Top

Published in:

01-02-2019

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) with the newest robotic surgical platform: a multi-institutional North American experience

Authors: Shanglei Liu, Toshiaki Suzuki, Bryce W. Murray, Lisa Parry, Craig S. Johnson, Santiago Horgan, Sonia Ramamoorthy, Samuel Eisenstein

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2019

Abstract

Background

Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) offers intra-luminal full-thickness excision of rectal neoplasia. Robotic TAMIS (RT) allows for greater versatility in motion while operating in the limited space of the rectum. We present our experience with this technique in practice using the DaVinci Xi™ platform.

Method

This is a multi-institutional retrospective analysis for patient undergoing Robotic TAMIS for resection of rectal lesions at two tertiary referral hospitals in the United States. Morbidity, mortality, anatomic measurement, and final pathology were analyzed.

Results

Thirty-four patients planned for Robotic TAMIS were identified. Average follow-up was 188 days. The average BMI was 29.5 ± 5.9. All patients had an American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) Class of 2 or greater and 21 (62%) were ASA 3 or greater. Rectal lesions located from 2 to 15 cm from the dentate line were successfully resected. Lesions up to 4.5 cm in the longest dimension were successfully resected. The average operative time was 100 ± 70 min, which correlated to a robotic console time of 76 ± 67 min. Patients were placed in Lithotomy in 32 (94%) cases and were prone in only 2 (6%) cases. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions to another technique. The only postoperative complication was a medically managed Clostridium difficile infection in 1 patient. Three patients were upstaged to T2 on final pathology and underwent successful formal resections. BMI was a statistically significant predictor of a longer operation.

Conclusions

With increased reach and operative range of motion, Robotic TAMIS is a safe and effective method for excising low-risk rectal neoplasia with a wide range of anatomical measurements. Higher BMI is a significant predictor of a longer and likely more challenging operation.

Buess G, Kipfmuller K, Hack D et al (1988) Technique of transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Surg Endosc 2:71–75CrossRefPubMed

Buess G, Hutterer F, Theiss J et al (1984) A system for a transanal endoscopic rectum operation. Chirurg 55(10):677–680 (in German)PubMed

Allaix ME, Arezzo A, Caldart M et al (2009) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal neoplasms: experience of 300 consecutive cases. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1831–1836CrossRefPubMed

Guerrieri M, Baldarelli M, Organetti L et al (2008) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for the treatment of selected patients with distal rectal cancer: 15 years experience. Surg Endosc 22(9):2030–2035CrossRefPubMed

Doornebosch PG, Tollenaar RA, Gosselink MP et al (2007) Quality of life after transanal endoscopic microsurgery and total mesorectal excision in early rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 9(6):553–558CrossRefPubMed

Lin GL, Meng WC, Lau PY et al (2006) Local resection for early rectal tumours: comparative study of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) versus posterior trans-sphincteric approach (Mason’s operation). Asian J Surg 29(4):227–232CrossRefPubMed

Winde G, Nottberg H, Keller R et al (1996) Surgical cure for early rectal carcinomas (T1). Transanal endoscopic microsurgery vs. anterior resection. Dis Colon Rectum 39(9):969–976CrossRefPubMed

Middleton PF, Sutherland LM, Maddern GJ (2005) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 48(2):270–284CrossRefPubMed

Papagrigoriadis S (2006) Transanal endoscopic micro-surgery (TEMS) for the management of large or sessile rectal adenomas: a review of the technique and indications. Int Semin Surg Oncol 3:13CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Maslekar S, Pillinger SH, Sharma A et al (2007) Cost analysis of transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal tumours. Colorectal Dis 9(3):229–234CrossRefPubMed

11.

Atallah S, Albert M, Larach S (2010) Transanal minimally invasive surgery: a giant leap forward. Surg Endosc 24(9):2200–2205CrossRefPubMed

12.

Lim SB, Seo SI, Lee JL et al (2012) Feasibility of transanal minimally invasive surgery for mid-rectal lesions. Surg Endosc 26(11):3127–3132CrossRefPubMed

13.

Barendse RM, Doornebosch PG, Bemelman WA et al (2012) Transanal employment of single access ports is feasible for rectal surgery. Ann Surg 256(6):1030–1033CrossRefPubMed

14.

Lorenz C, Nimmesgern T, Back M et al (2010) Transanal single port microsurgery (TSPM) as a modified technique of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Surg Innov 17(2):160–163CrossRefPubMed

15.

Hideki K, Chiharu I (2012) Mechanical analysis of the formation of forceps and scope for single-port laparoscopic surgery. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 22(4):e168–e175CrossRef

16.

Hompes R, Rauh SM, Hagen ME et al (2012) Preclinical cadaveric study of transanal endoscopic da Vinci® surgery. Br J Surg 99(8):1144–1148CrossRefPubMed

17.

Atallah SB, Albert MR, deBeche-Adams TH et al (2011) Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery in a cadaveric model. Tech Coloproctol 15(4):461–464CrossRefPubMed

18.

Bardakcioglu O (2013) Robotic transanal access surgery. Surg Endosc 27(4):1407–1409CrossRefPubMed

19.

Hompes R, Rauh SM, Ris F et al (2014) Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery for local excision of rectal neoplasms. Br J Surg 101(5):578–581CrossRefPubMed

20.

Atallah S, Quinteros F, Martin-Perez B et al (2014) Robotic transanal surgery for local excision of rectal neoplasms. J Robot Surg 8(2):193–194CrossRefPubMed

21.

Vallribera Valls F, Espín Bassany E, Jiménez-Gómez LM et al (2014) Robotic transanal endoscopic microsurgery in benign rectal tumour. J Robot Surg 8(3):277–280CrossRefPubMed

22.

Ruiz MG, Parra IM, Palazuelos CM et al (2015) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a prospective pilot study. Dis Colon Rectum 58(1):145–153. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000265 CrossRef

23.

Patel MN, Hemal A (2017) Does advancing technology improve outcomes? Comparison of the da Vinci Standard/S/Si to the Xi robotic platforms during robotic nephroureterectomy. J Endourol 27157(336):end.2017.0477. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0477 CrossRef

Title: Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) with the newest robotic surgical platform: a multi-institutional North American experience
Authors: Shanglei Liu
Toshiaki Suzuki
Bryce W. Murray
Lisa Parry
Craig S. Johnson
Santiago Horgan
Sonia Ramamoorthy
Samuel Eisenstein
Publication date: 01-02-2019
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6329-3

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) with the newest robotic surgical platform: a multi-institutional North American experience

Abstract

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Professional fee payments by specialty for inpatient open ventral hernia repair: who gets paid for treating comorbidities and complications?

A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity

Surgical techniques for advanced transverse colon cancer using the pincer approach of the transverse mesocolon

Efficacy and safety of an internal magnet traction device for endoscopic submucosal dissection: ex vivo study in a porcine model (with video)

Surgeon leadership style and risk-adjusted patient outcomes

EUS-guided irreversible electroporation using endoscopic needle-electrode in porcine pancreas