Abdelsamad, A. (2022). Robotic-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in treatment of T2 and T3 rectal cancer. Benha Medical Journal, 39(1), 75-94. doi: 10.21608/bmfj.2021.18443.1109
Ahmed Abdelsamad. "Robotic-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in treatment of T2 and T3 rectal cancer". Benha Medical Journal, 39, 1, 2022, 75-94. doi: 10.21608/bmfj.2021.18443.1109
Abdelsamad, A. (2022). 'Robotic-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in treatment of T2 and T3 rectal cancer', Benha Medical Journal, 39(1), pp. 75-94. doi: 10.21608/bmfj.2021.18443.1109
Abdelsamad, A. Robotic-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in treatment of T2 and T3 rectal cancer. Benha Medical Journal, 2022; 39(1): 75-94. doi: 10.21608/bmfj.2021.18443.1109
Robotic-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in treatment of T2 and T3 rectal cancer
Gastrointestinal surgery department, Elisabeth Hospital, Kassel, Germany
Abstract
Background Several randomized trials have demonstrated that robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is safe and can accelerate recovery without compromising the oncological outcomes. The goal of the study is to compare short- and long-term outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer patients.
Methods From January 2014 to October 2018 at Klinikum Magdeburg, Germany, 46 patients with rectal cancer were operated using the robotic approach (RRR). Another 28 patients were operated using the laparoscopic approach (LRR) and matched to patients in the robotic group by sex, age, BMI, Tumor-stage and procedure. The patients in (RRR group) were further subdivided into five subgroups and compared according to the sequential order of their procedures per year to assess the effect of learning curve.
Results The operative times were longer with robotic resections (P=.001). The time to resumption of a soft diet was approximately 1 day prolonged and length of stay was 2 to 3 days longer in LRR group, although these results were not significant. No significant differences were observed in the complication rates, short- and long-term outcomes between both groups.
Conclusion The robotic surgery for rectal cancer patients is safe and feasible. Furthermore, the results indicated that the perioperative outcomes of robotic surgery may be comparable to those of laparoscopic surgery. Although the robotic approach may offer potential advantages for rectal surgery, comparable short- and long-term outcomes may be achieved when laparoscopic surgery is performed by experienced surgeons.
Top