BACKGROUND Rectal cancer ranks as the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide,necessitating surgical resection as the sole treatment option.Over the years,there has been a growing adoption of minima...BACKGROUND Rectal cancer ranks as the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide,necessitating surgical resection as the sole treatment option.Over the years,there has been a growing adoption of minimally invasive surgical techni-ques such as robotic and laparoscopic approaches.Robotic surgery represents an innovative modality that effectively addresses the limitations associated with traditional laparoscopic techniques.While previous studies have reported favo-rable perioperative outcomes for robot-assisted radical resection in rectal cancer patients,further evidence regarding its oncological safety is still warranted.AIM To conduct a comparative analysis of perioperative and oncological outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted low anterior resection(LALAR)procedures.METHODS The clinical data of 125 patients who underwent robot-assisted low anterior resection(RALAR)and 279 patients who underwent LALAR resection at Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University from December 2019 to November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed.After performing a 1:1 propensity score matching,the patients were divided into two groups:The RALAR group and the LALAR group(111 cases in each group).Subsequently,a comparison was made between the short-term outcomes within 30 d after surgery and the 3-year survival outcomes of these two groups.RESULTS Compared to the LALAR group,the RALAR group exhibited a significantly earlier time to first flatus[2(2-2)d vs 3(3-3)d,P=0.000],as well as a shorter time to first fluid diet[4(3-4)d vs 5(4-6)d,P=0.001].Additionally,the RALAR group demonstrated reduced postoperative indwelling catheter time[2(1-3)d vs 4(3-5)d,P=0.000]and decreased length of hospital stay after surgery[5(5-7)d vs 7(6-8)d,P=0.009].Moreover,there was an observed increase in total cost of hospitalization for the RALAR group compared to the LALAR group[10777(10780-11850)dollars vs 10550(8766-11715)dollars,P=0.012].No significant differences were found in terms of conversion rate to laparotomy or incidence of postoperative complications between both groups.Furthermore,no significant disparities were noted regarding the 3-year overall survival rate and 3-year disease-free survival rate between both groups.CONCLUSION Robotic surgery offers potential advantages in terms of accelerated recovery of gastrointestinal and urologic function compared to LALAR resection,while maintaining similar perioperative and 3-year oncological outcomes.展开更多
基金Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China,No.81672379.
文摘BACKGROUND Rectal cancer ranks as the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide,necessitating surgical resection as the sole treatment option.Over the years,there has been a growing adoption of minimally invasive surgical techni-ques such as robotic and laparoscopic approaches.Robotic surgery represents an innovative modality that effectively addresses the limitations associated with traditional laparoscopic techniques.While previous studies have reported favo-rable perioperative outcomes for robot-assisted radical resection in rectal cancer patients,further evidence regarding its oncological safety is still warranted.AIM To conduct a comparative analysis of perioperative and oncological outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic-assisted low anterior resection(LALAR)procedures.METHODS The clinical data of 125 patients who underwent robot-assisted low anterior resection(RALAR)and 279 patients who underwent LALAR resection at Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University from December 2019 to November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed.After performing a 1:1 propensity score matching,the patients were divided into two groups:The RALAR group and the LALAR group(111 cases in each group).Subsequently,a comparison was made between the short-term outcomes within 30 d after surgery and the 3-year survival outcomes of these two groups.RESULTS Compared to the LALAR group,the RALAR group exhibited a significantly earlier time to first flatus[2(2-2)d vs 3(3-3)d,P=0.000],as well as a shorter time to first fluid diet[4(3-4)d vs 5(4-6)d,P=0.001].Additionally,the RALAR group demonstrated reduced postoperative indwelling catheter time[2(1-3)d vs 4(3-5)d,P=0.000]and decreased length of hospital stay after surgery[5(5-7)d vs 7(6-8)d,P=0.009].Moreover,there was an observed increase in total cost of hospitalization for the RALAR group compared to the LALAR group[10777(10780-11850)dollars vs 10550(8766-11715)dollars,P=0.012].No significant differences were found in terms of conversion rate to laparotomy or incidence of postoperative complications between both groups.Furthermore,no significant disparities were noted regarding the 3-year overall survival rate and 3-year disease-free survival rate between both groups.CONCLUSION Robotic surgery offers potential advantages in terms of accelerated recovery of gastrointestinal and urologic function compared to LALAR resection,while maintaining similar perioperative and 3-year oncological outcomes.
