Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone versus robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction: a matched analysis.

ABSTRACT: Robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction is a recently developed minimally invasive surgery used in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. However, its safety and feasibility remain undiscussed and controversial. This study reported the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors pertaining to traditional robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone against that of robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction to provide a discussion on this issue. 49 patients who underwent robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction and 49 matched patients who underwent conventional robotic assisted rectal cancer resection were systematically analyzed in this study. Regarding the baseline characteristics, after matching, no significant differences were observed between the natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) group and the robotic assisted rectal cancer resection (RARC) group. Patients in the NOSE group had a reduced visual analog scale (p?

SUBMITTER: Liu D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7392890 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone versus robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction: a matched analysis.

Liu Dongning D Luo Rui R Wan Zhikai Z Zhu Weiquan W He Penghui P Ye Shanping S Tang Cheng C Lei Xiong X Li Taiyuan T Li Taiyuan T

Scientific reports 20200730 1

Robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction is a recently developed minimally invasive surgery used in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. However, its safety and feasibility remain undiscussed and controversial. This study reported the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors pertaining to traditional robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone against that of robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction to provide a discussion on this issue. ...[more]

PMID: 32733103

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTotally intracorporeal surgery for left-sided resection carries numerous potential advantages by avoiding crossing staple lines and eliminating the need for an abdominal incision. For those with complicated diverticulitis, minimally invasive surgery is known to be technically challenging due to inflamed tissue, distorted pelvic anatomy, and obliterated tissue planes, resulting in high conversion rates. We aim to illustrate the stepwise approach and modifications required to successful complete the robotic Natural-orifice IntraCorporeal anastomosis with transrectal specimen Extraction (NICE) procedure in this cohort.MethodsConsecutive, elective, unselected patients presenting with complicated diverticulitis defined as fistula, abscess and stricture underwent the NICE procedure over a 24-month period. Demographic and intraoperative data were collected, and video recordings were reviewed and edited on encrypted server.ResultsA total of 60 patients (50% female) underwent the NICE procedure for complicated diverticulitis with a mean age of 58.9 years and mean BMI of 30.7 kg/m2. The mean operative time was 231.6 min. All cases (100%) were achieved with intracorporeal anastomosis using a circular stapling device. All but one patient (98.3%) had successful transrectal extraction of the specimen. Forty-four (73%) of the specimens required a specimen-thinning maneuver to successfully extract the specimen and there were no conversions. We identified seven key technical modifications and considerations to facilitate successful completion of the procedure which are illustrated, including early release of the disease, mesentery-sparing dissection, dual instrument control of the mesenteric vasculature, release of the rectal reflection, use of NICE back table, specimen-thinning maneuver, and closure of the rectal cuff.ConclusionWe present a stepwise approach with key modifications to successfully achieve totally robotic intracorporeal resection for those presenting with complicated diverticulitis. This approach may help overcome the technical challenges and provide a foundation for reproducible results.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery is a novel technique of minimally invasive surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety of laparoscopic anterior resection with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE-LAR) and abdominal incision specimen extraction (AISE-LAR) for sigmoid or rectum tumors. METHODS:MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), Scopus, and ClinicalTrials databases were systematically searched for related articles up to August 2019. The primary outcomes included postoperative complications (overall postoperative complication, incision-related complication, anastomotic fistula, and severe complication) and pathologic results (lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, and distal resection edge). The statistical analysis was performed on STATA 12.0 software. RESULTS:Ten studies comprising 1787 patients were used for meta-analysis. Compared with AISE-LAR, NOSE-LAR had more advantages in terms of overall postoperative complication (odds ratio (OR) = 0.65 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.90; P = 0.01)), incision-related complication (OR = 0.13 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.35; P < 0.01)), distal resection edge (weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.17?cm (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.33?cm; P = 0.02)), recovery of gastrointestinal function (WMD = - 0.38?day (95% CI, - 0.70 to - 0.06?day; P = 0.02 )), pain scores in postoperative day 1 (WMD = - 1.64 (95% CI, - 2.31 to - 0.98; P < 0.01)), additional analgesics usage (OR = 0.21 (95% CI, 0.11 to 0.40; P < 0.01)) and hospital stay (WMD = - 0.71?day (95% CI, - 1.10 to - 0.32?day; P < 0.01)), while the operation time of NOSE-LAR was prolonged (WMD = 7.4?min (95% CI, 0.17 to 14.64?min; P = 0.04)). The anastomotic fistula, severe complication, lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, intraoperative blood loss, and long-term outcomes in NOSE-LAR were comparable with AISE-LAR. CONCLUSIONS:The safety of NOSE-LAR was demonstrated, and it could be an alternative to conventional surgery in laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid and rectal tumors. However, further randomized and multi-center trials are required.

Project description:Surgical resection is crucial for curative treatment of rectal cancer. Through multidisciplinary treatment, including radiochemotherapy and total mesorectal excision, survival has improved substantially. Consequently, more patients have to deal with side effects of treatment. The most recently introduced surgical technique is robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) which seems equally effective in terms of oncological control compared to laparoscopy. However, RAS enables further advantages which maximize the precision of surgery, thus providing better functional outcomes such as sexual function or contience without compromising oncological results. This review was done according to the PRISMA and AMSTAR-II guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018104519). The search was planned with PICO criteria and conducted on Medline, Web of Science and CENTRAL. All screening steps were performed by two independent reviewers. Inclusion criteria were original, comparative studies for laparoscopy vs. RAS for rectal cancer and reporting of functional outcomes. Quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The search retrieved 9703 hits, of which 51 studies with 24,319 patients were included. There was a lower rate of urinary retention (non-RCTs: Odds ratio (OR) [95% Confidence Interval (CI)] 0.65 [0.46, 0.92]; RCTs: OR[CI] 1.29[0.08, 21.47]), ileus (non-RCTs: OR[CI] 0.86[0.75, 0.98]; RCTs: OR[CI] 0.80[0.33, 1.93]), less urinary symptoms (non-RCTs mean difference (MD) [CI] - 0.60 [- 1.17, - 0.03]; RCTs: - 1.37 [- 4.18, 1.44]), and higher quality of life for RAS (only non-RCTs: MD[CI]: 2.99 [2.02, 3.95]). No significant differences were found for sexual function (non-RCTs: standardized MD[CI]: 0.46[- 0.13, 1.04]; RCTs: SMD[CI]: 0.09[- 0.14, 0.31]). The current meta-analysis suggests potential benefits for RAS over laparoscopy in terms of functional outcomes after rectal cancer resection. The current evidence is limited due to non-randomized controlled trials and reporting of functional outcomes as secondary endpoints.

Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone versus robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction: a matched analysis.

Publications

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone versus robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction: a matched analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets