Minimally invasive right versus left colectomy for cancer: does robotic surgery mitigate differences in short-term outcomes?

Short- and long-term outcome differences between patients undergoing left and right colon cancer surgery: cohort study

PURPOSE

Since the literature currently provides controversial data on the postoperative outcomes following right and left hemicolectomies, we carried out this study to examine the short- and long-term treatment outcomes.

METHODS

This study included consecutive patients who underwent right or left-sided colonic resections from year 2014 to 2018 and then they were followed up. The short-term outcomes such as postoperative morbidity and mortality according to Clavien-Dindo score, duration of hospital stay, and 90-day readmission rate were evaluated as well as long-term outcomes of overall survival and disease-free survival. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed of overall and progression-free survival.

RESULTS

In total, 1107 patients with colon tumors were included in the study, 525 patients with right-sided tumors (RCC) and 582 cases with tumors in the left part of the colon (LCC). RCC group patients were older (P < 0.001), with a higher ASA score (P < 0.001), and with more cardiovascular comorbidities (P < 0.001). No differences were observed between groups in terms of postoperative outcomes such as morbidity and mortality, except 90-day readmission which was more frequent in the RCC group. Upon histopathological analysis, the RCC group's patients had more removed lymph nodes (29 ± 14 vs 20 ± 11, P = 0.001) and more locally progressed (pT3-4) tumors (85.4% versus 73.4%, P = 0.001). Significantly greater 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival (P = 0.001) were observed for patients in the LCC group, according to univariate Kaplan-Meier analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with right-sided colon cancer were older and had more advanced disease. Short-term surgical outcomes were similar, but patients in the LCC group resulted in better long-term outcomes.

Robotic right versus left colectomy for colorectal neoplasia: a systemic review and meta-analysis

Previous studies comparing right and left colectomies have shown variable short-term outcomes. Despite the rapid adoption of robotics in colorectal operations, few studies have addressed outcome differences between robotic right (RRC) and left (RLC) colectomies. Therefore, we sought to compare the short-term outcomes of RRC and RLC for neoplasia. This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of articles published from the time of inception of the datasets to May 1, 2022. The electronic databases included English publications in Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and Scopus. A total of 13,514 patients with colon neoplasia enrolled in 9 comparative studies were included. The overall mean age was 64.1 years (standard deviation [SD] ± 9.8), and there was a minor female predominance (52% female vs. 48% male). 8656 (64.0%) underwent RRC and 4858 (36.0%) underwent RLC. The ASA score 1 of - 2 in the LRC group was 37% vs. 21% in the R. Whereas the ASA score 3-4 was 62% in the LRC vs. 76% in RRC. Moreover, the mean of the Charlson Comorbidity Score in the LRC was 4.3 (SD 1.9) vs. 3.1 (SD 2.3) in the RRC. Meta-analysis revealed a significantly higher rate of ileus in RRC (10%) compared to RLC (7%) (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.27-1.67). Additionally, operative time was significantly shorter by 22.6 min in RRC versus LRC (95% CI - 37.4-7.8; p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between RRC and RLC in conversion to open operation, estimated blood loss, wound infection, anastomotic leak, reoperation, readmission, and hospital length of stay. In this only meta-analysis comparing RRC and LRC for colon neoplasia, we found that RRC was independently associated with a shorter operative time but increased risk of ileus.

Comparison of Non-Oncological Postoperative Outcomes Following Robotic and Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection for Colorectal Malignancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the postoperative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic colorectal resection for colorectal malignancy. We performed a systematic review using a comprehensive search strategy on several electronic databases (PubMed, PubMed Central, Medline, and Google Scholar) in April 2022. Postoperative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were compared using 12 end points. Observational studies, randomized controlled trials, and nonrandomized clinical trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer were included. The statistical analysis was performed using the risk ratio (RR) for categorical variables and the standardized mean differences (SMD) for continuous variables. Sixteen studies involving 2,318 patients were included. The difference in length of hospital stay was significantly shorter with robotic access (SMD = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.19, -0.01, P = 0.04, I2 = 0%). Regarding intra-abdominal abscesses, the analysis showed an advantage in favor of the robotic group, but the result was not statically significant (RR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.28, 1.05, P = 0.07, I2 = 0%). Mechanical obstruction was found to be higher in robotic group, favoring laparoscopic access, but was not significant (RR = 1.91, 95% CI = 0.95, 3.83, P = 0.07, I2 = 0%). There was no difference in time to pass flatus and consume a soft diet. The rates of anastomotic leakage, ileus, wound infection, readmission, mortality, and incisional hernias were similar with both approaches. Robotic surgery for colorectal cancer is associated with a shorter hospital stay, with no differences in mortality and postoperative morbidity.

Right colectomy from open to robotic - a single-center experience with functional outcomes in a learning-curve setting

Purpose

Right colectomy (RC) is a frequently performed procedure. Beneath standard conventional open surgery (COS), various minimally invasive techniques had been introduced. Several advantages had recently been described for robotic approaches over COS or conventional laparoscopy. Nevertheless, novel minimally invasive techniques require continuous benchmarking against standard COS to gain maximum patient safety. Bowel dysfunction is a frequent problem after RC. Together with general complication rates postoperative bowel recovery are used as surrogate parameters for postoperative patient outcome in this study.

Methods

Retrospective, 10-year single-center analysis of consecutive patients who underwent sequentially either COS (n = 22), robotic-assisted (ECA: n = 39), or total robotic surgery (ICA: n = 56) for oncologic RC was performed.

Results

The conversion from robotic to open surgery rate was low (overall: 3.2%). Slightly longer duration of surgery had been observed during the early phase after introduction of the robotic program to RC (ECA versus COS, p = 0.044), but not anymore thereafter (versus ICA). No differences were observed in oncologic parameters including rates of tumor-negative margins, lymph node-positive patients, and lymph node yield during mesocolic excision. Both robotic approaches are beneficial regarding postoperative complication rates, especially wound infections, and shorter length of in-hospital stay compared with COS. The duration until first postoperative stool is the shortest after ICA (COS: 4 [2–8] days, ECA: 3 [1–6] days, ICA: 3 [1–5] days, p = 0.0004). Regression analyses reveal neither a longer duration of surgery nor the extent of mesocolic excision, but the degree of minimally invasiveness and postoperative systemic inflammation contribute to postoperative bowel dysfunction, which prolongs postoperative in-hospital stay significantly.

Conclusion

The current study reflects the institutional learning curve of oncologic RC during implementation of robotic surgery from robotic-assisted to total robotic approach without compromises in oncologic results and patient safety. However, the total robotic approach is beneficial regarding postoperative bowel recovery and general patient outcome.

Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to review the new evidence to understand whether the robotic approach could find some clear indication also in left colectomy.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published from 2004 to 2022 in the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases and comparing laparoscopic (LLC) and robotic left colectomy (RLC) was performed. All comparative studies evaluating robotic left colectomy (RLC) versus laparoscopic (LLC) left colectomy with at least 20 patients in the robotic arm were included. Abstract, editorials, and reviews were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to assess the methodological quality. The random-effect model was used to calculate pooled effect estimates.

RESULTS

Among the 139 articles identified, 11 were eligible, with a total of 52,589 patients (RLC, n = 13,506 versus LLC, n = 39,083). The rate of conversion to open surgery was lower for robotic procedures (RR 0.5, 0.5-0.6; p < 0.001). Operative time was longer for the robotic procedures in the pooled analysis (WMD 39.1, 17.3-60.9, p = 0.002). Overall complications (RR 0.9, 0.8-0.9, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (RR 0.7, 0.7-0.8; p < 0.001), and superficial wound infection (RR 3.1, 2.8-3.4; p < 0.001) were less common after RLC. There were no significant differences in mortality (RR 1.1; 0.8-1.6, p = 0.124). There were no differences between RLC and LLC with regards to postoperative variables in the subgroup analysis on malignancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic left colectomy requires less conversion to open surgery than the standard laparoscopic approach. Postoperative morbidity rates seemed to be lower during RLC, but this was not confirmed in the procedures performed for malignancies.