Robotic transanal endoscopic microsurgery: technical details for the lateral approach

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (R-TAMIS): current evidence in the treatment of early rectal neoplasia

INTRODUCTION

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (R-TAMIS) was introduced in 2012 for the excision of benign rectal polyps and low grade rectal cancer. Ergonomic improvements over traditional laparoscopic TAMIS (L-TAMIS) include increased dexterity within a small operative field, with possibility of better surgical precision. We aim to collate the existing data surrounding the use of R-TAMIS to treat rectal neoplasms from cohort studies and larger case series, providing a foundation for future, large-scale, comparative studies.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science were searched as part of our review. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies or large case series (≥ 5 patients) investigating the use of R-TAMIS to resect rectal neoplasia (benign or malignant) were eligible for inclusion in our analysis. Quality assessment of included studies was performed via the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) risk of bias tool. Outcomes extracted included basic participant characteristics, operative details and histopathological/oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies on 317 participants were included in our analysis. The quality of studies was generally satisfactory. Overall complication rate from R-TAMIS was 9.7%. Clear margins (R0) were reported in 96.2% of patients. Local recurrence (benign or malignant) occurred in 2.2% of patients during the specified follow-up periods.

CONCLUSION

Our review highlights the current evidence for R-TAMIS in the local excision of rectal lesions. While R-TAMIS appears to have complication, margin negativity and recurrence rates superior to those of published L-TAMIS series, comparative studies are needed.

Robot-assisted TAMIS: a systematic review of feasibility and outcomes

BACKGROUND

In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum, robot-assisted surgery should, theoretically, be superior due to articulated utensils, video enhancement, and tremor reduction, however, this has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to review the evidence reported to-date on experience of using robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery for treatment of rectal neoplasms.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of Embase and PubMed from May to August 2021were performed. Studies including patients diagnosed with rectal neoplasia or benign polyps who underwent robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery were included. All studies were assessed for risk of bias through assessment tools. Main outcome measures were feasibility, excision quality, and complications.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies with a total of 322 local excisions were included. The studies included were all retrospective, primarily case-reports, -series, and cohort studies. The median distance from the anal verge ranged from 3.5 to 10 cm and the median size was between 2.5 and 5.3 cm. Overall, 4.6% of the resections had a positive resection margin. The overall complication rate was at 9.5% with severe complications (Clavien-Dindo score III) at 0.9%.

CONCLUSION

Based on limited, retrospective data, with a high risk of bias, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery seems feasible and safe for local excisions in the rectum.

Robotic transanal excision of rectal lesions: expert perspective and literature review

Transanal excision of benign lesions, moderately or well-differentiated rectal T1 adenocarcinomas is typically completed via transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) or laparoscopic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS). Robotic platforms provide ergonomic comfort in an enclosed space, enhanced range of motion, and superior 3D visualization. This study sought to perform a literature review of robotic TAMIS (R-TAMIS) and provide expert commentary on the technique. A Pubmed literature search was performed. Study design, robot type, indication, techniques compared, surgical margins, conversion, complications, operative time, estimated blood loss, patient positioning, and defect closure were collected from included articles. Expert opinion on pre-operative planning, technical details, and possible pitfalls was provided, with an accompanying video. Twelve articles published between 2013 and 2022 were included. Five were case reports, three case series, two prospective cohort studies, one retrospective cohort study, and one Phase II trial. The Da Vinci Si (n = 3), Xi (n = 2), single port (n = 3) and flex robotic system (n = 2) were used. Five studies reported negative surgical margins, one reported positive margins, and six did not comment. Operating room time ranged from 45 to 552 min and EBL ranged from 0 to 100 mL. Patient positioning varied based on lesion location but included supine, prone, modified lithotomy, and prone jackknife positions. 11/12 studies reported defect closure, most commonly with V-Loc absorbable suture. We recommend pre-operative MRI abdomen/pelvis, digital rectal exam, and rigid proctoscopy; prone jackknife patient positioning to avoid collisions with robotic arms; and defect closure of full-thickness excisions with backhanded running V-Loc suture.

Randomized clinical trial on the use of a colon-occlusion device to assist rectal washout

Background

Transrectal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery is currently limited by the inherent risk of surgical site infection due to peritoneal contamination after rectotomy. Coloshield has been developed as a temporary colon occlusion device to facilitate rectal washout. However, effectiveness and safety has not been evaluated in humans.

Methods

Twenty-two patients have been randomly assigned to undergo proctological intervention with a rectal washout with and without the use of Coloshield. Patients and assessors were blinded. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) has been determined 30 min as well as immediately after rectal washout. Feasibility, pain, intra- and postoperative morbidity as well as bowel function and continence 6 weeks after surgery were assessed.

Results

BBPS 30 min after rectal washout with and without Coloshield was in mean 2.42 ± 1.02 and 2.12 ± 0.89 (p = 0.042). Mean BBPS immediately after rectal washout was 2.39 ± 1.02 and 2.24 ± 0.66 (p = 0.269). Mean BBPS immediately after rectal washout and 30 min thereafter did not differ (p = 0.711). Coloshield application was feasible without any complications. The median (interquartile range) numeric rating scale for pain 4 h after surgery was 1 (0–1) and 3 (0–4) (p = 0.212). Six weeks after surgery 0/11 and 1/11 patients suffered from evacuation difficulties (p = 1.0) and the median Vaizey–Wexner score was 1 (0–3) and 1 (0–2) (p = 0.360).

Conclusions

Coloshield application in humans is feasible and safe. Slight benefits in rectal preparation by washout are found when Coloshield is used. Colon occlusion by Coloshield for transrectal NOTES should be evaluated within clinical studies.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02579330

Hybrid Robotic Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery Approach to Large and Low-Lying Rectal Polyps

BACKGROUND

Transanal excision is the surgical treatment of choice for low-risk rectal pathology such as endoscopically unresectable polyps, very select early rectal cancers, as well as other benign and low-risk tumors. Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery enhances the surgeon's ability to work in the confined space of the rectum and helps overcome the limitations of other modalities for transanal excision. Large lesions that extend to the dentate line and cannot be excised transanally impart a particular challenge. Herein, we describe a hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach for excising large rectal lesions that extend to the dentate line and cannot be excised by utilizing traditional transanal techniques.

TECHNIQUE

With the use of a standard transanal approach, the distal margin of the lesion is marked and lifted off of the internal sphincter muscle. The dissection is continued until above the anorectal ring, and a 5.5-cm transanal platform is introduced transanally. Insufflation with an 8-mm trocar is initiated and the robotic platform is docked transanally. A 1-cm circumferential proximal margin is marked, and the excision is continued robotically until en bloc resection of the lesion is completed. The defect is closed in a transverse fashion using barbed suture. For rare cases of circumferential or nearly circumferential full-thickness defects, interrupted barbed sutures are placed equidistant, the robot is undocked, the transanal platform is removed, and a handsewn coloanal anastomosis is performed allowing complete closure of the defect.

RESULTS

A hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach to large and low-lying rectal lesions is feasible and safe, and it has advantages over standard transanal excision including enhanced ergonomics, dexterity, and optics, as well as reduced rates of specimen fragmentation.

CONCLUSION

A hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach allows for complete resection of very large polyps, which would otherwise be extremely challenging with standard transanal approaches. See Video at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B231.

The outcomes of two robotic platforms performing transanal minimally invasive surgery for rectal neoplasia: a case series of 21 patients

Colorectal cancer remains the third most common cancer effecting adults. Surgical guidelines recommend transanal excision of early rectal neoplasia up to 8 cm from the anal verge. A retrospective review of two novel approaches for transanal robotic local excision with R0 resections of rectal cancers which was, on average, higher than 8 cm. Twenty-one cases of robotic assisted transanal surgery for early stage disease (T0-T1, N0) were reviewed. The first 10 cases performed with the da Vinci^® Si robotic platform between 2013 and 2016, and the first 11 cases performed using the Flex^® Medrobotics platform between August 2017 and August 2018. The average distance from the anal verge was 11.1 cm and 9.5 cm for the da Vinci^® Si and Flex^® Colorectal Drive, respectively. The average operative time was 167.6 min for the da Vinci^® Si and 110.1 min for the Flex^® Colorectal Drive; the average EBL was 37.5 cc and 9.1 cc for the da Vinci^® Si and Flex^® Colorectal Drive. In the da Vinci^® series, four cases required intraoperative conversion. In the Flex^® series, one case was aborted due to unfavorable robotic positioning. All margins were histologically negative when surgically complete with no recurrences to date. Transanal robotic surgery may provide a method to address rectal lesions farther from the anal verge than previously described. The Flex^® Colorectal Drive platform may provide superior ability to navigate the nonlinear anatomy of the rectum and distal sigmoid colon.

Robotic Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Excision of Rectal Neoplasia: Clinical Experience With 58 Consecutive Patients

BACKGROUND

Given the significant perioperative risks and costs of total mesorectal excision, minimally invasive transanal surgical approaches have grown in popularity for early rectal cancer and rectal polyps. This article discusses a transanal robotic surgery technique to perform full-thickness resections of benign and malignant rectal neoplasms.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe an initial experience with robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a high-volume colorectal surgery practice with a large health maintenance organization.

PATIENTS

Patients at Southern California Kaiser Permanente with early rectal cancer and rectal polyps amenable to transanal excision were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Transanal resection of rectal tumors were removed using robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Local recurrence of rectal pathology was measured.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients underwent robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery with full-thickness rectal resection by 4 surgeons for the following indications: rectal cancer (n = 28), rectal polyp (n = 18), rectal carcinoid (n = 11), and rectal GI stromal tumor (n = 1). Mean operative time was 66.2 minutes (range, 17-180 min). The mean tumor height from the anal verge was 8.8 cm (range, 4-14 cm), and the mean specimen size was 3.3 cm (range, 1.3-8.2 cm). A total of 57 (98.3%) of 58 specimens were intact, and 55 (94.8%) of 58 specimens had negative surgical margins. At a mean follow-up of 11.5 months (range, 0.3-33.3 mo), 3 patients (5.5%) developed local recurrences, and all underwent successful salvage surgery.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by being a retrospective, nonrandomized trial with short follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery is a safe, oncologically effective surgical approach for rectal polyps and early rectal cancers. It offers the oncologic benefits and perioperative complication profile of other transanal minimally invasive surgical approaches but also enhances surgeon ergonomics and provides an efficient transanal rectal platform. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A759.

Appraisal and Current Considerations of Robotics in Colon and Rectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Robotic technology aims to obviate some of the limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, yet the role of robotics in colorectal surgery is still largely undefined and varies with respect to its application in abdominal versus pelvic surgery.

METHODS

With this review, we aimed to highlight current developments in colorectal robotic surgery. We systematically searched the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. We critically reviewed the available literature on the use of robotic technology in colon and rectal surgery.

RESULTS

Robotic colorectal surgery is oncologically safe and has short-term outcomes comparable to conventional laparoscopy, with potential benefits in rectal surgery. It has a shorter learning curve but increased operative times and costs. It offers potential advantages in the resection of rectal cancer, due to lower conversion rates. There is also a trend toward better outcomes in anastomotic leak rates, circumferential margin positivity, and perseveration of autonomic function.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy remains technically challenging and conversion rates are still high. Therefore, most cases of colorectal surgery are still performed open. Robotic surgery aims to overcome the limits of the laparoscopic technique. This new technology has many advantages in terms of articulating instruments, advanced three-dimensional optics, surgeon ergonomics, and improved accessibility to narrow spaces, such as the pelvis. However, further studies are needed to assess long-term results and benefits.

Decrease of Sphincter Preserving Length Lowers the Postoperative Genital Function for Patients With Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

With the increase in sphincter preserving rate of rectal cancer (RC) cancer, postoperative quality-of-life, such as genital dysfunction, has become a major issue in the patient management. In this study, we proposed a measurement, namely, the sphincter preserving length (SPL), and investigated the relationship between SPL and postoperative genital function and survival in RC patients.

METHODS

A total of 536 male patients who had a diagnosis of RC and underwent sphincter preserving rectal resection in the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University and the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between October 1997 and December 2013 were included in our study. SPL was defined as the distance between the lowest edge of the tumor to dentate line. Postoperative genital function was evaluated by erection function and ejaculation function. Five-year survival status was extracted from the hospital database.

RESULTS

Larger SPL was significantly associated with poorer postoperative erection and ejaculation function. For a SPL of 7.25 cm, the sensitivity and specificity of the diagnosis of erection dysfunction was 68.6% and 68.8%, respectively. The corresponding sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of ejaculation dysfunction was 70.9% and 75.7%, respectively. SPL was also negatively associated with survival rate. Compared with lower anterior resection, patients with lower RC who underwent local resection or draw-out colon-anal anastomosis had better postoperative genital function.

CONCLUSIONS

SPL might be a useful measurement to assess the risk of postoperative genital dysfunction and survival status and an indicator for initiation of early preventative treatment in patients with RC.

Robotic transanal microsurgery for high early rectal neoplasia (T0-T1, N0 lesions), case series of 10 patients

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

In 2017, an estimated 39 910 people will receive a new diagnosis of rectal cancer. Current surgical guidelines limit transanal excision of early rectal neoplasia to 8 cm from the anal verge. We report that R0 resection of higher rectal cancers is possible using transanal robotic microsurgery.

METHODS/INTERVENTIONS

Ten cases of robotic assisted transanal surgery for early stage disease (T0-T1, N0) between 2013 and 2016 were reviewed.

RESULTS/OUTCOMES

All cases were diagnosed preoperatively with colonoscopy, and the average distance from the anal verge was 11.1 cm. The average operative time was 167 minutes, and the average blood loss was 37.5 cc. Four cases required intraoperative conversion; one conversion required robotic abdominal access to repair a proctotomy. All margins were histologically negative, and 6-month follow-up showed no recurrences.

CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION

Transanal robotic surgery may provide the colorectal surgeon a method to address rectal lesions farther from the anal verge.

Trans-anal minimally invasive surgery for rectal neoplasia: Experience from single tertiary institution in China

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of trans-anal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) from single institute in China.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted for patients with rectal neoplasia, who underwent TAMIS using single incision laparoscopic surgery-Port from January 2013 till January 2016 by a group of colorectal surgeons from Gastrointestinal Center Unit III, Peking University Cancer Hospital. Patients' demographic data, surgical related information, post-operational pathology, as well as peri-operative follow-up were all collected.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients with rectal neoplasia were identified consequently. Complete full-thickness excision was achieved in all cases without conversion. 22 (88%) cases had rectal malignancies [6 were adenocarcinomas and 16 were neuroendocrine tumors (NET)], while 3 patients had adenomas. Mean surgical duration was 61.3 min, and mean post-operative stay were 2.7 d. Post-operational examination demonstrated 5 cases had positive resection margin: 2 adenocarcinoma cases and 1 NET case with positive lateral margin, and the other 2 NET cases with positive basal margin. The curve of operation time for TAMIS cases suggested a minimum of 10 cases for a laparoscopic surgeon proficient with this technique.

CONCLUSION

TAMIS was demonstrated to be reproducible and safe, with a relatively short learning process for laparoscopic surgeons in selected cases for rectal neoplasia. Long-term oncological outcome needs to be determined by further investigation.

Robotic Assisted Transanal Polypectomies: Is There Any Indication?

OBJECTIVES

Robotic assisted transanal polipectomy may have advantages compared with the conventional transanal minimally invasive surgery technique. We evaluate the safety, feasibility and advantages of this technique.

METHODS

Between February 2014 and October 2015, 9patients underwent robotic transanal polypectomy. We performed a retrospective study in which we analyse prospectively collected data regarding patient and tumor characteristics, perioperative outcomes, pathological report, morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 5 male and 4 female patients underwent robotic TAMIS. Lesions were 6,22cm from the anal verge. Mean size was 15,8cm². All procedures were performed in the lithotomy position. Closure of the defect was performed in all cases. Mean blood loss was 39,8ml. Mean operative time was 71,9min. No severe postoperative complications or readmissions occured. Median hospital stay was 2,5 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic TAMIS is useful to treat complex rectal lesions. Our transanal platform allowed a wider range of movements of the robotic arms and to perform all procedures in the lithotomy position.

Early clinical experience with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System in general surgery

The da Vinci Xi Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has been released in 2014 to facilitate minimally invasive surgery. Novel features are targeted towards facilitating complex multi-quadrant procedures, but data is scarce so far. Perioperative data of patients who underwent robotic general surgery with the da Vinci Xi system within the first 6 month after installation were collected and analyzed. The gastric bypass procedures performed with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System were compared to an equal amount of the last procedures with the da Vinci Si Surgical System. Thirty-one foregut (28 Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses), 6 colorectal procedures and 1 revisional biliary procedure were performed. The mean operating room (OR) time was 221.8 (±69.0) minutes for gastric bypasses and 306.5 (±48.8) for colorectal procedures with mean docking time of 9.4 (±3.8) minutes. The gastric bypass procedure was transitioned from a hybrid to a fully robotic approach. In comparison to the last 28 gastric bypass procedures performed with the da Vinci Si Surgical System, the OR time was comparable (226.9 versus 230.6 min, p = 0.8094), but the docking time significantly longer with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System (8.5 versus 6.1 min, p = 0.0415). All colorectal procedures were performed with a single robotic docking. No intraoperative and two postoperative complications occurred. The da Vinci Xi might facilitate single-setups of totally robotic gastric bypass and colorectal surgeries. However, further comparable research is needed to clearly determine the significance of this latest version of the da Vinci Surgical System.

Future of Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery

Minimally invasive surgery is slowly taking over as the preferred operative approach for colorectal diseases. However, many of the procedures remain technically difficult. This article will give an overview of the state of minimally invasive surgery and the many advances that have been made over the last two decades. Specifically, we discuss the introduction of the robotic platform and some of its benefits and limitations. We also describe some newer techniques related to robotics.

A surgical parallel continuum manipulator with a cable-driven grasper

In this paper, we present the design, construction, and control of a six-degree-of-freedom (DOF), 12 mm diameter, parallel continuum manipulator with a 2-DOF, cable-driven grasper. This work is a proof-of-concept first step towards miniaturization of this type of manipulator design to provide increased dexterity and stability in confined-space surgical applications, particularly for endoscopic procedures. Our robotic system consists of six superelastic NiTi (Nitinol) tubes in a standard Stewart-Gough configuration and an end effector with 180 degree motion of its two jaws. Two Kevlar cables pass through the centers of the tube legs to actuate the end effector. A computationally efficient inverse kinematics model provides low-level control inputs to ten independent linear actuators, which drive the Stewart-Gough platform and end-effector actuation cables. We demonstrate the performance and feasibility of this design by conducting open-loop range-of-motion tests for our system.

Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) was developed by Professor Gerhard Buess 30 years ago at the dawn of minimally invasive surgery. TEM utilizes a closed proctoscopic system whereby endoluminal surgery is accomplished with high-definition magnification, constant CO2 insufflation, and long-shafted instruments. The end result is a more precise excision and closure compared to conventional instrumentation. Virtually any benign lesion can be addressed with this technology; however, proper patient selection is paramount when using it for cancer.

The Role of Transanal Surgery in the Management of T1 Rectal Cancers

The management of T1 rectal cancers is based on finding the balance between optimal oncologic outcomes and acceptable functional results for the patient. While radical resection involving a proctectomy is considered the most oncologically adequate option, its adverse effects on patient reported outcomes makes this a less than ideal choice in certain circumstances. While local excision can circumvent some of the adverse functional outcomes, its inadequacy in assessing metastatic lymph node disease and the subsequent negative impact of untreated positive lymph nodes on patient prognosis is a cause for concern. As a result, the therapeutic strategy has to be based on patient and disease-related factors in order to identify the best treatment choice that maximizes survival benefit and preserves health-related quality of life. After adequate preoperative staging work up, in selected patients with favorable pathological features, local excision can be considered. These cancers can be removed by transanal local excision or transanal endoscopic microsurgery, depending on the location of the cancer and expertise available. While perioperative morbidity is minimal, close postoperative follow-up is essential.

SAGES TAVAC safety and effectiveness analysis: da Vinci ® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA)

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci(®) Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) is a computer-assisted (robotic) surgical system designed to enable and enhance minimally invasive surgery. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared computer-assisted surgical systems for use by trained physicians in an operating room environment for laparoscopic surgical procedures in general, cardiac, colorectal, gynecologic, head and neck, thoracic and urologic surgical procedures. There are substantial numbers of peer-reviewed papers regarding the da Vinci(®) Surgical System, and a thoughtful assessment of evidence framed by clinical opinion is warranted.

METHODS

The SAGES da Vinci(®) TAVAC sub-committee performed a literature review of the da Vinci(®) Surgical System regarding gastrointestinal surgery. Conclusions by the sub-committee were vetted by the SAGES TAVAC Committee and SAGES Executive Board. Following revisions, the document was evaluated by the TAVAC Committee and Executive Board again for final approval.

RESULTS

Several conclusions were drawn based on expert opinion organized by safety, efficacy, and cost for robotic foregut, bariatric, hepatobiliary/pancreatic, colorectal surgery, and single-incision cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastrointestinal surgery with the da Vinci(®) Surgical System is safe and comparable, but not superior to standard laparoscopic approaches. Although clinically acceptable, its use may be costly for select gastrointestinal procedures. Current data are limited to the da Vinci(®) Surgical System; further analyses are needed.

Robotic technology: Optimizing the outcomes in rectal cancer?

Minimally invasive rectal resection remains a challenging procedure, even in experienced hands. Technical limitations explain at least in part the reasons of a relatively poor adoption of laparoscopy for rectal resection, in particular for low tumors in a deep and narrow pelvis. Robotics is intended to overcome these limitations. Potentially better short-term outcomes have been published: reduced conversion rates, better functional outcomes, shorter learning curve, reduction of positive margins, better specimen… However, robotic surgery has not yet taken over as the gold standard approach for low anterior resection. Several drawbacks might indeed discourage the most fervent surgeon: the size of the robot, the lack of tactile feedback, the risk and difficulties during multiquadrant surgery, and, of course, costs. Whilst new systems might overcome most of these drawbacks, it seems obvious that the development of robotic surgery is underway. Robotics is not just another interesting technical tool, but more a new concept, which should play a role in the future.

Robotic transanal surgery for local excision of rectal neoplasia, transanal total mesorectal excision, and repair of complex fistulae: clinical experience with the first 18 cases at a single institution

BACKGROUND

Robotic transanal surgery represents a natural evolution of transanal minimally invasive surgery. This new approach to rectal surgery provides the ability to perform local excision of rectal neoplasia with precision. Robotic transanal surgery can also be used to perform more advanced procedures including repair of complex fistulae and transanal total mesorectal excision.

METHODS

Data from patients who underwent transanal robotic surgery over a 33-month period were retrospectively reviewed. Patients underwent three types of procedures using this approach: (a) local excision of rectal neoplasia, (b) transanal total mesorectal excision, and (c) closure of complex fistulae, such as rectourethral fistulae.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients underwent robotic transanal surgery during the 33-month study period. Of these, nine patients underwent local excision of rectal neoplasia; four patients underwent transanal total mesorectal excision; four patients underwent repair of rectourethral fistulae; and one patient underwent repair of an anastomotic fistula. Of the patients undergoing robotic transanal surgery for local excision, 6/9 were resections of benign neoplasia, while 3/9 were resections for invasive adenocarcinoma. There was no fragmentation (0/9) noted on any of the locally excised specimens, while one patient (1/9) had a positive lateral margin. During the mean follow-up of 11.4 months, no recurrence was detected. Four patients underwent robotic-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision for curative intent resection of rectal cancer confined to the distal rectum. Mesorectal quality was graded as complete or near complete, and an R0 resection was performed in all four cases. Other transanal robotic procedures performed were the repair of rectourethral fistulae (n = 3) and anastomotic fistula (n = 1). This approach was met with limited success, and only half of the rectourethral fistulae were closed.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic transanal surgery for local excision, transanal total mesorectal excision, and repair of fistulae is feasible, although these new approaches represent a work-in-progress. Improvement in platform design will likely facilitate the ability to perform more complex procedures. Further research with robotic transanal approaches is necessary to determine whether or not this approach can provide patients with significant benefit.

Robotic general surgery: current practice, evidence, and perspective

BACKGROUND

Robotic technology commenced to be adopted for the field of general surgery in the 1990s. Since then, the da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical Inc, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has remained by far the most commonly used system in this domain. The da Vinci surgical system is a master-slave machine that offers three-dimensional vision, articulated instruments with seven degrees of freedom, and additional software features such as motion scaling and tremor filtration. The specific design allows hand-eye alignment with intuitive control of the minimally invasive instruments. As such, robotic surgery appears technologically superior when compared with laparoscopy by overcoming some of the technical limitations that are imposed on the surgeon by the conventional approach.

PURPOSE

This article reviews the current literature and the perspective of robotic general surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

While robotics has been applied to a wide range of general surgery procedures, its precise role in this field remains a subject of further research. Until now, only limited clinical evidence that could establish the use of robotics as the gold standard for procedures of general surgery has been created. While surgical robotics is still in its infancy with multiple novel systems currently under development and clinical trials in progress, the opportunities for this technology appear endless, and robotics should have a lasting impact to the field of general surgery.

European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery

Following an extensive literature search and a consensus conference with subject matter experts the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Robotic surgery is still at its infancy, and there is a great potential in sophisticated electromechanical systems to perform complex surgical tasks when these systems evolve. 2. To date, in the vast majority of clinical settings, there is little or no advantage in using robotic systems in general surgery in terms of clinical outcome. Dedicated parameters should be addressed, and high quality research should focus on quality of care instead of routine parameters, where a clear advantage is not to be expected. 3. Preliminary data demonstrates that robotic system have a clinical benefit in performing complex procedures in confined spaces, especially in those that are located in unfavorable anatomical locations. 4. There is a severe lack of high quality data on robotic surgery, and there is a great need for rigorously controlled, unbiased clinical trials. These trials should be urged to address the cost-effectiveness issues as well. 5. Specific areas of research should include complex hepatobiliary surgery, surgery for gastric and esophageal cancer, revisional surgery in bariatric and upper GI surgery, surgery for large adrenal masses, and rectal surgery. All these fields show some potential for a true benefit of using current robotic systems. 6. Robotic surgery requires a specific set of skills, and needs to be trained using a dedicated, structured training program that addresses the specific knowledge, safety issues and skills essential to perform this type of surgery safely and with good outcomes. It is the responsibility of the corresponding professional organizations, not the industry, to define the training and credentialing of robotic basic skills and specific procedures. 7. Due to the special economic environment in which robotic surgery is currently employed special care should be taken in the decision making process when deciding on the purchase, use and training of robotic systems in general surgery. 8. Professional organizations in the sub-specialties of general surgery should review these statements and issue detailed, specialty-specific guidelines on the use of specific robotic surgery procedures in addition to outlining the advanced robotic surgery training required to safely perform such procedures.

Robotic transanal total mesorectal excision: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The introduction of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) in 2009 allowed colorectal surgeons to approach transanal access with a different perspective. This has lead to the development of TAMIS for total mesorectal excision (TME). We have previously described robotic transanal TME and here report our initial experience with the first three human cases performed at a single institution.

METHODS

Three patients with distal rectal cancer were selective to undergo robotic transanal TME. All resections were carried out with intent to cure; they were performed by a single attending colorectal surgeon over an 11-month period.

RESULTS

Three patients underwent robotic transanal TME. The average age was 45 years (range 26-59) with mean BMI of 32 kg/m(2) (range 21-38.5). The average tumor size was 2.5 cm. All lesions were located in the distal 5 cm of the rectum. In each case, the distal and circumferential resection margins were free of tumor. The resection quality of the mesorectal envelope was Grade I and Grade II. There was no major morbidity or mortality on short-term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic transanal TME is a new modality for en bloc rectal cancer surgery, and the technique is feasible. Further study is necessary to assess the benefit of this novel approach.

Robotic transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: experience with a first case

BACKGROUND

A transanal approach for total mesorectal excision (TME) using a single incision port is feasible. The disadvantages are technical difficulties associated with limited manoeuvrability.

METHODS

We present our first experience with robotic-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision. A 48 year-old woman with a tumour 8 cm from the anal verge was successfully operated using a transanal approach. A complete mesorectal excision was performed through a single incision port, using two robot arms.

RESULTS

TME was performed successfully and the patient recovered quickly without any complications. The histological report showed a complete mesorectal excision with free distal and circumferential margins. A sigmoidoscopy showed an intact anastomosis and the patient was planned for reversal of her ileostomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal total mesorectal excision using the robot is feasible. Robotics may help to overcome technical difficulties associated with the single incision port.

A systematic review of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) from 2010 to 2013

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) was introduced as an alternative to transanal endoscopic microsurgery in 2010. Over the past 4 years, considerable international experience has been gained with this approach. Most published reports focus on TAMIS for local excision of rectal neoplasia, but there are other important applications such as transanal mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. This comprehensive review details the progress with TAMIS since its inception. Robotic transanal surgery is a natural evolution of TAMIS still in its early infancy, which is also reviewed. A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge was performed. Since the inception of TAMIS in 2009, 33 retrospective studies and case reports, and 3 abstracts have been published on TAMIS for local excision of rectal neoplasms, which represents a combined n = 390 TAMIS procedures performed worldwide using eight different types of TAMIS platforms. A total of 152 lesions were excised for benign disease including adenomas and high-grade dysplasias (39 %), 209 for malignancy for carcinomas in situ and adenocarcinomas (53.5 %). Twenty-nine (7.5 %) of TAMIS resections were for other pathology, of which the majority (23/29) were neuroendocrine lesions. The remaining resections were for mucocele, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, melanoma, and fibrosis. Robotic-TAMIS has also been reported, however, data are extremely limited as there are only 7 case reports (combined n = 11) in the published literature. Success with Robotic-TAMIS has been demonstrated with various patient positions and by use of a special glove port. Transanal total mesorectal excision using the TAMIS platform has also been demonstrated is several small series, and the feasibility of performing pure transanal total mesorectal excision has also been reported. Combined, n = 78 cases of transanal total mesorectal excision have been performed using TAMIS. The advantages of TAMIS-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision are discussed.

A systematic review of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) from 2010 to 2013

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) was introduced as an alternative to transanal endoscopic microsurgery in 2010. Over the past 4 years, considerable international experience has been gained with this approach. Most published reports focus on TAMIS for local excision of rectal neoplasia, but there are other important applications such as transanal mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. This comprehensive review details the progress with TAMIS since its inception. Robotic transanal surgery is a natural evolution of TAMIS still in its early infancy, which is also reviewed. A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Knowledge was performed. Since the inception of TAMIS in 2009, 33 retrospective studies and case reports, and 3 abstracts have been published on TAMIS for local excision of rectal neoplasms, which represents a combined n = 390 TAMIS procedures performed worldwide using eight different types of TAMIS platforms. A total of 152 lesions were excised for benign disease including adenomas and high-grade dysplasias (39 %), 209 for malignancy for carcinomas in situ and adenocarcinomas (53.5 %). Twenty-nine (7.5 %) of TAMIS resections were for other pathology, of which the majority (23/29) were neuroendocrine lesions. The remaining resections were for mucocele, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, melanoma, and fibrosis. Robotic-TAMIS has also been reported, however, data are extremely limited as there are only 7 case reports (combined n = 11) in the published literature. Success with Robotic-TAMIS has been demonstrated with various patient positions and by use of a special glove port. Transanal total mesorectal excision using the TAMIS platform has also been demonstrated is several small series, and the feasibility of performing pure transanal total mesorectal excision has also been reported. Combined, n = 78 cases of transanal total mesorectal excision have been performed using TAMIS. The advantages of TAMIS-assisted transanal total mesorectal excision are discussed.

Robotic transanal surgery for local excision of rectal neoplasms

Robotic transanal surgery (RTS) has been a natural evolution of transanal minimally invasive surgery. This video demonstrates how RTS is performed for the full-thickness excision of a malignant rectal polyp, with endoluminal robotic suturing of the rectal wall defect. The general approach to RTS, including the approach to docking of the robotic cart, are also illustrated in video format.