Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

15 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Combined robotic and cystoscopic surgery for rectal cancer invading urinary bladder.

ABSTRACT: Although the application of laparoscopic rectal surgery has been widely accepted by accumulated evidence, it remains technically difficult in some cases of obesity, narrow male pelvis, bulky tumors, or involvement of adjacent organs. After robotic rectal surgery has been covered by the health insurance system in Japan since April 2018, we have employed robotic rectal surgery for an increasing number of cases by taking advantages of its 3D vision and wrist function. When a colorectal cancer involves the urinary bladder, the surgical treatment of choice is an anterior resection with en bloc (partial or total) bladder resection, depending on the site and extent of bladder involvement. In the attached video, robotic surgery was conducted with the aid of intraoperative cystoscopy, which resulted in curative resection with negative margin. Given that the robotic system provides excellent stability and dexterity for bladder reconstruction, the robotic approach can be technically suitable for locally advanced T4 colorectal cancer with urinary involvement.

SUBMITTER: Kawada K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7297884 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Robotic Surgery for Colon and Rectal Cancer.

Project description:Robotic surgery, used generally for colorectal cancer, has the advantages of a three-dimensional surgical view, steadiness, and seven degrees of robotic arms. However, there are disadvantages, such as a decreased sense of touch, extra time needed to dock the robotic cart, and high cost. Robotic surgery is performed using various techniques, with or without laparoscopic surgery. Because the results of this approach are reported to be similar to or less favorable than those of laparoscopic surgery, the learning curve for robotic colorectal surgery remains controversial. However, according to short- and long-term oncologic outcomes, robotic colorectal surgery is feasible and safe compared with conventional surgery. Advanced technologies in robotic surgery have resulted in favorable intraoperative and perioperative clinical outcomes as well as functional outcomes. As the technical advances in robotic surgery improve surgical performance as well as outcomes, it increasingly is being regarded as a treatment option for colorectal surgery. However, a multicenter, randomized clinical trial is needed to validate this approach.

| S-EPMC4751169 | biostudies-literature

Robotic Surgery in Rectal Cancer: Potential, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Project description:Opinion statementThe current standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is based on a multimodal comprehensive treatment combined with preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiation and complete surgical resection of the entire mesorectal cancer. For ultra-low cases and cases with lateral lymph node metastasis, due to limitations in laparoscopic technology, the difficulties of operation and incidence of intraoperative complications are always difficult to overcome. Robotic surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer is an emerging technique that can overcome some of the technical drawbacks posed by conventional laparoscopic approaches, improving the scope and effect of radical operations. However, evidence from the literature regarding its oncological safety and clinical outcomes is still lacking. This brief review summarized the current status of robotic technology in rectal cancer therapy from the perspective of several mainstream surgical methods, including robotic total mesorectal excision (TME), robotic transanal TME, robotic lateral lymph node dissection, and artificial intelligence, focusing on the developmental direction of robotic approach in the field of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in the future.

| S-EPMC9174118 | biostudies-literature

Total robotic surgery for pancreaticoduodenectomy combined with rectal cancer anterior resection: A case report and literature review.

Project description:RationaleSynchronous double malignancies, including carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater and rectal carcinoma, are generally uncommon occurrences in the gastrointestinal tract.Patient concernsThe present study report a case of a 37-year-old man who was incidentally found to suffer from carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater and rectal carcinoma.DiagnosesThe duodenoscopy was performed and revealed an ulcerated and bulky ampulla of Vater, the biopsy from which revealed a moderate-differentiated adenocarcinoma, A local hospital colonoscopy confirmed a tumor located in rectal 7 cm from the anal margin and biopsy-confirmed poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma.InterventionsAbout such patient treatment, both open and laparoscopic surgery are restricted because of operation complexity, large injury, and poor cosmetic effect. surgery performed using Da Vinci robotic surgical system (DVSS).OutcomesNo evidence of recurrence or relapses was found in the first year after surgery.LessonsAlthough sporadic double malignancies are uncommon, they should be considered when evaluating cancer patients. Complex surgery performed by robotic surgery may became surgeon's preferred treatment modality.

| S-EPMC5959404 | biostudies-literature

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer with lateral lymph node dissection.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC5132074 | biostudies-literature

Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Hype or Hope? (Indian Experience).

Project description:The primary goal to achieve cure in oncology is to reduce recurrence, maximize disease-free survival, maintain function, and optimize quality of life. Surgery remains the mainstay treatment modality in rectal cancer. The current trend is to perform least invasive method of doing complex surgeries while not compromising in the oncological of functional outcomes of patients. Total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer surgery entails removal of the rectum with its fascia as an intact unit while preserving surrounding vital structures. The procedure is technically challenging because of the narrow and deep pelvic cavity housing the rectum encased by fatty lymph vascular tissue within the perirectal fascia, distally the anal sphincter complex, and an intimate surrounded by vital structures like ureter, vessels, and nerves. Robotic technology enables overcoming these difficulties caused by complex pelvic anatomy. This system can facilitate better preservation of the pelvic autonomic nerve and thereby achieve favorable postoperative sexual and voiding functions after rectal cancer surgery. The nerve-preserving TME technique includes identification and preservation of the superior hypogastric plexus nerve, bilateral hypogastric nerves, pelvic plexus, and neurovascular bundles.

| S-EPMC7714808 | biostudies-literature

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review of current practice.

Project description:To give a comprehensive review of current literature on robotic rectal cancer surgery.A systematic review of current literature via PubMed and Embase search engines was performed to identify relevant articles from january 2007 to november 2013. The keywords used were: "robotic surgery", "surgical robotics", "laparoscopic computer-assisted surgery", "colectomy" and "rectal resection".After the initial screen of 380 articles, 20 papers were selected for review. A total of 1062 patients (male 64.0%) with a mean age of 61.1 years and body mass index of 24.9 kg/m(2) were included in the review. Out of 1062 robotic-assisted operations, 831 (78.2%) anterior and low anterior resections, 132 (12.4%) intersphincteric resection with coloanal anastomosis, 98 (9.3%) abdominoperineal resections and 1 (0.1%) Hartmann's operation were included in the review. Robotic rectal surgery was associated with longer operative time but with comparable oncological results and anastomotic leak rate when compared with laparoscopic rectal surgery.Robotic colorectal surgery has continued to evolve to its current state with promising results; feasible surgical option with low conversion rate and comparable short-term oncological results. The challenges faced with robotic surgery are for more high quality studies to justify its cost.

| S-EPMC4058726 | biostudies-other

Robotic Partial Excision of Levator-Ani Muscle for Locally Advanced Low Rectal Cancer Invading Ipsilateral Pelvic Floor.

Project description:Tumors at the level of the anorectal junction had required abdominoperineal resection (APR) to achieve an adequate resection margin. However, in the cases of tumor invading ipsilateral levator-ani muscle (LAM), en-bloc resection of the rectum with LAM including tumor would be possible. This video is to show the critical anatomic steps of this procedure. A video was produced from the robotic right partial excision of LAM (PELM) performed in a 57-year-old female patient with rectal cancer at 3 cm from the anal verge, invading the ipsilateral anorectal ring, who had received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The patient discharged at postoperative day 8 without complication. The pathology of the surgical specimen revealed ypT3N1bM0. The secure resection margin from the tumor was achieved. Robotic PELM is the sphincter-preserving technique that can be an alternative treatment option for low rectal cancer invading the ipsilateral LAM, which has been an indication for APR or extralevator APR.

| S-EPMC7837401 | biostudies-literature

Robotic-assisted surgery versus open surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer: the current evidence.

Project description:The aim of this meta-analysis was to comprehensively compare the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted rectal cancer surgery (RRCS) and open rectal cancer surgery (ORCS). Electronic database (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, and the Cochrane Library) searches were conducted for all relevant studies that compared the short-term and long-term outcomes between RRCS and ORCS. Odds ratios (ORs), mean differences, and hazard ratios were calculated. Seven studies involving 1074 patients with rectal cancer were identified for this meta-analysis. Compared with ORCS, RRCS is associated with a lower estimated blood loss (mean difference [MD]: -139.98, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -159.11 to -120.86; P?<?0.00001), shorter hospital stay length (MD: -2.10, 95% CI: -3.47 to -0.73; P?=?0.003), lower intraoperative transfusion requirements (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.99, P?=?0.05), shorter time to flatus passage (MD: -0.97, 95% CI?=?-1.06 to -0.88, P?<?0.00001), and shorter time to resume a normal diet (MD: -1.71.95% CI?=?-3.31 to -0.12, P?=?0.04). There were no significant differences in surgery-related complications, oncologic clearance, disease-free survival, and overall survival between the two groups. However, RRCS was associated with a longer operative time. RRCS is safe and effective.

| S-EPMC4882598 | biostudies-literature

Total mesorectal excision for mid and low rectal cancer: Laparoscopic vs robotic surgery.

Project description:To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for middle and low rectal cancer.This is a retrospective study on a prospectively collected database containing 111 patients who underwent minimally invasive rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) with curative intent between January 2008 and December 2014 (robot, n = 53; laparoscopy, n = 58). The patients all had a diagnosis of middle and low rectal adenocarcinoma with stage?I-III disease. The median follow-up period was 37.4 mo. Perioperative results, morbidity a pathological data were evaluated and compared. The 3-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were calculated and compared.Patients were comparable in terms of preoperative and demographic parameters. The median surgery time was 192 min for laparoscopic TME (L-TME) and 342 min for robotic TME (R-TME) (P < 0.001). There were no differences found in the rates of conversion to open surgery and morbidity. The patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery stayed in the hospital two days longer than the robotic group patients (8 d for L-TME and 6 d for R-TME, P < 0.001). The pathologic evaluation showed a higher number of harvested lymph nodes in the robotic group (18 for R-TME, 11 for L-TME, P < 0.001) and a shorter distal resection margin for laparoscopic patients (1.5 cm for L-TME, 2.5 cm for R-TME, P < 0.001). The three-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were similar between groups.Both L-TME and R-TME achieved acceptable clinical and oncologic outcomes. The robotic technique showed some advantages in rectal surgery that should be validated by further studies.

| S-EPMC4814646 | biostudies-other

Review of the evidence for robotic-assisted robotic cystectomy and intra-corporeal urinary diversion in bladder cancer.

Project description:Radical cystectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection and urinary diversion is the gold-standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The surgery is both complex and highly morbid. Robotic cystectomy is now in its 16th year with established techniques and sufficient research maturity to enable comparison with its open counterpart. The present review focuses on the current evidence for robotic cystectomy and assesses various metrics including oncological, perioperative, functional, surgeon-specific and cost outcomes. The review also encapsulates the current evidence for intra-corporeal urinary diversion and its current status in the cystectomy arena.

| S-EPMC7807361 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data