Comparative analysis of robot-assisted vs. open abdominoperineal resection in terms of operative and initial oncological outcomes.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
The present study aimed to objectively evaluate robot-assisted abdominoperineal resection (APR) in comparison with open APR, in terms of operative elements and initial oncological outcomes.Methods
A total of 118 patients with lower rectal adenocarcinoma who had undergone curative APR were consecutively enrolled between June 2010 and June 2016, i.e., robot-assisted group (n = 40) and open group (n = 78).Results
Transabdominal extralevator muscle excision was more frequently performed in the robot-assisted group than in the open group (68% vs. 42%, P = 0.012). In the robot-assisted group, the pain score at one day after surgery was less than in the open group, and the resumption of bowel function was earlier (P = 0.043 and P = 0.002, respectively). The occurrence of circumferential resection margin involvement (CRM+) was more than 5 times greater in the open group than in the robot-assisted group, presenting a marginal significance (P = 0.057). Although important postoperative morbidity did not generally differ between the 2 groups, voiding difficulty and male sexual dysfunction appeared to be encountered more frequently in the open group than in the robot-assisted group.Conclusion
The robot-assisted APR facilitated transabdominal extralevator excision and bowel recovery and demonstrated a trend towards reduced CRM+.
SUBMITTER: Kim JC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6024082 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Introduction: Salvage lymph node dissection (sLND) has been proposed as a treatment option for prostate cancer patients with lymph node (LN) recurrence following radical prostatectomy to delay or avoid palliative androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Historically sLND has been performed using an open approach, with its associated morbidity. A limited number of studies have reported peri-operative outcomes following robot-assisted sLND. However, a direct comparison with the open approach has hitherto not yet been reported. This study investigates whether robot-assisted sLND is associated with better peri-operative outcomes compared to the open approach. Early oncological outcomes are also compared. Patients and methods: In this retrospective study, clinical data were collected from 60 patients undergoing open sLND between 2010-2016 and 30 patients undergoing robot-assisted sLND between 2016 and 2018 at our tertiary referral center. The primary objective of the study was to compare peri-operative outcomes (length of stay, estimated blood loss, operative time, intra-operative, and postoperative complications) and LN yield between both procedures. As secondary objective early oncological outcome [biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and clinical recurrence-free survival (CRFS)] was compared. Variables of interest were compared using the chi-squared test (categorical variables), two sample t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test (continuous variables). To compare BRFS and CRFS, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and log-rank tests were performed. Results: Robotic sLND was associated with reduced blood loss (median 100 vs. 275cc; p < 0.0001) and shorter length of stay (median 2 vs. 7 days; p < 0.0001) compared to open sLND. Moreover, postoperative complications within 30 days after surgery were more prevalent in the open sLND group compared to the robotic group (41.6% vs. 20%, p = 0.04). No significant differences in LN yield (for each sLND template), BRFS, and CRFS were detected between both groups. Conclusion: Robot-assisted sLND is associated with significantly reduced peri-operative morbidity compared to open sLND. No difference in LN yield, BRFS and CRFS was seen between both groups. Modern imaging techniques underestimate the tumor burden and therefore, the surgical sLND template should not be limited to the positive spots on pre-operative imaging.
| S-EPMC6737006 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Perineal hernia is a protrusion of the pelvic floor containing intra-abdominal viscera. The occurrence of postoperative perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection (APR) is rare, but reports have indicated a recent increase in occurrence following surgical treatment for rectal cancer. This has been attributed to a shift towards extralevator abdominoperineal resection, together with more frequent and long-term use of neoadjuvant therapy. PRESENTATION OF CASE:Here, we report the case of a patient who underwent APR for cancer. Twenty months postoperative, a perineal hernia was detected. The patient was electively scheduled for surgery. Robot-assisted laparoscopy was performed using the da Vinci Surgical System. The perineal hernia was repaired by primary closure with the placement of Symbotex Composite mesh as reinforcement for the pelvic floor. The surgery was performed without any adverse events, and the patient was discharged the day after surgery. Clinical follow-up proceeded at the designated time intervals without difficulties. DISCUSSION:Recurrence rates of perineal hernia remain high, and surgeons face numerous challenges related to poor view, suturing and mesh placement in the deep pelvis. Numerous approaches have been described, but there is still no consensus as to the optimal repair technique for perineal hernia. CONCLUSION:Symptomatic perineal hernias can feasibly be repaired with robot-assisted laparoscopy. Furthermore, suturing and mesh placement require less effort with the robot approach when compared to the open and laparoscopic approaches. These promising findings are demonstrated in the included video.
| S-EPMC6351357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) has been reported to be safe and feasible. As a new technique, RPD has a learning curve similar to that of other types of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery such as laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. To our knowledge, no reports exist on the outcomes of open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD) and RPD after the learning curve. Objective:To analyze and evaluate the actual advantages of RPD. Design, Setting, and Participants:Between May 2010 and December 2018, 450 patients underwent RPD in the Shanghai Ruijin Hospital affiliated with Shanghai Jiaotong University in Shanghai, China, a high-volume pancreatic disease center. According to our previous study, an important flexion point in the learning curve is 250 cases. Data on the last 200 RPD cases were collected from January 2017 to December 2018. During that period, 634 patients underwent OPD. These patients were divided into 2 groups, and propensity score matching was used to minimize bias. The demographic data and operative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Analysis began May 2019. Exposures:Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy and OPD. Main Outcomes and Measures:The short-term operative outcomes of RPD and OPD. Results:After 1:1 matching, 187 cases of RPD and OPD were recorded. In the RPD group, 78 patients (41.7%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 60.9?(11.4) years. In the OPD group, 80 patients (42.8%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 60.1?(10.8) years. Robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy had advantages in operative time (mean [SD], 279.7?[76.3] minutes vs 298.2?[78.3] minutes; P?=?.02), estimated blood loss (mean [SD], 297.3?[246.8] mL vs 415.2?[497.9] mL; P?=?.002), and postoperative length of hospital stay (mean [SD], 22.4?[16.7] days vs 26.1?[16.3] days; P?=?.03). However, there was no significant difference in the R0 resection rate and incidence rate of postoperative complications, such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, bile leak, and delayed gastric emptying. The incidence rates of postoperative bleeding and reoperation in the RPD group were similar to those in the OPD group, with no statistically significant difference. Conclusions and Relevance:After passing the learning curve, RPD had advantages in operative time and blood loss compared with OPD. There were no differences in postoperative complications such as postoperative pancreatic fistula, bile leak, and delayed gastric emptying. However, patients recovered more quickly after RPD than after OPD. A prospective randomized clinical trial is needed in the future to verify these results.
| S-EPMC7057168 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the occurrence of severe urinary complications within 2 years of surgery in men undergoing either robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or retropubic open radical prostatectomy (ORP).We conducted a population-based cohort study in men who underwent RARP (n = 4 947), LRP (n = 5 479) or ORP (n = 6 873) between 2008 and 2012 in the English National Health Service (NHS) using national cancer registry records linked to Hospital Episodes Statistics, an administrative database of admissions to NHS hospitals. We identified the occurrence of any severe urinary or severe stricture-related complication within 2 years of surgery using a validated tool. Multi-level regression modelling was used to determine the association between the type of surgery and occurrence of complications, with adjustment for patient and surgical factors.Men undergoing RARP were least likely to experience any urinary complication (10.5%) or a stricture-related complication (3.3%) compared with those who had LRP (15.8% any or 5.7% stricture-related) or ORP (19.1% any or 6.9% stricture-related). The impact of the type of surgery on the occurrence of any urinary or stricture-related complications remained statistically significant after adjustment for patient and surgical factors (P < 0.01).Men who underwent RARP had the lowest risk of developing severe urinary complications within 2 years of surgery.
| S-EPMC5873443 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRobot-assisted pelvic lymph node dissection (rPLND) has been reported in heterogenous groups of patients with melanoma, including macroscopic or at-high-risk-for microscopic metastasis. With changing indications for surgery in melanoma, and availability of effective systemic therapies, pelvic dissection is now performed for clinically detected bulky lymph node metastasis followed by adjuvant drug therapy. rPLND has not been compared with open pelvic lymph node dissection (oPLND) for modern practice.MethodsAll patients undergoing pelvic node dissection for macroscopic melanoma at a single institution were reviewed as a cohort, observational study.ResultsTwenty-two pelvic lymph node dissections were identified (8 oPLND; 14 rPLND). The number of pelvic lymph nodes removed was similar (median oPLND 6.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 6.0-12.5] versus rPLND 6.0 [3.75-9.0]), with frequent matted nodes (11/22, 50.0%). Operative time (median oPLND 130 min [IQR 95.5-182] versus rPLND 126 min [IQR 97.8-160]) and complications (Clavien-Dindo scale) were similar. Length of hospital stay (median 5.34 days (IQR 3.77-6.94) versus 1.98 days (IQR 1.39-3.50) and time to postoperative adjuvant therapy (median 11.6 weeks [IQR 10.6-18.5] versus 7.71 weeks [IQR 6.29-10.4]) were shorter in the rPLND group. No differences in pelvic lymph node recurrence (p = 0.984), distant metastatic recurrence (p = 0.678), or melanoma-specific survival (p = 0.655) were seen (median follow-up 21.1 months [rPLND] and 25.7 months [oPLND]).ConclusionsrPLND is an effective way to remove bulky pelvic lymph nodes in melanoma, with a shorter recovery and reduced interval to initiating adjuvant therapy compared with oPLND. This group of patients may especially benefit from neoadjuvant systemic approaches to management.
| S-EPMC10908615 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe value to payers of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion (iRARC) when compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) for patients with bladder cancer is unclear.ObjectivesTo compare the cost-effectiveness of iRARC with that of ORC.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used individual patient data from a randomized clinical trial at 9 surgical centers in the United Kingdom. Patients with nonmetastatic bladder cancer were recruited from March 20, 2017, to January 29, 2020. The analysis used a health service perspective and a 90-day time horizon, with supplementary analyses exploring patient benefits up to 1 year. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken. Data were analyzed from January 13, 2022, to March 10, 2023.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive either iRARC (n = 169) or ORC (n = 169).Main outcomes and measuresCosts of surgery were calculated using surgery timings and equipment costs, with other hospital data based on counts of activity. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated from European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level instrument responses. Prespecified subgroup analyses were undertaken based on patient characteristics and type of diversion.ResultsA total of 305 patients with available outcome data were included in the analysis, with a mean (SD) age of 68.3 (8.1) years, and of whom 241 (79.0%) were men. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy was associated with statistically significant reductions in admissions to intensive therapy (6.35% [95% CI, 0.42%-12.28%]), and readmissions to hospital (14.56% [95% CI, 5.00%-24.11%]), but increases in theater time (31.35 [95% CI, 13.67-49.02] minutes). The additional cost of iRARC per patient was £1124 (95% CI, -£576 to £2824 [US $1622 (95% CI, -$831 to $4075)]) with an associated gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 0.01124 (95% CI, 0.00391-0.01857). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £100 008 (US $144 312) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy had a much higher probability of being cost-effective for subgroups defined by age, tumor stage, and performance status.Conclusions and relevanceIn this economic evaluation of surgery for patients with bladder cancer, iRARC reduced short-term morbidity and some associated costs. While the resulting cost-effectiveness ratio was in excess of thresholds used by many publicly funded health systems, patient subgroups were identified for which iRARC had a high probability of being cost-effective.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03049410.
| S-EPMC10314306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) have a lower risk of thrombosis compared to those undergoing open thoracotomy (OT) which may be due to several post-operative factors such as early mobilisation, shorter hospital stays, lower transfusion rates and lower risk of infections. Whether the higher thrombotic risk after OT is also linked to a peri-operative hypercoagulable state is a matter of debate. We therefore conducted a case-control study to compare peri-operative coagulation profiles in patients with primary lung cancer undergoing VATS vs OT.Materials and methodsAll consecutive patients undergoing VATS or OT for primary lung cancer at the Department of Thoracic Surgery of Padua University Hospital, Italy, between February and June 2018 were enrolled. Each patient provided a venous blood sample at least 30 min prior to surgical incision (T0) and 4±1 days after surgery (T1). Peri-operative coagulation profiles were assessed via traditional, viscoelastic whole blood (ROTEM® [Instrumentation Laboratory-Werfen]) and impedance aggregometry (Multiplate® Analyser [Roche Diagnostics]) tests.ResultsWe enrolled 65 patients (males 43, females 22; mean age 65±13 years) of whom 35 (54%) underwent VATS and 30 (46%) underwent OT. Compared to healthy controls, the surgical group (VATS and OT patients) had a significantly shorter clot formation time and higher alpha angle and maximum clot firmness values, as well as increased mean platelet function. In the post-operative period, patients who underwent OT had a significantly shorter clot formation time, higher alpha angle and maximum clot firmness values and higher mean platelet function vs VATS patients.DiscussionWhole blood ROTEM® profiles and Multiplate® aggregometry identified a more hypercoagulable post-operative state in patients who underwent OT than in those who underwent VATS. Larger studies are warranted to confirm our results and ascertain whether the observed hypercoagulability might promote post-operative thrombosis.
| S-EPMC7925226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is one of the most widely used procedures for localized prostate cancer (PCa). In the present study, the clinical and oncological outcomes of RARP with bilateral or unilateral nerve sparing (NS) for D'Amico high-risk PCa cases were assessed. Among the 767 cases who received RARP at Fujita Health University Hospital between August 2009 and December 2016, 230 high-risk PCa cases who were observed for >6 months comprised the retrospective study cohort. Bilateral NS was performed with the bilateral neurovascular bundle in eight, unilateral in 125 and none in 97 cases. Perioperative parameters [surgery time, console time, estimated blood loss, pathological stage, positive lymph node metastases [pN (+)], and surgical margin positivity] did not exhibit significant differences between the NS and non-NS cohorts. During a median follow-up time of 25 months, the 1- and 3-year biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival rates in the NS/non-NS cohorts were 84.4/86.0 and 72.7/75.0%, respectively. There were no significant differences identified between the two groups at each time period. According to multivariate analysis, the resection margin was an important factor for time to BCR, regardless of the NS technique used. The numbers of pads used daily at 3 and 6 months after RARP between the NS/non-NS cohorts were 1.1/1.5 and 0.6/1.0, respectively (P=0.045 and P=0.009), suggesting that the NS technique resulted in significantly improved outcomes regarding urinary continence recovery. In selected high-risk PCa cases, the NS technique resulted in equivalent oncological outcomes and improved urinary continence compared with the non-NS RARP group.
| S-EPMC6757315 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) has emerged as a surgical option for patients with prostatic cancer in high-volume centers. The objective is to assess oncological and functional outcomes when implementing RS-RARP in a medium-volume center without previous experience of robotic surgery. This is a prospective observational single-center study. Patients operated between July 2017 and April 2020 were divided into two consecutive groups, A and B, each with 104 patients. The surgeons had prior experience in laparoscopic surgery and underwent robotic training. Positive surgical margin (PSM) status, urinary continence, and erectile function projected by Kaplan-Meier curves, together with patient reported quality of life outcomes at 12 months post-surgery were documented. Median patient age was 63 years (IQR = 59-67), overall PSM rate were 33%, 28% for pT2 disease. Pre-operative values showed no significant difference between both groups. The rate of urinary continence dropped from 81 to 78% (SE = 5.7) (Group A) and from 90 to 72% (SE = 6.3) (Group B) using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form. Baseline sexual function was regained in 41% (Group A) and 47% (Group B) of patients. The median Expanded Prostate Index Composite-26 total score decreased from 86 to 82. These outcomes relate favorably to prior reports. There was a clinically significant decrease in median operative time in the successive groups with post-operative complications occurring in less than 2% of surgical procedures overall. A 12-month follow-up suggests that RS-RARP may be safely introduced in a medium-volume center without previous experience of robotic surgery.
| S-EPMC10209308 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe major advantages of robot-assisted surgery are the fine field of view provided by the high-precision three-dimensional (3D) images and the good operability provided by the robotic arms that enables precise movements. A growing number of retrospective studies have compared robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), but the number of cases is limited and the results are contradictory.MethodsWe studied the medical records of primary lung cancer patients who underwent lobectomy with lymph node dissection between 2017 and 2020. Four hundred and eleven patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria in this study (RATS: 103; VATS: 308). We compared the perioperative factors and postoperative results of the VATS and RATS groups. Further, we adjusted background factors using propensity score matching (PSM) then compared the results of 200 patients (100 patients in each group). In this study, we matched interlobar fissure completeness, which affects operative difficulty and operative time; however, this has been superficially compared in previous studies.ResultsAfter PSM, a significant difference was observed in the intraoperative blood loss (RATS: 53.3 mL, VATS: 120.3 mL, P=0.04). The rates of surgical complications were comparable between the groups (10.0% vs. 13.0%, P=0.66) with similar mean operation times (RATS: 215.0 min, VATS: 210.1 min, P=0.57). The mean postoperative stay in the RATS group was shorter than that in the VATS group (10.0 vs. 11.5 days, P=0.04).ConclusionsInitial experience of RATS had no obvious drawbacks when compared with that of VATS on propensity-matched analysis.
| S-EPMC9264105 | biostudies-literature