Abstract


Introduction: Laparoscopic rectal resection with total mesorectal excision is a technically challenging procedure, and there are limitations in conventional laparoscopy. A surgical robotic system may help to overcome some of the limitations. The aim of our study was to compare long-term oncological outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer.
Materials and Methods: The study was conducted as a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. One-hundred-three robotic and 84 laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excisions were performed by a single surgeon between January 2011 and January 2020. Patient characteristics, perioperative recovery, postoperative complications, pathology results, and oncological outcomes were compared between the two groups.
Results: The patients’ characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Median operating time was longer in the robotic than in the laparoscopic group (180 minutes versus 140 minutes, p=0.033). Macroscopic grading of the specimen in the robotic group was complete in 96 (93.20%), near complete in four (3.88%) and incomplete in three (2.91%) patients. In the laparoscopic group, grading was complete in 37 (44.04%), near complete in 40 (47.61%) and incomplete in seven (8.33%) patients (p=0.03). The median length of follow up was 48 (9–102) months in the robotic, and 75.6 (11–113) months in the laparoscopic group. Overall, five-year survival was 87% in the robotic and 85.3% in the laparoscopic groups. Local recurrence rates were 3.8% and 7.14%, respectively, in the robotic and laparoscopic groups (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Sphincter-saving robotic total mesorectal excision is a safe and feasible tool, which provides good mesorectal integrity and better local control in male patients with mid-low rectal cancer.

Abstract


Oncologic visceral surgery has recently been revolutionized by robotics, artificial intelligence (AI), sparing of functionally important structures and innovative intraoperative imaging tools. These techniques enable new dimensions of precision surgery and oncology. Currently, data-driven, cognitive operating rooms are standing at the forefront of the latest technical and didactic developments in abdominal surgery.
Rectal low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) for lower- and middle-third rectal cancer is a challenging operation due to the narrow pelvis and the tender guiding structures. Thus, new approaches have been needed to simplify the procedure and to upgrade the results.
The combination of robotics with pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring (pIONM) and new possibilities of visualization, such as multi- and hyperspectral imaging (MSI / HSI) or fluorescence imaging (FI) with indocyanine green (ICG) is a forward-looking modality to enhance surgical precision and reduce postoperative complications while improving oncologic and functional outcomes with a better quality of life.
The aim of our video-paper is to show how to achieve maximum precision by combining robotic surgery with pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring and new imaging devices for rectal cancer.

Abstract


Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) can be performed robotically assisted (R-TAMIS) for easier rectal defect suture closure particularly on the anterior rectal wall. The surgical technique described in this technical note emphasizes three safety points: 1) decreased likelihood for rectal injury when the ports are inserted into the GelPOINT® Path Transanal Access Platform (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, California) on the back table rather than being inserted into the rectum; 2) decreased external collision between ports when using ports of different length; and 3) increased stabilization of pneumorectum when insufflating with an AirSeal™ port (Intelligent Flow System, ConMed, Utica, New York). Although R-TAMIS can be safely performed with the da Vinci® Si® or Xi® (Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, California) patient cart, the following differences are noteworthy: a) the Si® vertically-mounted arms design forces the patient in an uncomfortable position with asymmetrical hip flexion as opposed to the Xi® boom-mounted horizontal arm design; b) the 28cm circumference of each Si® patient cart arms operating between the patient’s legs offer decreased maneuvering freedom as opposed to the 19cm circumference of the Xi® counterparts; and c) the abduction pattern of movement of the Si® arms potentially increases the risk of external collision with the patient’s legs as opposed to the Xi® “jack-knife” pattern of movement.