Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Current Role of Robotics in Colorectal Surgery

  • Large Intestine (B Cash and R Chokshi, Section Editors)
  • Published:
Current Gastroenterology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Despite the growth in laparoscopic surgery, comparable oncological outcomes, and reduced complication rates, the majority of colorectal surgery is still performed via an open approach. Reasons for this may include technical difficulties associated with operating in narrow spaces such as in the pelvis and inadequate experience. Robotic surgery provides potential solutions to some of these challenges. This review will summarize the state of the literature regarding robotic colorectal surgery.

Recent Findings

The most consistent benefit of robotic surgery is decreasing operative conversions, specifically in rectal cancer. In partial colectomies, there is evidence to support quicker return to bowel function. Oncologic outcomes compared to the laparoscopic approach are equivalent.

Summary

Robotic surgery provides solutions to the challenges posed by laparoscopy, including wristed instruments, ease of intracorporeal suturing, and ergonomic advantages. Randomized trials to evaluate peri-operative outcomes will be important. If robotics is able to facilitate conversion of open colectomies to their minimally invasive equivalent, robotics may end up proving to be advantageous in the peri-operative and post-operative period. Continued studies are warranted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Intuitive Surgical, I. da Vinci products FAQ. 2017; Available from: https://isrg.gcs-web.com/investor-faqs.

  2. Fowler DL, White SA. Laparoscopy-assisted sigmoid resection. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1991;1(3):183–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Juo YY, Hyder O, Haider AH, Camp M, Lidor A, Ahuja N. Is minimally invasive colon resection better than traditional approaches?: first comprehensive national examination with propensity score matching. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(2):177–84.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Hawkins AT, Ford MM, Benjamin Hopkins M, Muldoon RL, Wanderer JP, Parikh AA, et al. Barriers to laparoscopic colon resection for cancer: a national analysis. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(2):1035–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. • Yeo HL, et al. Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomies using a large national database: outcomes and trends related to surgery center volume. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(6):535–42 This paper provides a thorough description of open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomies and the disadvantages and advantages of each.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Moghadamyeghaneh Z, Hanna MH, Carmichael JC, Pigazzi A, Stamos MJ, Mills S. Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches for total abdominal colectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(7):2792–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schootman M, Hendren S, Ratnapradipa K, Stringer L, Davidson NO. Adoption of robotic technology for treating colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(11):1011–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Halabi WJ, Kang CY, Jafari MD, Nguyen VQ, Carmichael JC, Mills S, et al. Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes. World J Surg. 2013;37(12):2782–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne GH. Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45(12):1689–94 discussion 1695-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC. Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56(4):458–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim IK, Kang J, Park YA, Kim NK, Sohn SK, Lee KY. Is prior laparoscopy experience required for adaptation to robotic rectal surgery?: feasibility of one-step transition from open to robotic surgery. Int J Color Dis. 2014;29(6):693–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ohtani H, Maeda K, Nomura S, Shinto O, Mizuyama Y, Nakagawa H, et al. Meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. In Vivo. 2018;32(3):611–23.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Cui Y, Li C, Xu Z, Wang Y, Sun Y, Xu H, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic operation in anus-preserving rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2017;13:1247–57.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Li X, Wang T, Yao L, Hu L, Jin P, Guo T, et al. The safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic TME in patients with rectal cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(29):e7585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wang Y, Zhao GH, Yang H, Lin J. A pooled analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016;26(3):259–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sun Y, Xu H, Li Z, Han J, Song W, Wang J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14:61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee SH, Lim S, Kim JH, Lee KY. Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2015;89(4):190–201.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Xiong B, Ma L, Huang W, Zhao Q, Cheng Y, Liu J. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of eight studies. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(3):516–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, Shi C, Zou Y, Qin H, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(12):3727–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. •• Prete FP, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg. 2018;267(6):1034–46 This paper is the most up to date review of MIS for rectal cancer. It analyzes all the major trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bhama AR, Obias V, Welch KB, Vandewarker JF, Cleary RK. A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(4):1576–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee SH, Kim DH, Lim SW. Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Color Dis. 2018;33:1741–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wilder FG, Burnett A, Oliver J, Demyen MF, Chokshi RJ. A review of the long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Indian J Surg. 2016;78(3):214–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Luo Z, Zeng D, Shi Y, Yu P. da Vinci robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of postsurgery complications. Int J Color Dis. 2016;31(7):1405–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Speicher PJ, Englum BR, Ganapathi AM, Nussbaum DP, Mantyh CR, Migaly J. Robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a national perspective on short-term oncologic outcomes. Ann Surg. 2015;262(6):1040–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Garfinkle R, Abou-Khalil M, Bhatnagar S, Wong-Chong N, Azoulay L, Morin N, et al. A comparison of pathologic outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic resections for rectal cancer using the ACS-NSQIP proctectomy-targeted database: a propensity score analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2018

  27. Park SY, Choi GS, Park JS, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP. Short-term clinical outcome of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a retrospective comparison with conventional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(1):48–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Broholm M, Pommergaard HC, Gogenur I. Possible benefits of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery regarding urological and sexual dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Color Dis. 2015;17(5):375–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH. A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(8):2485–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, et al. Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318(16):1569–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Xu H, Li J, Sun Y, Li Z, Zhen Y, Wang B, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2014;12:274.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Zarak A, Castillo A, Kichler K, de la Cruz L, Tamariz L, Kaza S. Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colonic disease: a meta-analysis of postoperative variables. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(6):1341–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rondelli F, Balzarotti R, Villa F, Guerra A, Avenia N, Mariani E, et al. Is robot-assisted laparoscopic right colectomy more effective than the conventional laparoscopic procedure? A meta-analysis of short-term outcomes. Int J Surg. 2015;18:75–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Petrucciani N, Sirimarco D, Nigri GR, Magistri P, la Torre M, D′Angelo F, et al. Robotic right colectomy: a worthwhile procedure? Results of a meta-analysis of trials comparing robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy. J Minim Access Surg. 2015;11(1):22–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Lorenzon L, Bini F, Balducci G, Ferri M, Salvi PF, Marinozzi F. Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted colectomy and rectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Color Dis. 2016;31(2):161–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP. Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg. 2012;99(9):1219–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Solaini L, Bazzocchi F, Cavaliere D, Avanzolini A, Cucchetti A, Ercolani G. Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(3):1104–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Duan BS, Zhao GH, Yang H, Wang Y. A pooled analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016;26(6):523–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lim S, Kim JH, Baek SJ, Kim SH, Lee SH. Comparison of perioperative and short-term outcomes between robotic and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colonic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2016;90(6):328–39.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Miller PE, Dao H, Paluvoi N, Bailey M, Margolin D, Shah N, et al. Comparison of 30-day postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic vs robotic colectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;223(2):369–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Kulaylat AS, Mirkin KA, Puleo FJ, Hollenbeak CS, Messaris E. Robotic versus standard laparoscopic elective colectomy: where are the benefits? J Surg Res. 2018;224:72–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Cheng CL, Rezac C. The role of robotics in colorectal surgery. BMJ. 2018;360:j5304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Wu Q, Jin C, Hu T, Wei M, Wang Z. Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2017;27(4):348–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Akram WM, al-Natour RH, Albright J, Wu J, Ferraro J, Shanker BA, et al. A propensity score-matched comparison of intracorporeal and extracorporeal techniques for robotic-assisted right colectomy in an enhanced recovery pathway. Am J Surg. 2018;216:1095–100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Trastulli S, Coratti A, Guarino S, Piagnerelli R, Annecchiarico M, Coratti F, et al. Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared with laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal and intracorporeal anastomosis: a retrospective multicentre study. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(6):1512–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Spinoglio G, Bianchi PP, Marano A, Priora F, Lenti LM, Ravazzoni F, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision for the treatment of colon cancer: perioperative outcomes and 5-year survival in a consecutive series of 202 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:3580–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Mirkin KA, Kulaylat AS, Hollenbeak CS, Messaris E. Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for stage I-III colon cancer: oncologic and long-term survival outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(6):2894–901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Jeffrey D, Tanvir H, Sean JL. Predictors of adequate lymph node harvest during colectomy for colon cancer. Am J Surg. 2018.

  49. Harr JN, Haskins IN, Amdur RL, Agarwal S, Obias V. The effect of obesity on laparoscopic and robotic-assisted colorectal surgery outcomes: an ACS-NSQIP database analysis. J Robot Surg. 2018;12(2):317–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. van Iersel JJ, Formijne Jonkers HA, Paulides TJC, Verheijen PM, Draaisma WA, Consten ECJ, et al. Robot-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a 5-year experience at a tertiary referral center. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60(11):1215–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Perrenot C, Germain A, Scherrer ML, Ayav A, Brunaud L, Bresler L. Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse. Dis Colon Rectum. 2013;56(7):909–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Heemskerk J, de Hoog DENM, van Gemert WG, Baeten CGMI, Greve JWM, Bouvy ND. Robot-assisted vs. conventional laparoscopic rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a comparative study on costs and time. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50(11):1825–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Faucheron JL, Trilling B, Barbois S, Sage PY, Waroquet PA, Reche F. Day case robotic ventral rectopexy compared with day case laparoscopic ventral rectopexy: a prospective study. Tech Coloproctol. 2016;20(10):695–700.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Rondelli F, Bugiantella W, Villa F, Sanguinetti A, Boni M, Mariani E, et al. Robot-assisted or conventional laparoscoic rectopexy for rectal prolapse? Systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2014;12(Suppl 2):S153–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Makela-Kaikkonen J, et al. Robot-assisted vs laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external or internal rectal prolapse and enterocele: a randomized controlled trial. Color Dis. 2016;18(10):1010–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Rencuzogullari A, Gorgun E, Costedio M, Aytac E, Kessler H, Abbas MA, et al. Case-matched comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016;26(3):e37–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Renshaw S, Silva IL, Hotouras A, Wexner SD, Murphy J, Bhan C. Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of robotic colorectal resections for inflammatory bowel disease: a systematic literature review. Tech Coloproctol. 2018;22(3):161–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Mark-Christensen A, Pachler FR, Nørager CB, Jepsen P, Laurberg S, Tøttrup A. Short-term outcome of robot-assisted and open IPAA: an observational single-center study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59(3):201–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Philip S, Jackson N, Mittal V. Outcomes after laparoscopic or robotic colectomy and open colectomy when compared by operative duration for the procedure. Am J Surg. 2018;215(4):577–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Lee L, Wong-Chong N, Kelly JJ, Nassif GJ, Albert MR, Monson JRT. Minimally invasive surgery for stage III colon adenocarcinoma is associated with less delay to initiation of adjuvant systemic therapy and improved survival. Surg Endosc. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6319-5

  61. Damle A, Damle RN, Flahive JM, Schlussel AT, Davids JS, Sturrock PR, et al. Diffusion of technology: trends in robotic-assisted colorectal surgery. Am J Surg. 2017;214(5):820–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Armijo PR, Pagkratis S, Boilesen E, Tanner T, Oleynikov D. Growth in robotic-assisted procedures is from conversion of laparoscopic procedures and not from open surgeons' conversion: a study of trends and costs. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(4):2106–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Lemini R, Spaulding AC, Naessens JM, Li Z, Merchea A, Crook JE, et al. ERAS protocol validation in a propensity-matched cohort of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Int J Color Dis. 2018;33:1543–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Morelli L, et al. Use of the new da Vinci Xi(R) during robotic rectal resection for cancer: a pilot matched-case comparison with the da Vinci Si(R). Int J Med Robot. 2017;13(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.1728

  65. Morelli L, di Franco G, Guadagni S, Rossi L, Palmeri M, Furbetta N, et al. Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: case-matched comparison of short-term surgical and functional outcomes between the da Vinci Xi and Si. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(2):589–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Ozben V, Cengiz TB, Atasoy D, Bayraktar O, Aghayeva A, Erguner I, et al. Is da Vinci Xi better than da Vinci Si in robotic rectal cancer surgery? Comparison of the 2 generations of da Vinci systems. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016;26(5):417–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Paull JO, Pudalov N, Obias V. Medrobotics flex transanal excision of a rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumour: first video of the transanal flex robot used in a human—a video vignette. Color Dis. 2018;20:1048–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. General Surgery, McGovern Medical School at UT Health, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 4.331, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Harith H. Mushtaq

  2. Minimally Invasive and Elective General Surgery, McGovern Medical School at UT Health, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 4.156, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Shinil K. Shah

  3. Colon and Rectal Surgery, McGovern Medical School at UT Health, 6431 Fannin Street, MSB 4.158, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Amit K. Agarwal

Authors
  1. Harith H. Mushtaq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shinil K. Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amit K. Agarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amit K. Agarwal.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Large Intestine

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mushtaq, H.H., Shah, S.K. & Agarwal, A.K. The Current Role of Robotics in Colorectal Surgery. Curr Gastroenterol Rep 21, 11 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-019-0676-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11894-019-0676-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation