Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Few studies have compared robotic and laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) in rectal cancer. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of recently published studies to compare perioperative outcomes of ISR for the treatment of low rectal cancer.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search of the Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic ISR in patients with low rectal cancer. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from articles that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Perioperative outcomes of interest included the rate of diverting stoma, open conversion rate, operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, time to first flatus, and time to initiate the postoperative diet. Oncological outcomes included the number of retrieved lymph nodes, distal resection margin, proximal resection margin, circumferential resection margin, 3-year overall survival, 3-year disease-free survival, and local recurrence. Postoperative complications included overall complications, a Dindo-Clavien classification ≥ III, and anastomotic leakage. All outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

We included 5 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 510 patients undergoing 273 (53.5%) robotic ISR procedures and 237 (46.5%) laparoscopic ISR procedures. The robotic ISR group lower conversion rate, lower blood loss, and longer operation times than the laparoscopic group. We also noted that fewer lymph nodes were harvested in the robotic ISR group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Other outcomes were similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

Robotic and laparoscopic ISR showed comparable perioperative outcomes, functional outcomes, and 3-year oncologic outcomes; however, robotic ISR was associated with a lower conversion rate and less blood loss despite longer operation times compared to laparoscopic ISR. These findings suggest that robotic ISR maybe a safe and effective technique for treating low rectal cancer in selected patients. The potential oncologic and functional benefits of robotic ISR should be evaluated in larger randomized controlled trials.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jeong SY, Park JW, Nam BH, Kim S, Kang SB, Lim SB, Choi HS, Kim DW, Chang HJ, Kim DY, Jung KH, Kim TY, Kang GH, Chie EK, Kim SY, Sohn DK, Kim DH, Kim JS, Lee HS, Kim JH, Oh JH (2014) Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 15(7):767–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70205-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, Hewett P, Clouston AD, Gebski VJ, Davies L, Wilson K, Hague W, Simes J (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314(13):1356–1363. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.12009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Martinez-Perez A, Carra MC, Brunetti F, de’ Angelis N (2017) Pathologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 152(4):e165665. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.5665

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kang J, Yoon KJ, Min BS, Hur H, Baik SH, Kim NK, Lee KY (2013) The impact of robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer: a case-matched analysis of a 3-arm comparison--open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery. Ann Surg 257(1):95–101. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182686bbd

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH (2012) A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 19(8):2485–2493. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2262-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Scarpinata R, Aly EH (2013) Does robotic rectal cancer surgery offer improved early postoperative outcomes? Dis Colon Rectum 56(2):253–262. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182694595

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rullier E, Sa Cunha A, Couderc P, Rullier A, Gontier R, Saric J (2003) Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection with coloplasty and coloanal anastomosis for mid and low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 90(4):445–451. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4052

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lim SW, Huh JW, Kim YJ, Kim HR (2011) Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. World J Surg 35(12):2811–2817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-011-1277-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kim JC, Lim SB, Yoon YS, Park IJ, Kim CW, Kim CN (2014) Completely abdominal intersphincteric resection for lower rectal cancer: feasibility and comparison of robot-assisted and open surgery. Surg Endosc 28(9):2734–2744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3509-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Luca F, Valvo M, Guerra-Cogorno M, Simo D, Blesa-Sierra E, Biffi R, Garberoglio C (2016) Functional results of robotic total intersphincteric resection with hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis. Eur J Surg Oncol 42(6):841–847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Leong QM, Son DN, Cho JS, Baek SJ, Kwak JM, Amar AH, Kim SH (2011) Robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: technique and short-term outcome for 29 consecutive patients. Surg Endosc 25(9):2987–2992

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Park JS, Kim NK, Kim SH, Lee KY, Lee KY, Shin JY, Kim CN, Choi GS, Korean Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study G (2015) Multicentre study of robotic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg 102 (12):1567–1573

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kuo LJ, Lin YK, Chang CC, Tai CJ, Chiou JF, Chang YJ (2014) Clinical outcomes of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopy and multifactorial analysis of the learning curve for robotic surgery. Int J Color Dis 29(5):555–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Park SY, Choi GS, Park JS, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP (2013) Short-term clinical outcome of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a retrospective comparison with conventional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 27(1):48–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Baek SJ, Al-Asari S, Jeong DH, Hur H, Min BS, Baik SH, Kim NK (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic coloanal anastomosis with or without intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27(11):4157–4163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yoo BE, Cho JS, Shin JW, Lee DW, Kwak JM, Kim J, Kim SH (2015) Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison of the operative, oncological, and functional outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 22(4):1219–1225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang X, Wei Z, Bie M, Peng X, Chen C (2016) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 30(12):5601–5614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4892-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee SH, Lim S, Kim JH, Lee KY (2015) Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Treat Res 89(4):190–201. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2015.89.4.190

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Lim S, Kim JH, Baek SJ, Kim SH, Lee SH (2016) Comparison of perioperative and short-term outcomes between robotic and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colonic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Treat Res 90(6):328–339. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2016.90.6.328

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Lin S, Jiang HG, Chen ZH, Zhou SY, Liu XS, Yu JR (2011) Meta-analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of rectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 17(47):5214–5220. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i47.5214

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Kim SY, Park JE, Lee YJ, Seo HJ, Sheen SS, Hahn S, Jang BH, Son HJ (2013) Testing a tool for assessing the risk of bias for nonrandomized studies showed moderate reliability and promising validity. J Clin Epidemiol 66(4):408–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.09.016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I (2005) Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 5:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-5-13

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C, Cheng Y (2014) Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. J Surg Res 188(2):404–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2014.01.027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, Quirke P, West N, Rautio T, Thomassen N, Tilney H, Gudgeon M, Bianchi PP, Edlin R, Hulme C, Brown J (2017) Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318(16):1569–1580. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.7219

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Liao G, Zhao Z, Lin S, Li R, Yuan Y, Du S, Chen J, Deng H (2014) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of four randomized controlled trials. World J Surg Oncol 12:122. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-12-122

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Sng KK, Hara M, Shin JW, Yoo BE, Yang KS, Kim SH (2013) The multiphasic learning curve for robot-assisted rectal surgery. Surg Endosc 27(9):3297–3307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-2909-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jimenez-Rodriguez RM, Diaz-Pavon JM, de la Portilla de Juan F, Prendes-Sillero E, Dussort HC, Padillo J (2013) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Int J Color Dis 28(6):815–821. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-012-1620-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. D’Annibale A, Pernazza G, Monsellato I, Pende V, Lucandri G, Mazzocchi P, Alfano G (2013) Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27(6):1887–1895. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2731-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yamaguchi T, Kinugasa Y, Shiomi A, Sato S, Yamakawa Y, Kagawa H, Tomioka H, Mori K (2015) Learning curve for robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: use of the cumulative sum method. Surg Endosc 29(7):1679–1685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3855-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jimenez-Rodriguez RM, Rubio-Dorado-Manzanares M, Diaz-Pavon JM, Reyes-Diaz ML, Vazquez-Monchul JM, Garcia-Cabrera AM, Padillo J, De la Portilla F (2016) Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs. Int J Colorectal Dis 31(12):1807–1815. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2660-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Compton CC, Greene FL (2004) The staging of colorectal cancer: 2004 and beyond. CA Cancer J Clin 54(6):295–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Compton CC, Fielding LP, Burgart LJ, Conley B, Cooper HS, Hamilton SR, Hammond ME, Henson DE, Hutter RV, Nagle RB, Nielsen ML, Sargent DJ, Taylor CR, Welton M, Willett C (2000) Prognostic factors in colorectal cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999. Arch Pathol Lab Med 124(7):979–994. https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-9985(2000)124<0979:PFICC>2.0.CO;2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sobin LH, Greene FL (2001) TNM classification: clarification of number of regional lymph nodes for pNo. Cancer 92(2):452. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20010715)92:2<452::AID-CNCR1342>3.0.CO;2-B

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Park SY, Choi GS, Park JS, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP, Yun SH (2014) Urinary and erectile function in men after total mesorectal excision by laparoscopic or robot-assisted methods for the treatment of rectal cancer: a case-matched comparison. World J Surg 38(7):1834–1842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2419-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kim HJ, Choi GS, Park JS, Park SY, Yang CS, Lee HJ (2018) The impact of robotic surgery on quality of life, urinary and sexual function following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis with laparoscopic surgery. Color Dis 20(5):O103–O113. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.14051

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Panteleimonitis S, Ahmed J, Ramachandra M, Farooq M, Harper M, Parvaiz A (2017) Urogenital function in robotic vs laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a comparative study. Int J Color Dis 32(2):241–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2682-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Baek JH, McKenzie S, Garcia-Aguilar J, Pigazzi A (2010) Oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg 251(5):882–886. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181c79114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kim J, Baek SJ, Kang DW, Roh YE, Lee JW, Kwak HD, Kwak JM, Kim SH (2017) Robotic resection is a good prognostic factor in rectal cancer compared with laparoscopic resection: long-term survival analysis using propensity score matching. Dis Colon rectum 60(3):266–273. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000770

  40. Baek JH, Pastor C, Pigazzi A (2011) Robotic and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched study. Surg Endosc 25(2):521–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1204-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Baek SJ, Kim SH, Cho JS, Shin JW, Kim J (2012) Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a cost analysis from a single institute in Korea. World J Surg 36(11):2722–2729. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1728-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by the Hallym University Research Fund (HURF-2016-07).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nursing Science, College of Nursing, Gachon University, Hambakmoe-ro, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, South Korea

    Seon Heui Lee

  2. Department of Colorectal Surgery, University of Hallym College of Medicine, Hallym University Sacred Heart Hospital, 22 Gwanpyeong-ro 170-gil, Dongan-gu, Anyang, 14068, Republic of Korea

    Dong Hyun Kim & Sang Woo Lim

Authors
  1. Seon Heui Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dong Hyun Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sang Woo Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sang Woo Lim.

Ethics declarations

We the authors, Drs. Lee Seon Heui, Kim Dong Hyun, and Lim Sang Woo, have complied with all applicable ethical standards.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, S.H., Kim, D.H. & Lim, S.W. Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 33, 1741–1753 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-018-3145-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-018-3145-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation