The impact of body mass index on outcomes in robotic colorectal surgery: a single-centre experience.

Obesity is an independent risk factor for postoperative morbidity and mortality in laparoscopic colorectal surgery (LCRS). The technological advantages of robotic colorectal surgery (RCRS) may allow surgeons to overcome the limitations of LCRS in obese patients, but it is largely unknown if this translates to superior outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare perioperative, postoperative and short-term oncological outcomes in obese (BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m2) and non-obese (BMI < 30 kg/m2) patients undergoing RCRS in a university teaching hospital. Demographic, perioperative and postoperative data along with short-term oncological outcomes of obese and non-obese patients that underwent RCRS for both benign and malignant colorectal disease were identified from a prospectively maintained database. A total of 107 patients (34 obese, 73 non-obese) underwent RCRS over a 4-year period. No statistically significant differences in the incidence of complications, 30-day reoperation, 30-day mortality, conversion to open surgery, anastomotic leak or length of inpatient stay were demonstrated. Obese patients had a significantly higher rate of surgical site infection (SSI) (p < 0.0001). Short-term oncological outcomes in both groups were favourable. There was no statistically significant difference in median duration of surgery between the two cohorts. The results demonstrate that obese patients undergoing RCRS in this institution experience similar outcomes to non-obese patients. These results suggest that RCRS is safe and feasible in obese patients and may be superior to LCRS in this cohort, where the literature suggests a higher complication rate compared to non-obese patients. The inherent advantages of robotic surgical platforms, such as improved visualisation, dexterity and ergonomics likely contribute to the improved outcomes in this challenging patient population.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a case-matched study.

The current gold standard surgical treatment for right colonic malignancy is the laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH). However, laparoscopic surgery has limitations which can be overcome by robotic surgery. The benefits of robotics for rectal cancer are widely accepted but its use for right hemicolectomy remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes in patients undergoing robotic right hemicolectomy (RRH) and LRH in a university teaching hospital. Demographic, perioperative and postoperative data along with early oncological outcomes of patients who underwent RRH and LRH with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA) were identified from a prospectively maintained database. A total of 70 patients (35 RRH, 35 LRH) were identified over a 4-year period. No statistically significant differences in estimated blood loss, conversion to open surgery, postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, 30-day reoperation, 30-day mortality, surgical site infection or lengths of stay were demonstrated. Surgical specimen quality in both groups was favourable. The mean duration of surgery was longer in RRH (p < < 0.00001). A statistically significant proportion of RRH patients had a higher BMI and ASA grade. The results demonstrate that RRH is safe and feasible when compared to LRH, with no statistical difference in postoperative morbidity, mortality and early oncological outcomes. A difference was noted in operating time, however was influenced by training residents in docking the robot and a technically challenging cohort of patients. Operative time has shortened with further experience. Incorporating an intracorporeal anastomosis technique in RRH offers the potential to improve outcomes compared to LRH.

Propensity score-matched analysis comparing laparoscopic to robotic surgery for colorectal cancer shows comparable clinical and oncological outcomes.

Robotic colorectal surgery is gaining popularity. The objective of this study was to compare clinical and cancer outcomes in propensity-score matched cohorts (PSM-1:1) undergoing colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery performed using laparoscopic or robotic surgery in a single institution. A PSM cohort comparison was performed in a tertiary referral cancer and National accredited rectal cancer surgery centre. Patients with CRC undergoing laparoscopic or robotic resection with curative intent from 2016 to 2019 (inclusive) were assessed for inclusion. Matched cohorts were selected using a 1:1 ratio. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, version 22. 128 patients were analysed [laparoscopic (n = 64); robotic (n = 64)]. Median age was 64 years (29-84 years). 55% (n = 70) of patients were male, 45% female (n = 58). SSI rates were slightly lower in the robotic group [10.9% (n = 7) v 12.5% (n = 8) p = 0.40]. Anastomotic leak rates were equal in both groups [5.4% (n = 3)]. All but one patient received an R0 resection in each group, median LNY was 14 in the robotic group and 12 in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.004) and no difference in disease recurrence (p = 0.465) or survival (p = 0.886) was observed. Structured introduction of a robotic colorectal programme over a 3-year period has resulted in equivalent outcomes with an established laparoscopic programme for CRC.

A review of clinical and oncological outcomes following the introduction of the first robotic colorectal surgery programme to a university teaching hospital in Ireland using a dual console training platform.

Robotic-assisted surgery is evolving, with improving clinical and cancer outcomes. The aim of this study was to present the clinical and cancer outcomes of patients undergoing robotic-assisted colorectal surgery (RAS-CR) at University Hospital Limerick (UHL) since its introduction to the 100th case, using the daVinci Xi dual-console surgical system. The RAS-CR programme at UHL commenced in June 2016 and the 100th case was performed in July 2019. All patient-related data were recorded prospectively during the perioperative period by the RAS-CR team. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, version 22. One hundred patients were operated on, comprising of 47 males and 53 females. The median age was 65 years (IQR 13.0; range 25-84) with 69% of cases performed for cancer [N = 39 rectal cancer, N = 30 colon cancer], 20% for benign disease and 11% for dysplasia. Median length of stay for cancer operations was 6.5 days for colon cancer cases (5.0 days when cases with complications were excluded) and 7.0 days for rectal cancer cases. Median operative time was 255 mins (IQR 130 min; all cases), median docking time was 33 mins (IQR 20 mins) and median intra-operative blood loss was 80 ml (IQR 70 ml). Thirty-one patients developed a post-operative complication (5% anastomotic leak; 13% SSI). In cancer cases, median nodal harvest was 14 nodes (IQR10) and an R0 resection was achieved in 98.6% (n = 68) of cancer cases. Three patients (4.3%) developed metastatic disease at a median interval of 16.5 months. Clinical and operative outcomes remained stable over time from case 1 to 100. Structured introduction of a RAS-CR programme with appropriate governance and continuous audit results in favourable clinical and cancer outcomes and provides an excellent training opportunity for surgical residents.