Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery 1/2024

01-12-2024 | Rectal Cancer | Research

Sphincter-preserving effect of robotic-assisted intersphincteric resection for ultra-low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

Authors: Longhe Sun, Jiajie Zhou, Lili Ji, Shuai Zhao, Ruiqi Li, Yayan Fu, Wei Wang, Chunhua Qian, Qiannan Sun, Daorong Wang

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is a viable option for sphincter preservation in early ultra-low rectal cancer, but postoperative anal dysfunction remains a concern. This study evaluates the outcomes of robotic ISR with coloanal anastomosis in early ultra-low rectal cancer, comparing its efficacy and safety with laparoscopic ISR. Retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 74 consecutive patients undergoing robotic intersphincteric resection (R-ISR) for early ultra-low rectal cancer between January 2017 and December 2018 (R-ISR group), matched with 110 patients undergoing laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (L-ISR). After 1:1 propensity score matching, each group comprised 68 patients. Comparative analyses covered surgical outcomes, complications, long-term results, and anal function. The R-ISR group showed longer total operative time than the L-ISR group (211.7 ± 25.3 min vs. 191.2 ± 23.0 min, p = 0.001), but less intraoperative bleeding (55.2 ± 20.7 ml vs. 69.2 ± 22.9 ml, p = 0.01). R-ISR group had fewer conversions to APR surgery (6/8.8% vs. 14/20.6%). Other perioperative indicators were similar. R-ISR exhibited a smaller tumor margin, superior mesorectal integrity, and comparable histopathological outcomes. Postoperative complications, 3-year and 5-year DFS, and OS were similar. At the 1-year follow-up, the Wexner Incontinence Score favored R-ISR (9.24 ± 4.03 vs. 11.06 ± 3.77, p = 0.048). Although R-ISR prolongs the operative time, its surgical safety and oncological outcomes are similar to conventional ISR procedures. Furthermore, it further shortens the margin of anal preservation, reduces the rate of conversion to APR surgery, and improves postoperative anal function.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Siegel RL et al (2020) Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020. CA A Cancer J Clin 70:145–164CrossRef Siegel RL et al (2020) Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020. CA A Cancer J Clin 70:145–164CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Bonjer HJ et al (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332CrossRefPubMed Bonjer HJ et al (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Jiang W-Z et al (2022) Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 8:1607–1615CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jiang W-Z et al (2022) Short-term Outcomes of Laparoscopy-Assisted vs Open Surgery for Patients With Low Rectal Cancer: The LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 8:1607–1615CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Ito M et al (2009) Analysis of Clinical Factors Associated with Anal Function after Intersphincteric Resection for Very Low Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 52:64–70CrossRefPubMed Ito M et al (2009) Analysis of Clinical Factors Associated with Anal Function after Intersphincteric Resection for Very Low Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 52:64–70CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Piozzi GN et al (2021) Anatomic Landmarks for Transabdominal Robotic-Assisted Intersphincteric Dissection for Ultralow Anterior Resection. Dis Colon Rectum 64:e87–e88CrossRefPubMed Piozzi GN et al (2021) Anatomic Landmarks for Transabdominal Robotic-Assisted Intersphincteric Dissection for Ultralow Anterior Resection. Dis Colon Rectum 64:e87–e88CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Akagi Y, Kinugasa T, Shirouzu K (2013) Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: a systematic review. Surg Today 43:838–847CrossRefPubMed Akagi Y, Kinugasa T, Shirouzu K (2013) Intersphincteric resection for very low rectal cancer: a systematic review. Surg Today 43:838–847CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Miskovic D, Ni M, Wyles SM, Tekkis P, Hanna GB (2012) Learning Curve and Case Selection in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: Systematic Review and International Multicenter Analysis of 4852 Cases. Dis Colon Rectum 55:1300–1310CrossRefPubMed Miskovic D, Ni M, Wyles SM, Tekkis P, Hanna GB (2012) Learning Curve and Case Selection in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: Systematic Review and International Multicenter Analysis of 4852 Cases. Dis Colon Rectum 55:1300–1310CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Kang J et al (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 257:95–101CrossRefPubMed Kang J et al (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 257:95–101CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Wang G et al. (2017) Male urinary and sexual function after robotic pelvic autonomic nerve-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Int J Med Robot 13 Wang G et al. (2017) Male urinary and sexual function after robotic pelvic autonomic nerve-preserving surgery for rectal cancer. Int J Med Robot 13
10.
go back to reference Kojima T et al (2022) Comparison between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 6:643–650CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kojima T et al (2022) Comparison between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving operations for ultra-low rectal cancer. Ann Gastroenterol Surg 6:643–650CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Wexner SD (2021) Further validation of the Wexner Incontinence Score: A note of appreciation and gratitude. Surgery 170:53–54CrossRefPubMed Wexner SD (2021) Further validation of the Wexner Incontinence Score: A note of appreciation and gratitude. Surgery 170:53–54CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Kirwan WO, Turnbull RB, Fazio VW, Weakley FL (1978) Pullthrough operation with delayed anastomosis for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 65:695–698CrossRefPubMed Kirwan WO, Turnbull RB, Fazio VW, Weakley FL (1978) Pullthrough operation with delayed anastomosis for rectal cancer. Br J Surg 65:695–698CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Juul T et al (2014) International validation of the low anterior resection syndrome score. Ann Surg 259:728–734CrossRefPubMed Juul T et al (2014) International validation of the low anterior resection syndrome score. Ann Surg 259:728–734CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Aliyev V et al (2022) Robotic vs. laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a case matched study reporting a median of 7-year long-term oncological and functional outcomes. Updates Surg 74:1851–1860CrossRefPubMed Aliyev V et al (2022) Robotic vs. laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a case matched study reporting a median of 7-year long-term oncological and functional outcomes. Updates Surg 74:1851–1860CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Luca F et al (2016) Functional results of robotic total intersphincteric resection with hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis. Eur J Surg Oncol 42:841–847CrossRefPubMed Luca F et al (2016) Functional results of robotic total intersphincteric resection with hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis. Eur J Surg Oncol 42:841–847CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD (1982) The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery–the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg 69:613–616CrossRefPubMed Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD (1982) The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery–the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg 69:613–616CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Aslaner A et al (2022) Comparison of robotic-assisted resection alone and with natural orifice specimen extraction for rectal cancer by using Da Vinci Xi. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 26:6665–6670PubMed Aslaner A et al (2022) Comparison of robotic-assisted resection alone and with natural orifice specimen extraction for rectal cancer by using Da Vinci Xi. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 26:6665–6670PubMed
21.
go back to reference Baek S-J, Piozzi GN, Kim S-H (2021) Optimizing outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery with robotic platforms. Surg Oncol 37:101559CrossRefPubMed Baek S-J, Piozzi GN, Kim S-H (2021) Optimizing outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery with robotic platforms. Surg Oncol 37:101559CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Baek SJ et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic coloanal anastomosis with or without intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27:4157–4163CrossRefPubMed Baek SJ et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic coloanal anastomosis with or without intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27:4157–4163CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Lee SH, Kim DH, Lim SW (2018) Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 33:1741–1753CrossRefPubMed Lee SH, Kim DH, Lim SW (2018) Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 33:1741–1753CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Liu J et al (2021) Nomogram for Predicting the Probability of Permanent Stoma after Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection. J Gastrointest Surg 25:3218–3229CrossRefPubMed Liu J et al (2021) Nomogram for Predicting the Probability of Permanent Stoma after Laparoscopic Intersphincteric Resection. J Gastrointest Surg 25:3218–3229CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Stelzner S et al (2018) Internal anal sphincter nerves - a macroanatomical and microscopic description of the extrinsic autonomic nerve supply of the internal anal sphincter. Colorectal Dis 20:O7–O16CrossRefPubMed Stelzner S et al (2018) Internal anal sphincter nerves - a macroanatomical and microscopic description of the extrinsic autonomic nerve supply of the internal anal sphincter. Colorectal Dis 20:O7–O16CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Belloni E et al (2022) The role of indocyanine green fluorescence in rectal cancer robotic surgery: a narrative review. Cancers (Basel) 14:2411CrossRefPubMed Belloni E et al (2022) The role of indocyanine green fluorescence in rectal cancer robotic surgery: a narrative review. Cancers (Basel) 14:2411CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Saito N et al (2004) Early results of intersphincteric resection for patients with very low rectal cancer: an active approach to avoid a permanent colostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 47:459–466CrossRefPubMed Saito N et al (2004) Early results of intersphincteric resection for patients with very low rectal cancer: an active approach to avoid a permanent colostomy. Dis Colon Rectum 47:459–466CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Sphincter-preserving effect of robotic-assisted intersphincteric resection for ultra-low rectal cancer: a propensity score matching analysis
Authors
Longhe Sun
Jiajie Zhou
Lili Ji
Shuai Zhao
Ruiqi Li
Yayan Fu
Wei Wang
Chunhua Qian
Qiannan Sun
Daorong Wang
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-01826-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Journal of Robotic Surgery 1/2024 Go to the issue