Robotic-assisted multivisceral resection for rectal cancer: short-term outcomes at a single center

Robotic beyond total mesorectal excision for locally advanced rectal cancers: Perioperative and oncological outcomes from a multicentre case series

BACKGROUND

Around 20% of rectal tumors are locally advanced with invasion into adjacent structures at presentation. These may require surgical resections beyond boundaries of total mesorectal excision (bTME) for radicality. Robotic bTME is under investigation. This study reports perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic bTME for locally advanced rectal cancers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicentre, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected robotic bTME resections (July 2015-November 2020). Demographics, clinicopathological features, short-term outcomes, recurrences, and survival were investigated.

RESULTS

One-hundred-sixty-eight patients (eight centres) were included. Median age and BMI were 60.0 (50.0-68.7) years and 24.0 (24.4-27.7) kg/m2. Female sex was prevalent (n = 95, 56.8%). Fifty patients (29.6%) were ASA III-IV. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was given to 125 (74.4%) patients. Median operative time was 314.0 (260.0-450.0) minutes. Median estimated blood loss was 150.0 (27.5-500.0) ml. Conversion to laparotomy was seen in 4.8%. Postoperative complications occurred in 77 (45.8%) patients; 27.3% and 3.9% were Clavien-Dindo III and IV, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 1.2% (n = 2). R0 rate was 92.9%. Adjuvant chemotherapy was offered to 72 (42.9%) patients. Median follow-up was 34.0 (10.0-65.7) months. Distant and local recurrences were seen in 35 (20.8%) and 15 patients (8.9%), respectively. Overall survival (OS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 91.7, 82.1, and 76.8%. Disease-free survival (DFS) at 1, 3, and 5-years was 84.0, 74.5, and 69.2%.

CONCLUSION

Robotic bTME is technically safe with relatively low conversion rate, good OS, and acceptable DFS in the hands of experienced surgeons in high volume centres. In selected cases robotic approach allows for high R0 rates during bTME.

Streamlining robotic-assisted abdominoperineal resection

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery has proven to be a safe and feasible approach for the management of rectal cancer, including abdominoperineal resection (APR). However, it often incurs longer operative times and higher costs. This study aimed to overcome these limitations by adopting a synchronous approach utilizing an optimized team composition.

METHODS

Data on patients who underwent robot-assisted APR at our facility between June 2022 and June 2023 were analyzed. The key points of the optimized approach included the following: At the start of the surgery, the surgeon performed an anococcygeal ligament resection from the perineal side while the bedside assistants set up the ports. Then, through console manipulation, the presacral fascia, elevated by previously placed gauze, was easily and safely incised, providing access to the perineal region.

RESULTS

A total of nine patients were included in this study. The median operation time was 231 min, and the intraoperative blood loss was 170 ml. The operation time was reduced to 167.5 min, and the blood loss was 80.5 ml in cases without a trainee. Surgical site infections, classified as Clavien-Dindo grade II complications, were observed in two cases, but no obvious urinary or erectile dysfunction was observed.

CONCLUSION

The study results indicate that the challenges associated with APR can be efficiently addressed without requiring additional personnel by streamlining team composition and the synchronous approach. This optimization strategy minimizes the need for a larger surgical team, while maximizing the utilization of surgical time and resources.

Propensity matched analysis of robotic and laparoscopic operations for mid-low rectal cancer: short-term comparison of anal function and oncological outcomes

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer, while in some respects equivalent or even preferable to open surgery, is challenged in specific conditions where the tumor is located in the middle and lower third of the rectum. Robotic surgery equipped with a superior arm of machinery and gained better visualization can compensate for the deficiency of the laparoscopic approach. This study adopted a propensity matched analysis to compare the functional and oncological short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery. All patients who underwent proctectomy have been collected prospectively between December 2019 and November 2022. After censoring for inclusion criteria, we performed a propensity matching analysis. A detailed collection of post-operative examination indicators was performed, while the K-M survival curves were plotted to analyze post-operative oncology outcomes. The LARS scale was designed to evaluate the anal function of patients in the form of questionnaires. Totally, 215 patients underwent robotic operations while 1011 patients selected laparoscopic operations. Patients matched 1∶1 by propensity score were divided into the robotic and laparoscopic groups, 210 cases were included in each group. All patients underwent a follow-up for a median period of 18.3 months. Robotic surgery was connected with an enhanced recovery including the earlier time to first flatus passage without ileostomy (P = 0.050), the earlier time to liquid diet without ileostomy (P = 0.040), lower incidence of urinary retention (P = 0.043), better anal function 1 month after LAR without ileostomy (P < 0.001), longer operative time (\P = 0.042), compared with laparoscopic operations. The oncological outcomes and occurrence of other complications were comparable between the two approaches. For mid-low rectal cancer, robotic surgery could be recognized as an effective technique with identical short-term outcomes of oncology and better anal function in comparison to laparoscopic surgery. However, multi-center studies with larger samples are expected to validate the long-term outcomes of robotic surgery.

Robotic surgery for locally advanced T4 rectal cancer: feasibility and oncological quality

For T4 rectal tumours and local recurrences (LR) of rectal cancer, a radical resection beyond TME, sometimes by multi-visceral resection, is important to obtain safe margins and improve survival. The use of the laparoscopic approach (LA) for these cases is still controversial and associated with a high rate of conversion. However, robotic surgery might offer some advantages that can overcome some of the limitations of LA. Therefore, we aimed to analyse the postoperative outcomes and medium-term oncological results of robotic surgery for locally advanced rectal cancer (pathological T4) and LR. A retrospective analysis was performed including patients who had undergone robotic rectal resection in a single institution over an 11-year period, and had a T4 tumour confirmed in the pathological report. Primary endpoint was to analyse postoperative complications (30-day) and the rate of conversion. Secondary endpoints include pathological assessment of the quality of the specimen, local recurrence and survival [2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS)]. A total of 41 patients were analysed, including a total of 24 patients (60%) that required a multivisceral resection. The median distance from the tumour to the anorectal junction was 7 (4-12) cm. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 2 cases (5%). The overall morbidity rate was 78% (n = 32), with 37% of major complications, most of them urinary (n = 7). Median length of hospital stay (LOS) was 13 (7-27) days. The 30-day mortality rate was 7% (n = 3). An R0 resection was achieved in 85.4% of the cases (n = 35) due to 6 cases of the positive circumferential resection margin. 2-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for the T4 tumours were 72% and 85%, respectively. There were 8 cases of local recurrence (22.2%); 6 of them met the selection criteria for salvage surgery. Robotic surgery for locally advanced T4 rectal cancer and multi-visceral resections is safe and feasible, with a low rate of conversion and an acceptable rate of postoperative morbidity in this subgroup of patients. Oncological results have shown to be comparable with the laparoscopic series published, preserving a good quality of the resected specimen. However, comparative studies and a longer follow-up period is needed to confirm the oncologic findings and to support the general adoption of the robotic system for these complex interventions.

Laparoscopic and robotic multivisceral resection in colorectal cancer: A case series and systematic review

PURPOSE

Multivisceral resection (MVR) with open approach is the standard surgical treatment for locally advanced colorectal cancer. However, the medical literature concerning the practice of minimally invasive MVR in order to reduce postoperative complications and hospital stay has been growing exponentially over the last years. The present study aimed to examine our experience and to provide a systematic review about the results and complications of minimally invasive MVR.

METHODS

Data of patients that underwent minimally invasive MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. The literature was searched for studies concerning minimally invasive MVR for colorectal cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 39 laparoscopic MVR were performed in our department. Complications occurred in 14 patients (35.9%) with major complications in five patients (18.82%) according to Clavien-Dindo classification. Conversion was required in one case (2.56%) with subsequent mortality (2.56%). Pathologic adjacent organs or structures invasion was observed in 30 patients (76.9%) and positive resection margin occurred in two cases (5.2%). Twenty-two studies including 1055 patients were identified after literature search. In these studies, laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery were performed in 90.15% and 9.85% of the patients, respectively. R0 resection was established in 95% of cases, conversion rate varied between 0% and 41.7%, and postoperative mortality ranged between 0% and 7.7% in the included articles.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive approach may be a safe option for patients requiring MVR for locally advanced colorectal cancer, with equivalent oncological results and could result in better early postoperative outcomes to open approach. However, further studies on this topic are needed to confirm the results of the current study.

Technical insights to multivisceral resections using the da Vinci Xi

BACKGROUND

There have been few reports on the feasibility and safety of robotic multivisceral surgeries. The da Vinci Xi boasts significant upgrades that improve its applicability in combined resections. We report our early experience of multivisceral, multi-quadrant resections with the Xi system.

METHODS

Between May 2015 and August 2019, 13 multivisceral resections were performed. Patient demographics, procedural data, and perioperative outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The procedures were completed at a median operative time of 290 (range, 210-535) minutes. The median postoperative length of hospital stay was 3.5 (range, 2-7) days. There was one case of readmission for anastomotic leak, but no positioning injuries, external robot arm collisions or issues arising from trocar position. There were no cases of perioperative mortality.

CONCLUSION

Multivisceral resections can be safely accomplished using the Xi. Further studies are necessary to ascertain whether there are benefits of the robotic approach over conventional laparoscopy in these complex cases.

Updated systematic review of the approach to pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary rectal cancer

OBJECTIVES

To review the evidence regarding surgical advances in the management of primary locally advanced rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND

The management of rectal cancer has evolved significantly in recent decades, with improved (neo)adjuvant treatment strategies and enhanced perioperative protocols. Centralization of care for complex, advanced cases has enabled surgeons in these units to undertake more ambitious surgical procedures.

METHODS

A Pubmed, Ovid, Embase and Cochrane database search was conducted according to the predetermined search strategy. The review protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021245582).

RESULTS

14 studies were identified which reported on the outcomes of 3,188 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) for primary rectal cancer. 50% of patients had neoadjuvant radiotherapy. 24.2% underwent flap reconstruction, 9.4% required a bony resection and 34 patients underwent a major vascular excision. 73.9% achieved R0 resection, with 33.1% experiencing a major complication. Median length of hospital stay ranged from 13 to 19 days. 1.6% of patients died within 30 days of their operation. Five-year overall survival (OS) rates ranged 29%-78%.

LIMITATIONS

The studies included in our review were mostly single-centre observational studies published prior to the introduction of modern neoadjuvant treatment regimens. It was not possible to perform a meta-analysis on the basis that most were non-randomized, non-comparative studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvic exenteration offers patients with locally advanced rectal cancer the chance of long-term survival with acceptable levels of morbidity. Increased experience facilitates more radical procedures, with the introduction of new platforms and/or reconstructive options.

Robotic and robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: A meta-analysis of short-term and long-term results

The usage of robotic surgery in rectal cancer (RC) is increasing, but there is an ongoing debate as to whether it provides any benefit. This study conducted a meta-analysis of rectal cancer surgery for short-term and long-term outcome by Robotic and robotic-assisted surgery (RS) vs laparoscopic surgery (LS).Pubmed, Embase, Ovid, CNKI, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched. Studies clearly documenting a comparison of short-term and long-term effect between RS and LS for RC were selected. Lymph node harvested, operation time, hospital stay, circumferential resection margins（CRM), complications, 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and 5-year DFS parameters were evaluated. All data were performed by Review Manager 5.3 software. Nine studies were collected that included 1436 cases in total, 716 (49.86%) in the RS group, 720(50.14%) in the LS group. Compared with LS, RS was associated with longer operation time (MD 35.19, 95%CI [7.57, 62.81]; P = 0.01), but similar hospital stay (MD -0.43, 95%CI [-0.87,0.01]; P = 0.05).Lymph node harvested, CRM, complications, 3-year DFS, 5-year DFS had no significance difference between RS and LS groups（MD -0.67，95%CI[-1.53，0.19]；P = 0.13；MD 0.86，95%CI[0.54,1.37]；P = 0.52；MD 0.97，95%CI [0.73,1.29]；P = 0.86；MD 0.94，95%CI[0.60,1.48]；P = 0.79；MD 0.88，95%CI[0.52,1.47]；P = 0.61 respectively）.RS is feasible and safe for RC. It has an advantage in short -term outcome and a similar effect in long-term outcome compared with LS.

Advantages of robotic abdominoperineal resection compared with laparoscopic surgery: a single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

Although robotic surgery for rectal cancer can overcome the shortcomings of laparoscopic surgery, studies focusing on abdominoperineal resection are limited. The aim of this study was to compare the operative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted from April 2010 to March 2020. Patients with rectal cancer who underwent robotic or laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection without lateral lymph node dissection were enrolled. The perioperative and oncological outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

We evaluated 33 and 20 patients in the robotic and laparoscopic groups, respectively. The median operative time and blood loss were comparable between the two groups. No significant differences in the overall complication rates were noted, whereas the rates of urinary dysfunction (3% vs. 26%, p = 0.02) and perineal wound infection (9% vs. 35%, p = 0.03) in the robotic group were significantly lower in comparison to the laparoscopic group. The median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the robotic group (8 days vs. 11 days, p < 0.01). The positive resection margin rates were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Robotic abdominoperineal resection demonstrated better short-term outcomes than laparoscopic surgery, suggesting that it could be a useful approach.

Robotic surgery for clinical T4 rectal cancer: short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical approach for clinical T4 (cT4) rectal cancer is unknown. This study was conducted to clarify short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer.

METHODS

In our retrospective cohort study, we enrolled patients who underwent robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer within 15 cm from the anal verge between 2011 and 2018. The short- and long-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of a total of 122 eligible patients, 70 (57%) had cT4a tumors and 52 (43%) had cT4b tumors. Thirty-five patients (29%) had distant metastasis and 21 (17%) underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Thirty-four patients (28%) underwent combined resection of adjacent organs and 43 (35%) underwent lateral lymph node dissection. The median operative time was 288 min and the median blood loss was 11 ml. No patients required conversion to open surgery. The incidences of postoperative complications of grades II, III, and IV or more according to the Clavien-Dindo classification were 17.2%, 3.5%, and 0%, respectively. Seventy-three patients (60%) had pathological T4 tumors, and the incidence of positive resection margins was 4.9%. The median follow-up time was 42.9 months. The 3-year overall survival, disease-free survival, and cumulative local recurrence rates were 87.5%, 70.4%, and 4.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for cT4 rectal cancer were favorable. Robotic surgery is considered to be a useful approach for cT4 rectal cancer.

Robotic-assisted resection for beyond TME rectal cancer: a novel classification and analysis from a specialized center

Locally advanced rectal cancer often requires an extended resection beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (bTME) to obtain clear resection margins. We classified three types of bTME rectal cancer following local disease diffusion: radial (adjacent pelvic organs), lateral (pelvic lateral lymph nodes) and longitudinal (below 3.5 cm from the anal verge, submitted to intersphincteric resection). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the application of robotic surgery to the three types of bTME regarding the short and long-term oncological outcomes. Secondary aim was to identify survival prognostic factors for bTME rectal cancers. A total of 137 patients who underwent robotic-assisted bTME procedures between 2008 and 2018 were extracted from a prospectively collected database. Patient-related, operative and pathological factors were assessed. Morbidity was moderately high with 66% of patients reporting postoperative complications. Median follow up was 47 months (IQR, 31.5-66.5). Local recurrence rate was 15.3% with a statistical difference between the three types of bTME (p = 0.041). Disease progression/distant metastasis rate was 33.6%. Overall survival was significantly different (p = 0.023) with 1- and 3-years rates of: 77.8% and 55.0% (radial; n = 19); 96.6% and 84.8% (lateral; n = 30); 97.7% and 86.9% (longitudinal; n = 88). No statistical difference was observed for disease-free survival (p = 0.897). Local recurrence-free survival was significantly different between the groups (p = 0.031). Multivariate analysis showed that (y)pT (p = 0.028; HR (95% CI) 5.133 (1.192-22.097)), (y)pN (p = 0.014; HR (95% CI) 2.835 (1.240-6.482)) and type of bTME were associated to OS whilst (y)pT (p = 0.072) and type of bTME were not associated to LRFS.

Effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on the immunological status of rectal cancer patients

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of chemo-radiation on the genetic and immunological status of rectal cancer patients who were treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT). The expression of immune response-associated genes was compared between rectal cancer patients treated (n = 9) and not-treated (n = 10) with preoperative CRT using volcano plot analysis. Apoptosis and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) marker genes were analysed by quantitative PCR (qPCR). Other markers associated with the tumor microenvironment (TME), such as tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) and immune checkpoint molecules, were investigated using immunohistochemistry (IHC). The clinical responses of preoperative CRT for 9 rectal cancer patients were all rated as stable disease, while the pathological tumor regression score (TRG) revealed 6 cases of grade2 and 3 cases of grade1. According to the genetic signature of colon cancers, treated tumors belonged to consensus molecular subtype (CMS)4, while not-treated tumors had signatures of CMS2 or 3. CRT-treated tumors showed significant upregulation of EMT-associated genes, such as CDH2, TGF-beta and FGF, and cancer stem cell-associated genes. Additionally, qPCR and IHC demonstrated a suppressive immunological status derived from the upregulation of inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, IL-10 and TGF-beta) and immune checkpoint genes (B7-H3 and B7-H5) and from M2-type macrophage accumulation in the tumor. The induction of EMT and immune-suppressive status in the tumor after strong CRT treatment urges the development of a novel combined therapy that restores immune-suppression and inhibits EMT, ultimately leading to distant metastasis control.

Combined robotic and cystoscopic surgery for rectal cancer invading urinary bladder

Although the application of laparoscopic rectal surgery has been widely accepted by accumulated evidence, it remains technically difficult in some cases of obesity, narrow male pelvis, bulky tumors, or involvement of adjacent organs. After robotic rectal surgery has been covered by the health insurance system in Japan since April 2018, we have employed robotic rectal surgery for an increasing number of cases by taking advantages of its 3D vision and wrist function. When a colorectal cancer involves the urinary bladder, the surgical treatment of choice is an anterior resection with en bloc (partial or total) bladder resection, depending on the site and extent of bladder involvement. In the attached video, robotic surgery was conducted with the aid of intraoperative cystoscopy, which resulted in curative resection with negative margin. Given that the robotic system provides excellent stability and dexterity for bladder reconstruction, the robotic approach can be technically suitable for locally advanced T4 colorectal cancer with urinary involvement.

Feasibility of robotic assisted bladder sparing pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer: A single institution case series

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer involving prostate has been performed via open surgery. Robotic pelvic exenteration offers benefits of better pelvic visualisation and dissection for bladder preserving prostatectomy with vesicourethral anastomosis, while achieving clear margins.

AIM

To determine the feasibility of robotic assisted bladder sparing pelvic exenteration.

METHODS

We describe robotic assisted pelvic exenteration in three cases of locally advanced rectal cancer involving prostate and seminal vesicles (SV). The da Vinci S robotic system was used. Robotic console was docked at left oblique position for abdominal phase and redocked to between the patient’s legs for pelvic phase. All three cases were performed fully robotically at Tan Tock Seng Hospital by colorectal and urological teams.

RESULTS

Case 1: 67-year-old with low rectal tumour 3cm from anal verge involving the prostate. He underwent neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and robotic abdominoperineal resection with en-bloc prostatectomy. Case 2: 66-year-old with low rectal tumour 3cm from anal verge involving prostate and bilateral SV. He underwent neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and robot assisted ultra-low anterior resection with coloanal anastomosis and en-bloc prostatectomy. Case 3: 57-year-old with metachronous rectal tumour in the rectovesical pouch inseparable from the anterior mid rectum, prostate and bilateral SV. He underwent robot assisted ultra-low anterior resection with en-bloc prostatectomy. Bladder neck margin revealed cauterized tumour cells, and he underwent total cystectomy and ileal conduit creation. Histology revealed no residual tumour. All patients are currently disease free

CONCLUSION

Robot assisted bladder sparing pelvic exenteration can be safely performed in locally advanced rectal cancer with acceptable surgical outcome while preserving benefits of minimally invasive surgery.

Resection of the urinary bladder for locally advanced colorectal cancer: a retrospective comparison of partial versus total cystectomy

Background

The postoperative and survival outcomes of patients with primary advanced colorectal cancer who undergo partial versus total cystectomy have not been adequately compared, as studies of this topic are rare and comprise relatively small cohorts. This study aimed to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent en bloc partial or total cystectomy for primary advanced colorectal cancer that was suspected of adhering to or invading the urinary bladder.

Methods

The study included 90 patients who underwent various degrees of cystectomy between 1993 and 2013 to treat locally advanced primary colorectal cancer that was suspected of involving the urinary bladder. Patients in whom total cystectomy was performed solely because of prostate-invading lower rectal cancer were excluded. Data on patient characteristics and their short- and long-term outcomes were collected retrospectively to evaluate differences between partial cystectomy (the P group; n = 72) and total cystectomy (the T group; n = 18). Postoperative and oncologic outcomes were also analyzed.

Results

The T group had significantly greater operating times than the P group (median, 572 vs. 346 min); blood loss volume was also greater in the T group (median, 3092 vs. 1112 mL). The postoperative overall complication rate was significantly greater in the T group than in the P group (94.4% vs. 51.4%). With a median follow-up duration of 62 months, local recurrences were observed in 22.2 and 6.9% of patients in the T and P groups, respectively. On multivariate Cox regression analyses using partial cystectomy as the reference, total cystectomy was independently associated with poorer local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 4.0 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–15.0), relapse-free survival (HR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.2–6.9), and overall survival (HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.0–4.3).

Conclusions

Patients who undergo en bloc total cystectomy for locally advanced colorectal cancers have worse postoperative and oncologic outcomes than those who undergo partial cystectomy.

Robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current state and future perspective

Interest in minimally invasive surgery has increased in recent decades. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) was introduced as the latest advance in minimally invasive surgery. RALS has the potential to provide better clinical outcomes in rectal cancer surgery, allowing for precise dissection in the narrow pelvic space. In addition, RALS represents an important advancement in surgical education with respect to use of the dual-console robotic surgery system. Because the public health insurance systems in Japan have covered the cost of RALS for rectal cancer since April 2018, RALS has been attracting increasingly more attention. Although no overall robust evidence has yet shown that RALS is superior to laparoscopic or open surgery, the current evidence supports the notion that technically demanding subgroups (patients with obesity, male patients, and patients treated by extended procedures) may benefit from RALS. Technological innovation is a constantly evolving field. Several companies have been developing new robotic systems that incorporate new technology. This competition among companies in the development of such systems is anticipated to lead to further improvements in patient outcomes as well as drive down the cost of RALS, which is one main concern of this new technique.