Intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis for robotic-assisted and laparoscopic right colectomy: short-term outcomes of a multi-center prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies to date show contrasting conclusions when comparing intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses for minimally invasive right colectomy. Large multi-center prospective studies comparing perioperative outcomes between these two techniques are needed. The purpose of this study was to compare intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses outcomes for robotic assisted and laparoscopic right colectomy. METHODS: Multi-center, prospective, observational study of patients with malignant or benign disease scheduled for laparoscopic or robotic-assisted right colectomy. Outcomes included conversion rate, gastrointestinal recovery, and complication rates. RESULTS: There were 280 patients: 156 in the robotic assisted and laparoscopic intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) group and 124 in the robotic assisted and laparoscopic extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) group. The EA group was older (mean age 67 vs. 65 years, p = 0.05) and had fewer white (81% vs. 90%, p = 0.05) and Hispanic (2% vs. 12%, p = 0.003) patients. The EA group had more patients with comorbidities (82% vs. 72%, p = 0.04) while there was no significant difference in individual comorbidities between groups. IA was associated with fewer conversions to open and hand-assisted laparoscopic approaches (p = 0.007), shorter extraction site incision length (4.9 vs. 6.2 cm; p ≤ 0.0001), and longer operative time (156.9 vs. 118.2 min). Postoperatively, patients with IA had shorter time to first flatus, (1.5 vs. 1.8 days; p ≤ 0.0001), time to first bowel movement (1.6 vs. 2.0 days; p = 0.0005), time to resume soft/regular diet (29.0 vs. 37.5 h; p = 0.0014), and shorter length of hospital stay (median, 3 vs. 4 days; p ≤ 0.0001). Postoperative complication rates were comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: In this prospective, multi-center study of minimally invasive right colectomy across 20 institutions, IA was associated with significant improvements in conversion rates, return of bowel function, and shorter hospital stay, as well as significantly longer operative times compared to EA. These data validate current efforts to increase training and adoption of the IA technique for minimally invasive right colectomy.

Totally robotic right hemicolectomy: a multicentre case-matched technical and peri-operative comparison of port placements and da Vinci models.

The objective of the study was to review the technical and peri-operative outcomes using the da Vinci Xi (dVXi) and da Vinci Si (dVSi) models with suprapubic port placement (SPPP) or traditional port placements (TPP) during a robotic right hemicolectomy (RRHC). A retrospective review was undertaken of prospectively maintained databases of RRHC performed by two senior colorectal surgeons in the USA and Australia. Data were prospectively collected for patient demographics, intra-operative technical outcomes and peri-operative clinical outcomes. A cohort of 138 patients underwent RRHC between 2013 and 2017: 134 (97%) had intra-corporeal anastomoses (ICA), 50% for polyp disease and 38% for cancer. 16 (12%) patients had post-operative complications, 11 (8%) of whom had only one complication. There were five (4%) anaemias requiring transfusion; five (4%) anastomotic bleeds; one (1%) leucocytosis/sepsis; two (1%) paralytic ileus; and two (1%) delayed readmissions. There were no conversions to open operations, anastomotic leaks, 30-day readmissions, or 30-day mortalities. With dVSi compared to dVXi, median (IQR) total operation time (TOT) reduced by 16% [134 (118-169) min versus 113 (90-132), p < 0.001]. dVXi had shorter console times (CST) [75 (62-97) min vs 94 (77-108), p = 0.004]. SPPP seemed more advantageous than TPP with less CST [75 (60-98) min versus 85 (70-106), p = 0.02]; less TOT [110 (90-130) min versus 130 (108-167), p < 0.001]; and shorter LOS [2 (2-3) days versus 3(2-3), p = 0.03]. There are operative technical improvements and peri-operative patient clinical benefits during RRHC with ICA using either da Vinci models or port placement configurations. It appears more advantageous to use dVXi with SPPP configuration as our preferred setup for RHHC. Many gastrointestinal surgeons foresee potential benefits of robotic surgery (RS) over conventional laparoscopic surgery, hence evaluation of RS in both routine and more complex operations is needed (Kwak and Kim in J Robot Surg 5:65-72, 2011).

Totally robotic vs hybrid abdominoperineal resection: A retrospective multicenter analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection (APR) for low rectal cancers is technically demanding. Robotic assistance may be of help and can be hybrid (HAPR) or totally robotic (RAPR). The present study describes outcomes of robotic APR and compares both approaches. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multicentric retrospective analysis of rectal cancer patients undergoing either HAPR or RAPR was conducted. Patients' demographics, surgeons' experience, oncologic results, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were collected. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five patients were included, 48 in HAPR group and 77 in RAPR group. Demographics and comorbidities were comparable. Operative time was reduced in RAPR group (266.9 ± 107.8 min vs 318.9 ± 75.1 min, P = .001). RAPR patients were discharged home more frequently (91.18% vs 66.67%, P = .001), and experienced fewer parastomal hernias (3.71% vs 9.86%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: RAPR is safe and feasible with appropriate oncologic outcomes. Totally robotic approach reduces operative time and may improve functional outcomes.

Performance of da Vinci Stapler during robotic-assisted right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis.

Applications for surgical staplers continue to grow, due to the increase in minimally invasive surgical approaches, and range from vessel ligation to tissue transection and anastomoses. Complications associated with stapled tissue, such as bleeding or leaks, continue to be a concern for surgeons, as both can be associated with prolonged operative times and can contribute to postoperative morbidity and mortality. The goal of this retrospective study was to evaluate the performance of the da Vinci® Xi EndoWrist® Stapler 45 with SmartClamp™ technology during robotic-assisted right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. We reviewed 113 consecutive cases from four medical centers. Preclinical diagnoses were inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (n = 5), benign bowel disease (n = 77), and malignant bowel disease (n = 31). No anastomotic leaks occurred; one event of anastomotic bleeding (0.88%) resolved without surgical intervention. Overall, there were 643 clamp attempts (5.7 attempts per case), and 570 fires (5.0 fires per case). SmartClamp™ occurrences happened in approximately one out of three cases, with the highest proportion of occurrences in the IBD group (2.0 occurrences per case). The most commonly fired reload was blue (1.5 mm closed height) with 4.1 blue reloads fired per case overall. No incomplete fires occurred during the procedures. The study data demonstrate the performance of the da Vinci Xi EndoWrist® Stapler 45 as used in right colon resection with intracorporeal anastomosis. The collection and analysis of these data provide surgeons with information related to stapler firings, which were not previously available; as such, this analysis may lead to deductions that are useful for intraoperative decision-making and clinical outcomes.

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) with the newest robotic surgical platform: a multi-institutional North American experience.

BACKGROUND: Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) offers intra-luminal full-thickness excision of rectal neoplasia. Robotic TAMIS (RT) allows for greater versatility in motion while operating in the limited space of the rectum. We present our experience with this technique in practice using the DaVinci Xi™ platform. METHOD: This is a multi-institutional retrospective analysis for patient undergoing Robotic TAMIS for resection of rectal lesions at two tertiary referral hospitals in the United States. Morbidity, mortality, anatomic measurement, and final pathology were analyzed. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients planned for Robotic TAMIS were identified. Average follow-up was 188 days. The average BMI was 29.5 ± 5.9. All patients had an American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) Class of 2 or greater and 21 (62%) were ASA 3 or greater. Rectal lesions located from 2 to 15 cm from the dentate line were successfully resected. Lesions up to 4.5 cm in the longest dimension were successfully resected. The average operative time was 100 ± 70 min, which correlated to a robotic console time of 76 ± 67 min. Patients were placed in Lithotomy in 32 (94%) cases and were prone in only 2 (6%) cases. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions to another technique. The only postoperative complication was a medically managed Clostridium difficile infection in 1 patient. Three patients were upstaged to T2 on final pathology and underwent successful formal resections. BMI was a statistically significant predictor of a longer operation. CONCLUSIONS: With increased reach and operative range of motion, Robotic TAMIS is a safe and effective method for excising low-risk rectal neoplasia with a wide range of anatomical measurements. Higher BMI is a significant predictor of a longer and likely more challenging operation.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive right colectomy: A multi-center propensity score-matched comparison of outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to retrospectively compare short-term outcomes of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic-assisted right colectomies for benign and malignant disease. Recent studies suggest potential short-term outcomes advantages for the intracorporeal anastomosis technique. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched comparison of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis techniques for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted right colectomy between January 11, 2010, and July 21, 2016. RESULTS: After propensity score-matching, there were a total of 1029 minimal invasive surgery cases for analysis-379 right colectomies (335 robotic-assisted and 44 laparoscopic) done with an intracorporeal anastomosis and 650 right colectomies (253 robotic-assisted and 397 laparoscopic) done with an extracorporeal anastomosis. There were no significant differences in any preoperative patient characteristics between groups. The minimally invasive intracorporeal anastomosis group had significantly longer operative times (p<0.0001), lower conversion to open rate (p = 0.01), shorter hospital length of stay (p = 0.02) and lower complication rate from after discharge to 30-days (p = 0.04) than the extracorporeal anastomosis group. CONCLUSIONS: This comparison shows several clinical outcomes advantages for the intracorporeal anastomosis technique in minimally invasive right colectomy. These data may guide future refinements in minimally invasive training techniques and help surgeons choose among different minimally invasive options.

Organ preservation for clinical T2N0 distal rectal cancer using neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision (ACOSOG Z6041): results of an open-label, single-arm, multi-institutional, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Local excision is an organ-preserving treatment alternative to transabdominal resection for patients with stage I rectal cancer. However, local excision alone is associated with a high risk of local recurrence and inferior survival compared with transabdominal rectal resection. We investigated the oncological and functional outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and local excision for patients with stage T2N0 rectal cancer. METHODS: We did a multi-institutional, single-arm, open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 trial of patients with clinically staged T2N0 distal rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy at 26 American College of Surgeons Oncology Group institutions. Patients with clinical T2N0 rectal adenocarcinoma staged by endorectal ultrasound or endorectal coil MRI, measuring less than 4 cm in greatest diameter, involving less than 40% of the circumference of the rectum, located within 8 cm of the anal verge, and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of at least 2 were included in the study. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy consisted of capecitabine (original dose 825 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 and 22-35), oxaliplatin (50 mg/m(2) on weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5), and radiation (5 days a week at 1·8 Gy per day for 5 weeks to a dose of 45 Gy, followed by a boost of 9 Gy, for a total dose of 54 Gy) followed by local excision. Because of adverse events during chemoradiotherapy, the dose of capecitabine was reduced to 725 mg/m(2) twice-daily, 5 days per week, for 5 weeks, and the boost of radiation was reduced to 5·4 Gy, for a total dose of 50·4 Gy. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival for all eligible patients (intention-to-treat population) and for patients who completed chemotherapy and radiation, and had ypT0, ypT1, or ypT2 tumours, and negative resection margins (per-protocol group). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00114231. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2006, and Oct 22, 2009, 79 eligible patients were recruited to the trial and started neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Two patients had no surgery and one had a total mesorectal excision. Four additional patients completed protocol treatment, but one had a positive margin and three had ypT3 tumours. Thus, the per-protocol population consisted of 72 patients. Median follow-up was 56 months (IQR 46-63) for all patients. The estimated 3-year disease-free survival for the intention-to-treat group was 88·2% (95% CI 81·3-95·8), and for the per-protocol group was 86·9% (79·3-95·3). Of 79 eligible patients, 23 (29%) had grade 3 gastrointestinal adverse events, 12 (15%) had grade 3-4 pain, and 12 (15%) had grade 3-4 haematological adverse events during chemoradiation. Of the 77 patients who had surgery, six (8%) had grade 3 pain, three (4%) had grade 3-4 haemorrhage, and three (4%) had gastrointestinal adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Although the observed 3-year disease free survival was not as high as anticipated, our data suggest that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by local excision might be considered as an organ-preserving alternative in carefully selected patients with clinically staged T2N0 tumours who refuse, or are not candidates for, transabdominal resection. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute and Sanofi-Aventis.

Robotic Rectal Cancer Resection: A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Conventional laparoscopy has been applied to colorectal resections for more than 2 decades. However, laparoscopic rectal resection is technically demanding, especially when performing a tumor-specific mesorectal excision in a difficult pelvis. Robotic surgery is uniquely designed to overcome most of these technical limitations. The aim of this study was to confirm the feasibility of robotic rectal cancer surgery in a large multicenter study. METHODS: Retrospective data of 425 patients who underwent robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal lesions at seven institutions were collected. Outcome data were analyzed for the overall cohort and were stratified according to obese versus non-obese and low versus ultra-low resection patients. RESULTS: Mean age was 60.9 years, and 57.9 % of patients were male. Overall, 51.3 % of patients underwent neoadjuvant therapy, while operative time was 240 min, mean blood loss 119 ml, and intraoperative complication rate 4.5 %. Mean number of lymph nodes was 17.4, with a positive circumferential margin rate of 0.9 %. Conversion rate to open was 5.9 %, anastomotic leak rate was 8.7 %, with a mean length of stay of 5.7 days. Operative times were significantly longer and re-admission rate higher for the obese population, with all other parameters comparable. Ultra-low resections also had longer operative times. CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of rectal cancer is safe and can be performed according to current oncologic principles. BMI seems to play a minor role in influencing outcomes. Thus, robotics might be an excellent treatment option for the challenging patient undergoing resection for rectal cancer.