Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review and Description of the Technique.

Robotic surgery may offer significant advantages for treating extraperitoneal rectal cancer. Although laparoscopy has been shown to be safe and effective, laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) remains technically challenging and is still performed in selected centers. Robotic anterior resection (RAR) may overcome the drawback of conventional laparoscopy, providing high-quality surgery with favorable oncological outcomes. Moreover, recent data show how RAR offers clinical and oncological benefits when affording difficult TMEs, such as low and advanced rectal tumors, in terms of complication rate, specimen quality, recurrence rate, and survival. This series aims to review the most recent and relevant literature, reporting mid- and long-term oncological outcomes and focusing on minimally invasive RAR for low rectal cancer.

Preliminary robotic abdominal wall reconstruction experience: single-centre outcomes of the first 150 cases.

PURPOSE: Robotic surgery offers new possibilities in repairing complex hernias with a minimally invasive approach. This study aimed to analyze our preliminary results. METHODS: Between November 2015 and February 2020, 150 patients underwent robotic reconstruction for abdominal wall defects (77 primary and 73 incisional). A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was conducted to evaluate the short-term outcomes. RESULTS: The mean operative time was 176.9 ± 72.1 min. No conversion to open or laparoscopic approach occurred. The mean hospital length of stay was 2.6 ± 1.6. According to Clavien-Dindo classification, two (grade III) complications following retromuscular mesh placement (1.3%) occurred. One patient (0.7%) required surgical revision due to small bowel occlusion following an intraparietal hernia. The 30-day readmission rate was 0.6%, and the mortality was nihil. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery is valuable for safely completing challenging surgical procedures like complex abdominal wall reconstruction, with low conversion and complication rates. A stepwise approach to the different surgical techniques is essential to optimize the outcomes and maximize the benefits of the robotic approach.

Robotic right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision: Senior versus junior surgeon, a case-matched retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery may facilitate complex procedures such as right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision (CME) and shorten the learning curve. This study aimed to compare senior and junior surgeons' results in performing robotic right colectomy (RRC) with CME and intracorporeal anastomosis for right colon cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and April 2020, a total of 161 patients underwent RRC with CME. After propensity score matching, two groups of 31 patients for each surgeon were formed. Intraoperative, postoperative and pathological outcomes were the variables assessed. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was recorded between the two groups. The senior surgeon experienced 16.1% minor complications (Clavien-Dindo I-II) and 3.2% major complications (Clavien-Dindo III-IV), while the novice surgeon reported 19.3% and 3.2% rates of minor and major adverse events, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: After a structured training protocol, a novice may obtain comparable results to an expert in performing RRC with CME.

Update on Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer.

The minimally invasive treatment of rectal cancer with Total Mesorectal Excision is a complex and challenging procedure due to technical and anatomical issues which could impair postoperative, oncological and functional outcomes, especially in a defined subgroup of patients. The results from recent randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery are still conflicting and trans-anal bottom-up approaches have recently been developed. Robotic surgery represents the latest consistent innovation in the field of minimally invasive surgery that may potentially overcome the technical limitations of conventional laparoscopy thanks to an enhanced dexterity, especially in deep narrow operative fields such as the pelvis. Results from population-based multicenter studies have shown the potential advantages of robotic surgery when compared to its laparoscopic counterpart in terms of reduced conversions, complication rates and length of stay. Costs, often advocated as one of the main drawbacks of robotic surgery, should be thoroughly evaluated including both the direct and indirect costs, with the latter having the potential of counterbalancing the excess of expenditure directly related to the purchase and maintenance of robotic equipment. Further prospectively maintained or randomized data are still required to better delineate the advantages of the robotic platform, especially in the subset of most complex and technically challenging patients from both an anatomical and oncological standpoint.

Update on Robotic Rectal Prolapse Treatment.

Rectal prolapse is a condition that can cause significant social impairment and negatively affects quality of life. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment, with the aim of restoring the anatomy and correcting the associated functional disorders. During recent decades, laparoscopic abdominal procedures have emerged as effective tools for the treatment of rectal prolapse, with the advantages of faster recovery, lower morbidity, and shorter length of stay. Robotic surgery represents the latest evolution in the field of minimally invasive surgery, with the benefits of enhanced dexterity in deep narrow fields such as the pelvis, and may potentially overcome the technical limitations of conventional laparoscopy. Robotic surgery for the treatment of rectal prolapse is feasible and safe. It could reduce complication rates and length of hospital stay, as well as shorten the learning curve, when compared to conventional laparoscopy. Further prospectively maintained or randomized data are still required on long-term functional outcomes and recurrence rates.

Prevalence of constipation in a tertiary referral Italian Colorectal Unit.

INTRODUCTION: Epidemiology data on constipation are not commonly available, particularly in Italy Here we review the prevalence and clinical features of constipated patients attending a tertiary referral Italian center. METHODS: Clinical data of patients attending our Coloproctology Unit in the last 15 years and complaining of constipation as the main clinical features were retrospectively analyzed. Rome-III criteria were adoptedto define constipation. RESULTS: 1041/11881 patients were affected by chronic constipation (8.8%), 376 had slow-transit constipation, 497 obstructed defecation and 168 both types of constipation. 76% of them were females. Patients distribution according to sex and age was Gaussian-like only in females. In the slow-transit group, constipation was idiopathic in 59.3% and secondary to other causes in 40.7% . In patients with anatomic obstructed defecation, rectocele and intussusceptions were the main findings, while pelvic floor dissynergia was the main finding in functional outlet obstruction, although more frequently all these components were associated. In 14.8% no apparent cause was identified. CONCLUSION: Constipation accounts for about 9% of patients attending a tertiary referral Colorectal Unit. Females were much more frequently affected in both types of constipation. Anatomic and functional defecatory disturbances are frequently associated, although in 15% no evident causes were identified. KEY WORDS: Constipation, Epidemiology, Obstructed defecation, Slow transit constipation.

Conservative and surgical treatment of haemorrhoids.

The management of haemorrhoids has evolved rapidly during the past few decades. Several new treatments have been proposed with the aim of reducing patients' postoperative pain, time to return to normal life, risk of early and late complications, and recurrence rate. Although conservative treatment based on dietary and lifestyle changes can help the majority of patients, and rubber band ligation and phlebotonic drugs can effectively treat grade I and II haemorrhoids, surgery is required for the most advanced stages. Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy is considered to be the gold-standard approach for grade IV haemorrhoids. An increasing number of minimally invasive treatment options, including mucopexy with or without mucosal resection and haemorrhoid artery ligation, have now been proposed for the management of grade III haemorrhoids. These approaches aim to correct the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms involved in the aetiology of haemorrhoids. An increased risk of recurrence is the price to pay for these minimally invasive and less painful treatments, but the sparing of the sensitive anoderm and a rapid return to normal life without pain are greatly appreciated by patients. An algorithm for the management of haemorrhoids using evidence-based medicine is also presented here.