Top

Surgical Endoscopy

Published in:

01-06-2017

Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis

Authors: Scott C. Dolejs, Joshua A. Waters, Eugene P. Ceppa, Ben L. Zarzaur

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 6/2017

Abstract

Introduction

Robotic colorectal surgery is being increasingly adopted. Our objective was to compare early postoperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic colectomy in a nationally representative sample.

Methods

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Colectomy Targeted Dataset from 2012 to 2014 was used for this study. Adult patients undergoing elective colectomy with an anastomosis were included. Patients were stratified based on location of colorectal resection (low anterior resection (LAR), left-sided resection, or right-sided resection). Bivariate data analysis was performed, and logistic regression modeling was conducted to calculate risk-adjusted 30-day outcomes.

Results

There were a total of 25,998 laparoscopic colectomies (30 % LAR’s, 45 % left-sided, and 25 % right-sided) and 1484 robotic colectomies (54 % LAR’s, 28 % left-sided, and 18 % right-sided). The risk-adjusted overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality were similar between laparoscopic and robotic approaches in all anastomotic groups. Patients undergoing robotic LAR had a lower conversion rate (OR 0.47, 95 % CI 1.20–1.76) and postoperative sepsis rate (OR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.29–0.85) but a higher rate of diverting ostomies (OR 1.45, 95 % CI 1.20–1.76). Robotic right-sided colectomies had significantly lower conversion rates (OR 0.58, 95 % CI 0.34–0.96). Robotic colectomy in all groups was associated with a longer operative time (by 40 min) and a decreased length of stay (by 0.5 days).

Conclusions

In a nationally representative sample comparing laparoscopic and robotic colectomies, the overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality between groups are similar while length of stay was shorter by 0.5 days in the robotic colectomy group. Robotic LAR was associated with lower conversion rates and lower septic complications. However, robotic LAR is also associated with a significantly higher rate of diverting ostomy. The reason for this relationship is unclear. Surgeon factors, patient factors, and technical factors should be considered in future studies.

Available only for authorised users

Patel SV, Van Koughnett JA, Howe B, Wexner SD (2015) Spin is common in studies assessing robotic colorectal surgery: an assessment of reporting and interpretation of study results. Dis Colon Rectum 58(9):878–884. doi:10.1097/DCR.0000000000000425 CrossRefPubMed

Wright JD, Tergas AI, Hou JY et al (2016) Effect of regional hospital competition and hospital financial status on the use of robotic-assisted surgery. JAMA Surg. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2015.5508

Zarak A, Castillo A, Kichler K, de la Cruz L, Tamariz L, Kaza S (2015) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colonic disease: a meta-analysis of postoperative variables. Surg Endosc 29(6):1341–1347. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4197-7 CrossRefPubMed

Zerey M, Hawver LM, Awad Z, Stefanidis D, Richardson W, Fanelli RD, Members of the SGC (2013) SAGES evidence-based guidelines for the laparoscopic resection of curable colon and rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27(1):1–10. doi:10.1007/s00464-012-2592-x CrossRefPubMed

Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, Shi C, Zou Y, Qin H, Ma Y (2012) Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 19(12):3727–3736. doi:10.1245/s10434-012-2429-9 CrossRefPubMed

Xu H, Li J, Sun Y, Li Z, Zhen Y, Wang B, Xu Z (2014) Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol 12:274. doi:10.1186/1477-7819-12-274 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Wormer BA, Dacey KT, Williams KB, Bradley JF 3rd, Walters AL, Augenstein VA, Stefanidis D, Heniford BT (2014) The first nationwide evaluation of robotic general surgery: a regionalized, small but safe start. Surg Endosc 28(3):767–776. doi:10.1007/s00464-013-3239-2 CrossRefPubMed

Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R, Cavaliere D, Avenia N, Sciannameo F, Gulla N, Noya G, Boselli C (2012) Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis 14(4):e134–e156. doi:10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02907.x CrossRefPubMed

Tam MS, Kaoutzanis C, Mullard AJ, Regenbogen SE, Franz MG, Hendren S, Krapohl G, Vandewarker JF, Lampman RM, Cleary RK (2015) A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4218-6

10.

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

11.

Rencuzogullari A, Gorgun E (2015) Robotic rectal surgery. J Surg Oncol 112(3):326–331. doi:10.1002/jso.23956 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC (2013) Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum 56(4):458–466. doi:10.1097/DCR.0b013e31827085ec CrossRefPubMed

13.

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. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2014.01.027 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP (2012) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg 99(9):1219–1226. doi:10.1002/bjs.8841 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Derrick J (2015) Everyone’s talking about ROLARR heading into intuitive surgical earnings: here’s what it means. Yahoo! Finance. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/everyones-talking-rolarr-heading-intuitive-173129658.html. Accessed 26 Feb 2016

16.

Wexner S (2015) Robotic versus laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/robotic-versus-laparoscopic-resection-rectal-cancer-steven. Accessed 26 Feb 2016

17.

Shiloach M, Frencher SK Jr, Steeger JE, Rowell KS, Bartzokis K, Tomeh MG, Richards KE, Ko CY, Hall BL (2010) Toward robust information: data quality and inter-rater reliability in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg 210(1):6–16. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.09.031 CrossRefPubMed

18.

Miller PE, Dao H, Paluvoi N, Bailey M, Margolin D, Shah N, Vargas D (2016) Comparison of 30-day postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy. J Am Coll Surg. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2016.03.041

19.

Ezekian B, Sun Z, Adam MA, Kim J, Turner MC, Gilmore BF, Ong CT, Mantyh CR, Migaly J (2016) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic colectomy results in increased operative time without improved perioperative outcomes. J Gastrointest Surg. doi:10.1007/s11605-016-3124-0

20.

Bhama AR, Obias V, Welch KB, Vandewarker JF, Cleary RK (2015) A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4381-9 PubMed

21.

Classification of Overweight and Obesity by BMI, Waist Circumference, and Associated Disease Risks. (2015) National Institutes of Health. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmi_dis.htm. Accessed 26 Jan 2016

22.

Morris MS, Graham LA, Chu DI, Cannon JA, Hawn MT (2015) Oral antibiotic bowel preparation significantly reduces surgical site infection rates and readmission rates in elective colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 261(6):1034–1040. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001125 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Scarborough JE, Mantyh CR, Sun Z, Migaly J (2015) Combined mechanical and oral antibiotic bowel preparation reduces incisional surgical site infection and anastomotic leak rates after elective colorectal resection: an analysis of colectomy-targeted ACS NSQIP. Ann Surg 262(2):331–337. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001041 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Reichenbach DJ, Tackett AD, Harris J, Camacho D, Graviss EA, Dewan B, Vavra A, Stiles A, Fisher WE, Brunicardi FC, Sweeney JF (2006) Laparoscopic colon resection early in the learning curve: What is the appropriate setting? Ann Surg 243(6):730–735; discussion 735–737. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000220039.26524.fa

25.

Nfonsam V, Aziz H, Pandit V, Khalil M, Jandova J, Joseph B (2016) Analyzing clinical outcomes in laparoscopic right versus left colectomy in colon cancer patients using the NSQIP database. Cancer Treat Commun 8:1–4. doi:10.1016/j.ctrc.2016.03.006 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Tekkis PP, Senagore AJ, Delaney CP, Fazio VW (2005) Evaluation of the learning curve in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: comparison of right-sided and left-sided resections. Ann Surg 242(1):83–91CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Dincler S, Koller MT, Steurer J, Bachmann LM, Christen D, Buchmann P (2003) Multidimensional analysis of learning curves in laparoscopic sigmoid resection: eight-year results. Dis Colon Rectum 46(10):1371–1378; discussion 1378–1379. doi:10.1097/01.dcr.0000089054.22223.41

28.

Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, Min BS, Baik SH, Lee KY, Kim NK (2015) Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 261(1):129–137. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000613 CrossRefPubMed

29.

Kim CW, Baik SH, Roh YH, Kang J, Hur H, Min BS, Lee KY, Kim NK (2015) Cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery for rectal cancer focusing on short-term outcomes: a propensity score-matching analysis. Medicine 94(22):e823. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000000823 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Juo YY, Hyder O, Haider AH, Camp M, Lidor A, Ahuja N (2014) Is minimally invasive colon resection better than traditional approaches? First comprehensive national examination with propensity score matching. JAMA Surg 149(2):177–184. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3660 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Baik SH, Kim NK, Lim DR, Hur H, Min BS, Lee KY (2013) Oncologic outcomes and perioperative clinicopathologic results after robot-assisted tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 20(8):2625–2632. doi:10.1245/s10434-013-2895-8 CrossRefPubMed

32.

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. doi:10.1007/s00464-013-2909-4 CrossRefPubMed

Title: Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis
Authors: Scott C. Dolejs
Joshua A. Waters
Eugene P. Ceppa
Ben L. Zarzaur
Publication date: 01-06-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 6/2017
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5239-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2017

Outcomes of Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) mastery training standards applied to an ergonomically different, lower cost platform

Assessment of treatment options for rectosigmoid cancer: single-incision plus one port laparoscopic surgery, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, and conventional laparoscopic surgery

The effect of tobacco use on outcomes of laparoscopic and open ventral hernia repairs: a review of the NSQIP dataset

Postoperative day one neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a predictor of 30-day outcomes in bariatric surgery patients

Annual colonoscopy volume and maintenance of competency for surgeons

Ten-year outcomes of a randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for colon cancer