specifically defined for precise surgical description. Indication for ISR was determined by the rectal tumour's maximal radial infiltration (T stage) below the levator ani. A new surgical definition of T3isp was reached by consensus to define T3 low rectal tumours infiltrating the intersphincteric plane. A practical flowchart for surgical indication for uLAR/ISR/abdominoperineal resection was developed. A standardized ISR surgical technique and functional outcome assessment protocol was defined.

Single-port versus multiport robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: initial experiences by case-matched analysis of short-term outcomes

Purpose

The da Vinci single-port (SP) system has been used in various surgical fields, including colorectal surgery. However, limited experience has been reported on its safety and feasibility. This study aims to evaluate the short-term outcomes of SP robotic surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer compared with multiport (MP) robotic surgery.

Methods

Rectal cancer patients who underwent curative resection in 2020 were reviewed. A total of 43 patients underwent robotic total mesorectal excision (TME), of which 26 (13 in each group, SPTME vs. MPTME) were included in the case-matched cohort for analysis. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and pathological results were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

Median tumor height was similar between the 2 groups (SPTME vs. MPTME: 5.9 cm [range, 2.2-9.6 cm] vs. 6.7 cm [range, 3.4-10.0 cm], P = 0.578). Preoperative chemoradiotherapy was equally performed (38.5%). The median estimated blood loss was less (20.0 mL [range, 5.0-20.0 mL] vs. 30.0 mL [range, 20.0-30.0 mL], P = 0.020) and the median hospital stay was shorter (7 days [range, 6-8 days] vs. 8 days [range, 7-9 days], P = 0.055) in the SPTME group. Postoperative complications did not differ (SPTME vs. MPTME: 7.7% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.587). One patient in the SPTME group and 3 in the MPTME group experienced anastomotic leakage.

Conclusion

SP robotic TME showed perioperative outcomes similar to MP robotic TME. The SP robotic system can be considered a surgical option for the treatment of rectal cancer. Further prospective randomized trials with larger cohorts are required.

New Robotic Platforms in General Surgery: What's the Current Clinical Scenario?

Background and Objectives: Robotic surgery has been widely adopted in general surgery worldwide but access to this technology is still limited to a few hospitals. With the recent introduction of new robotic platforms, several studies reported the feasibility of different surgical procedures. The aim of this systematic review is to highlight the current clinical practice with the new robotic platforms in general surgery. Materials and Methods: A grey literature search was performed on the Internet to identify the available robotic systems. A PRISMA compliant systematic review was conducted for all English articles up to 10 February 2023 searching the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Clinical outcomes, training process, operating surgeon background, cost-analysis, and specific registries were evaluated. Results: A total of 103 studies were included for qualitative synthesis after the full-text screening. Of the fifteen robotic platforms identified, only seven were adopted in a clinical environment. Out of 4053 patients, 2819 were operated on with a new robotic device. Hepatopancreatobiliary surgery specialty performed the majority of procedures, and the most performed procedure was cholecystectomy. Globally, 109 emergency surgeries were reported. Concerning the training process, only 45 papers reported the background of the operating surgeon, and only 28 papers described the training process on the surgical platform. Only one cost-analysis compared a new robot to the existing reference. Two manufacturers promoted a specific registry to collect clinical outcomes. Conclusions: This systematic review highlights the feasibility of most surgical procedures in general surgery using the new robotic platforms. Adoption of these new devices in general surgery is constantly growing with the extension of regulatory approvals. Standardization of the training process and the assessment of skills' transferability is still lacking. Further studies are required to better understand the real clinical and economical benefit.

Single-incision robotic colorectal surgery with the da Vinci SP® surgical system: initial results of 50 cases

PURPOSE

The da Vinci SP® (dVSP) surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA), a robotic platform designed for single-incision surgery, overcame the need for multiple ports in traditional robotic surgery and issues including triangulation and retraction in single-incision laparoscopic surgery. However, previous studies only included case reports or series with small sample sizes. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and performance of the dVSP surgical system and its instruments and accessories for colorectal procedures.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who had surgery with the dVSP from March 2019 to September 2021 at Ewha Womans University Seoul Hospital were investigated. The pathologic and follow-up data of patients who had malignant tumors were analyzed separately to evaluate oncological safety.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (26 male and 24 female) with a median age of 59 years (interquartile range 52.5-63.0 years) were enrolled. The procedures included low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (n = 16), sigmoid colectomy with complete mesocolic excision and central vessel ligation (CME + CVL) (n = 14), right colectomy with CME + CVL (n = 9), left colectomy with CME + CVL (n = 4), right colectomy (n = 6), and sigmoid colectomy (n = 1). Operative time significantly decreased after 25 cases (early phase vs. late phase; operative time 295.0 min vs. 250.0 min, p = 0.015; docking time 16.0 min vs. 12.0 min, p = 0.001; console time 212.0 min vs. 190.0 min, p = 0.019). Planned procedures were successfully completed in all patients. Postoperative outcomes were acceptable with only six cases of mild adverse events through a 3-month follow-up. No local recurrence and only one case of systemic recurrence occurred within 1 year postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the surgical and oncological safety and feasibility of dVSP, which may be a novel surgical platform for colorectal surgery.

Single-Port Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for the Treatment of Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci Single-port (SP) system is designed to facilitate single-incision robotic surgery in a narrow space. We developed a new procedure of intersphincteric resection (ISR) using the SP platform and evaluated the technical safety and feasibility of this procedure for the treatment of very low rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eleven rectal cancer patients who underwent SP robotic ISR between August 2020 and July 2021 were included. Patients' clinical characteristics, operative and pathologic findings of the patients were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The median tumor height was 3 cm (range, 2-4 cm). A single docking was performed, and the median docking time was 3 min 10 sec (range, 2 min 50 sec-3 min 30 sec). The median total operation time was 210 min (range, 150-280 min), and the median time of pelvic dissection was 57 min (range, 45-68 min). All patients presented with negative distal resection margins [median 1 cm (range, 0.5-2.0 cm)], and only one patient had less than 1mm of circumferential resection margin (0.9 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

Our initial experience suggests that SP robotic ISR is safe and feasible.

Current Status and Future of Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer-An English Version

Robotic surgical systems were created in part to solve several constraints of laparoscopic surgery and offer technical advantages. With a substantial body of evidence that demonstrates its efficacy in the treatment of rectal cancer, robotic surgery will soon become another conventional treatment. However, further investigations and randomized trials focusing on primary endpoints are needed to establish some advantages for robot-assisted colon surgery. Da Vinci Single-SiteⓇ and SPⓇ platforms were developed to overcome the shortcomings of single-port laparoscopic surgery. Despite the currently insufficient evidence, it appears that the SP platform addresses many of the limitations of single-port transabdominal or transanal surgery. Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery and total mesorectal excision were developed to overcome some of the limitations of conventional platforms, using wristed instrumentation to enhance dexterity and ergonomics. Studies on the effectiveness and viability of this novel approach are ongoing. The near-infrared fluorescence technique, real-time stereotactic navigation technology, and other surgical data platforms based on artificial intelligence incorporated into the robotic system will play an important role in improving outcomes. Robotic systems for advanced colorectal cancer offer technical advantages for complex and precise surgeries. If the cost of robotic surgery is reduced by expanding its indications and enhancing competition among different robotic platforms, it will provide clinical benefits to more patients and reduce social healthcare costs.

Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer

Background: Robotic surgical systems were created partly to solve several constraints of laparoscopic surgery and to offer technical advantages. With a substantial body of evidence demonstrating its efficacy in rectal cancer treatment, robotic surgery will soon become another conventional treatment. However, further investigations and randomized trials focusing on primary endpoints are necessary to establish some advantages of robot-assisted colon surgery.Current Concepts: Da Vinci Single-Site and SP platforms (Intuitive Surgical Inc.) were developed to overcome the shortcomings of single-port laparoscopic surgery. Despite the currently insufficient evidence, it seems that the SP platform addresses several limitations of single-port transabdominal or transanal surgery. Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery and total mesorectal excision were developed to overcome conventional platforms’ limitations, using wristed instrumentation to enhance dexterity and ergonomics. Studies on the effectiveness and viability of this novel approach are ongoing. The near-infrared fluorescence technique, real-time stereotactic navigation technology, and other surgical data platforms based on artificial intelligence incorporated into the robotic system will play an important role in improving outcomes.Discussion and Conclusion: Robotic systems for advanced colorectal cancer offer technical advantages for complex and precise surgeries. If robotic surgery costs are reduced by expanding its indications and enhancing competition among different robotic platforms, it will provide clinical benefits to more patients and reduce social healthcare costs.

Minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer, a look back to look forward: a personal history

While laparoscopic colonoscopy was reported by several surgeons in the early 1990s, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has been attempted sporadically since 1992 in Korea. Then, in 2000, the Korean Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group was established. Didactic lectures, videos, and live surgery by the early pioneers of this group inspired and helped many surgeons initiate the laparoscopic approach to the treatment of colorectal disease. As a result, the penetration rate of minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery nationwide is increasing to 80% in 2018. As a witness on this journey, I would like to share my personal minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery history and perspectives on future surgery in this field.

Early Experience of Transabdominal and Novel Transvaginal Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Removal of Transvaginal Mesh

Background: Mesh removal after transvaginal mesh placement has typically involved transvaginal, open pelvic, laparoscopic, or a combination of approaches. Robotic pelvic mesh removal has been described in a small number of cases only. This study aims at determining the feasibility and safety of using robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in the removal of pelvic mesh via the transabdominal and novel transvaginal approach. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective case series study on women who underwent transabdominal or transvaginal robot-assisted removal of pelvic mesh. Women were offered participation in this study with pelvic mesh and a clinical indication for mesh removal if they were older than the age of 18. Alternative surgical options, including conventional open removal of mesh, were discussed and offered to patients. The primary outcome of this study is the rate of successful removal of mesh and the 30-day complication rates. Ethics approval was obtained for this study. Results: Thirty patients were included in this study. Median age was 62. Median operative and console time was 240 and 148 minutes, respectively. Concomitant reconstructive procedures were performed in 40% of patients. Complete or near-complete mesh removal was achieved in 83.3% of patients. For the remaining patients, partial removal of mesh was performed as planned preoperatively. Three Clavien-Dindo grade 3b complications resulted from mesh removal: concomitant ureteric and bladder injury, omental bleed, and groin wound infection. Conclusion: This study presents the early experience of robotic-assisted removal of transvaginal mesh with a transvaginal or transabdominal approach and demonstrates the feasibility of removal of both retropubic and transobturator mid-urethral synthetic sling as well as transvaginal prolapse meshes with transobturator and sacrospinous mesh arms. Further studies are required to expand understanding on the learning curve, operating times, complication rates, and functional outcome of this operation.

Da Vinci SP robotic approach to colorectal surgery: two specific indications and short-term results

BACKGROUND

Da Vinci® Single Port (dvSP) was recently developed. Its application in colorectal surgery is under investigation. The aim of this study was to explore the safety and feasibility of dvSP for intersphincteric (dvSP-ISR), right colectomy (dvSP-RC), and transverse colectomy (dvSP-TC). Surgical indication and short-term results were analyzed.

METHODS

All consecutive patients from a prospective database of patients who underwent dvSP-ISR, dvSP-RC, and dvSP-TC at Korea University Anam Hospital from November 2020 to December 2021, were analyzed. Perioperative, pathological, and oncological short-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 7 dvSP-ISR, 5 dvSP-RC, and 1 dvSP-TC were performed. Median age was 56.0 (55.0-61.0) years for the dvSP-ISR and 54.0 (44.7-63.5) years for the dvSP-RC/TC. Median body mass index was 22.8 (17.1-24.8) kg/m² for the dvSP-ISR and 23.6 (20.8-26.9) kg/m² for the dvSP-RC/TC. All dvSP-ISR patients received neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy, including one patient with squamocellular carcinoma who was treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/mitomycin. All other patients, excluding one dvSP-RC patient with Crohn's disease, had an adenocarcinoma. Median operation time was 280 (240-370) minutes for the dvSP-ISR and 220 (201-270) minutes for the dvSP-RC/TC. Estimated blood loss was insignificant. No intraoperative complications or conversions to multiport/open surgery was reported. Median post-operative stay was 7.0 (6.0-10.0) days for the dvSP-ISR and 5.0 (4.0-6.7) days for the dvSP-RC/TC. Quality of mesorectum was complete for six patients, and nearly complete for one. Median number of retrieved lymph nodes were 21 (17-25) for the dvSP-ISR and 28 (24-49) for the dvSP-RC/TC. Proximal and distal resection margins were tumor free. Four patients experienced post-operative complications not related to the platform which were: ileus, voiding dysfunction, infected pelvic hematoma, and wound infection. Median follow-up was 9 (6-11) months and 11 (7-17) months for the dvSP-ISR and dvSP-RC/TC, respectively. Two patients had systemic recurrence; all others were tumor free.

CONCLUSIONS

The dvSP platform is safe and feasible for intersphincteric resection with right lower quadrant access, and right/transverse colectomy with suprapubic access. Further studies are needed to evaluate benefit differences compared to multiport robotic platform.

Robotic Intersphincteric Resection for Low Rectal Cancer: Technical Controversies and a Systematic Review on the Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is the ultimate anus-sparing technique for low rectal cancer and is considered an oncologically safe alternative to abdominoperineal resection. The application of the robotic approach to ISR (RISR) has been described by few specialized surgical teams with several differences regarding approach and technique. This review aims to discuss the technical aspects of RISR by evaluating point by point each surgical controversy. Moreover, a systematic review was performed to report the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of RISR. Postoperative morbidities after RISR are acceptable. RISR allows adequate surgical margins and adequate oncological outcomes. RISR may result in severe bowel and genitourinary dysfunction affecting the quality of life in a portion of patients.

Anus-Preserving Surgery in Advanced Low-Lying Rectal Cancer: A Perspective on Oncological Safety of Intersphincteric Resection

The surgical management of low-lying rectal cancer, within 5 cm from the anal verge (AV), is challenging due to the possibility, or not, to preserve the anus with its sphincter muscles maintaining oncological safety. The standardization of total mesorectal excision, the adoption of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the implementation of rectal magnetic resonance imaging, and the evolution of mechanical staplers have increased the rate of anus-preserving surgeries. Moreover, extensive anatomy and physiology studies have increased the understanding of the complexity of the deep pelvis. Intersphincteric resection (ISR) was introduced nearly three decades ago as the ultimate anus-preserving surgery. The definition and indication of ISR have changed over time. The adoption of the robotic platform provides excellent perioperative results with no differences in oncological outcomes. Pushing the boundaries of anus-preserving surgeries has risen doubts on oncological safety in order to preserve function. This review critically discusses the oncological safety of ISR by evaluating the anatomical characteristics of the deep pelvis, the clinical indications, the role of distal and circumferential resection margins, the role of the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, the outcomes between surgical approaches (open, laparoscopic, and robotic), the comparison with abdominoperineal resection, the risk factors for oncological outcomes and local recurrence, the patterns of local recurrences after ISR, considerations on functional outcomes after ISR, and learning curve and surgical education on ISR.