Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 13/2018

01-12-2018 | Colorectal Cancer

Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Patients with Colorectal Cancer

Authors: Ismail Pinar, MD, Tina Fransgaard, MD, Lau C. Thygesen, PhD, Ismail Gögenur, DMSc

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 13/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Robotic technology has been proven to be a safe alternative to conventional laparoscopy with regards to the peri- and postoperative clinical outcomes. Oncological outcomes have been scarcely examined. The purpose of this study was to examine the disease-free survival in relation to the two surgical approaches: robot-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopy. In addition, all-cause mortality and recurrence-free survival were investigated.

Methods

Between January 2010 and December 2015, patients, undergoing either laparoscopic or robot-assisted elective, curative-intended surgery for colorectal cancer were included.

Results

A total of 9184 patients underwent surgery in the study period: 5978 patients for colon cancer and 3206 patients for rectal cancer. Among patients with colon cancer, 331 patients (5.5%) underwent robot-assisted surgery, and 449 patients (14.0%) underwent robot-assisted surgery in the rectal cancer group. In the adjusted analyses, the hazard ratio (HR) for disease-free survival, for patients with colon cancer was 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71–1.18]. For patients with rectal cancer, the adjusted HR was 0.83 (95% CI 0.65–1.06). No difference in all-cause mortality and recurrence-free survival were observed.

Conclusions

The study demonstrated comparable rates of disease-free survival, all-cause mortality, and recurrence-free survival when comparing robot-assisted surgery with conventional laparoscopy in patients with colorectal cancer.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Crawford DL. Telerobotic surgery for right and sigmoid colectomies: 30 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc. 2006;20:1713–8.CrossRef Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Crawford DL. Telerobotic surgery for right and sigmoid colectomies: 30 consecutive cases. Surg Endosc. 2006;20:1713–8.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Stylopoulos N, Rattner D. Robotics and ergonomics. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83:1321–37.CrossRef Stylopoulos N, Rattner D. Robotics and ergonomics. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83:1321–37.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Germay O, et al. Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg. 2001;25:1467–77.PubMed Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Germay O, et al. Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg. 2001;25:1467–77.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Trastulli S, Cirocchi R, Desiderio J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic approach in colonic resections for cancer and benign diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0134062.CrossRef Trastulli S, Cirocchi R, Desiderio J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic approach in colonic resections for cancer and benign diseases: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0134062.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC. Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:458–66.CrossRef Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC. Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56:458–66.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3727–36.CrossRef Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3727–36.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ, Marecik SJ, Blumetti J, Abcarian H. Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53:1000–6.CrossRef deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ, Marecik SJ, Blumetti J, Abcarian H. Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53:1000–6.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP. Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg. 2012;99:1219–26.CrossRef Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP. Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg. 2012;99:1219–26.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Kim J, Baek SJ, Kang DW, et al. 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. 2017;60:266–73.PubMed Kim J, Baek SJ, Kang DW, et al. 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. 2017;60:266–73.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Lim DR, Bae SU, Hur H, et al. Long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:1728–37.CrossRef Lim DR, Bae SU, Hur H, et al. Long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:1728–37.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Wilder FG, Burnett A, Oliver J, Demyen MF, Chokshi RJ. A review of the long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Indian J Surg. 2016;78:214–9.CrossRef Wilder FG, Burnett A, Oliver J, Demyen MF, Chokshi RJ. A review of the long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Indian J Surg. 2016;78:214–9.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, et al. Short and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94:e522.CrossRef Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, et al. Short and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015;94:e522.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2015;261:129–37.CrossRef Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2015;261:129–37.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Thygesen LC, Daasnes C, Thaulow I, Bronnum-Hansen H. Introduction to Danish (nationwide) registers on health and social issues: structure, access, legislation, and archiving. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39:12–6.CrossRef Thygesen LC, Daasnes C, Thaulow I, Bronnum-Hansen H. Introduction to Danish (nationwide) registers on health and social issues: structure, access, legislation, and archiving. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39:12–6.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Pedersen CB, Gotzsche H, Moller JO, Mortensen PB. The Danish Civil Registration System. A cohort of eight million persons. Dan Med Bull. 2006;53:441–9. Pedersen CB, Gotzsche H, Moller JO, Mortensen PB. The Danish Civil Registration System. A cohort of eight million persons. Dan Med Bull. 2006;53:441–9.
17.
go back to reference Lynge E, Sandegaard JL, Rebolj M. The Danish National Patient Register. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39:30–3.CrossRef Lynge E, Sandegaard JL, Rebolj M. The Danish National Patient Register. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39:30–3.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Lash TL, Riis AH, Ostenfeld EB, Erichsen R, Vyberg M, Thorlacius-Ussing O. A validated algorithm to ascertain colorectal cancer recurrence using registry resources in Denmark. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:2210–5.CrossRef Lash TL, Riis AH, Ostenfeld EB, Erichsen R, Vyberg M, Thorlacius-Ussing O. A validated algorithm to ascertain colorectal cancer recurrence using registry resources in Denmark. Int J Cancer. 2015;136:2210–5.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:W163–94.CrossRef Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:W163–94.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Lim DR, Min BS, Kim MS, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection of sigmoid colon cancer: comparative study of long-term oncologic outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1379–85.CrossRef Lim DR, Min BS, Kim MS, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection of sigmoid colon cancer: comparative study of long-term oncologic outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:1379–85.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J, et al. Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2009;373:821–8.CrossRef Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J, et al. Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2009;373:821–8.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, et al. 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. 2017;318:1569–80.CrossRef Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, et al. 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. 2017;318:1569–80.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Fransgaard T, Pinar I, Thygesen LC, Gögenur I. Association between robot-assisted surgery and resection quality in patients with colorectal cancer. Surg Oncol. 2018;27:177–84.CrossRef Fransgaard T, Pinar I, Thygesen LC, Gögenur I. Association between robot-assisted surgery and resection quality in patients with colorectal cancer. Surg Oncol. 2018;27:177–84.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Tam MS, Kaoutzanis C, Mullard AJ, et al. A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:455–63.CrossRef Tam MS, Kaoutzanis C, Mullard AJ, et al. A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:455–63.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Long-Term Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Surgery in Patients with Colorectal Cancer
Authors
Ismail Pinar, MD
Tina Fransgaard, MD
Lau C. Thygesen, PhD
Ismail Gögenur, DMSc
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 13/2018
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6862-2

Other articles of this Issue 13/2018

Annals of Surgical Oncology 13/2018 Go to the issue