Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 27, Issue 6, pp 1887–1895 | Cite as

Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer

  • Annibale D’Annibale
  • Graziano PernazzaEmail author
  • Igor Monsellato
  • Vito Pende
  • Giorgio Lucandri
  • Paolo Mazzocchi
  • Giovanni Alfano



Long-term data from the CLASICC study demonstrated the oncologic equivalence of laparoscopic and open rectal cancer surgery despite an increased circumferential resection margin involvement in the laparoscopic group in the initial report. Moreover, laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) may be associated with increased rates of male sexual dysfunction compared to conventional open TME. Robotic surgery could potentially obtain better results than laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in a single-center experience.


This study was based on 100 patients who underwent minimally invasive anterior rectal resection with TME. Fifty consecutive robotic rectal anterior resections with TME (R-TME) were compared to the first 50 consecutive laparoscopic rectal resections with TME (L-TME).


Median operative time was 270 min in R-TME and 275 min in L-TME. No conversions occurred in the R-TME group whereas six conversions occurred in the L-TME group. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 16.5 ± 7.1 for R-TME and 13.8 ± 6.7 for L-TME. The circumferential margin (CRM) was <2 mm in six L-TME patients, whereas no one in R-TME group had a CRM <2 mm. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) scores were significantly increased 1 month after surgery in both the L-TME and R-TME groups, but they normalized 1 year after surgery. Erectile function worsened significantly 1 month after surgery in both the groups but it was restored completely 1 year after surgery in the R-TME group and partially in the L-TME group.


Robotic TME is oncologically safe and adequate for rectal cancer treatment, showing better results than laparoscopic TME in terms of CRM, conversions, and hospital length of stay. Better recovery in voiding and sexual function is achieved with the robotic technique.


Robotic rectal anterior resection Laparoscopy TME Rectal cancer Robotic surgery Functional results 



We thank Dr. Marina Rosito and Dr. Tania Contardo for helping us collect the data.


Drs. D’Annibale, Pernazza, Monsellato, Pende, Lucandri, Mazzocchi, and Alfano have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown JM, Guillou PJ (2010) Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:1638–1645PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jayne DG, Brown JM, Thorpe H, Walker J, Quirke P, Guillou PJ (2005) Bladder and sexual function following resection for rectal cancer in a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open technique. Br J Surg 92:1124–1132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP, Meyers WC (2004) Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg 239:14–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    D’Annibale A, Pernazza G, Morpurgo E, Monsellato I, Pende V, Lucandri G, Termini B, Orsini C, Sovernigo G (2010) Robotic right colon resection: evaluation of first 50 consecutive cases for malignant disease. Ann Surg Oncol 17:2856–2862PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Spinoglio G, Summa M, Priora F, Quarati R, Testa S (2008) Robotic colorectal surgery: first 50 cases experience. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1627–1632PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    D’Annibale A, Pende V, Pernazza G, Monsellato I, Mazzocchi P, Lucandri G, Morpurgo E, Contardo T, Sovernigo G (2011) Full robotic gastrectomy with extended (D2) lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer: surgical technique and preliminary results. J Surg Res 166:e113–e120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ashley FL, Anson BJ (1946) The pelvic autonomic nerves in the male. Surg Gynecol Obstet 82:598–608PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim NK (2005) Anatomic basis of sharp pelvic dissection for curative resection of rectal cancer. Yonsei Med J 46:737–749PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    García-Armengol J, García-Botello S, Martinez-Soriano F, Roig JV, Lledó S (2008) Review of the anatomic concepts in relation to the retrorectal space and endopelvic fascia: Waldeyer’s fascia and the rectosacral fascia. Colorectal Dis 10:298–302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lepor H, Gregerman M, Crosby R, Mostofi FK, Walsh PC (1985) Precise localization of the autonomic nerves from the pelvic plexus to the corpora cavernosa: a detailed anatomical study of the adult male pelvis. J Urol 133:207–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kourambas J, Angus DG, Hosking P, Chou ST (1998) A histological study of Denonvilliers’ fascia and its relationship to the neurovascular bundle. Br J Urol 82:408–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nano M, Levi AC, Borghi F, Bellora P, Bogliatto F, Garbossa D, Bronda M, Lanfranco G, Moffa F, Dörfl J (1998) Observations on surgical anatomy for rectal cancer surgery. Hepatogastroenterology 45:717–726PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang GJ, Gao CF, Wei D, Wang C, Meng WJ (2010) Anatomy of the lateral ligaments of the rectum: a controversial point of view. World J Gastroenterol 16:5411–5415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ito M, Sugito M, Kobayashi A, Nishizawa Y, Tsunoda Y, Saito N (2009) Influence of learning curve on short-term results after laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 23:403–408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schlachta CM, Mamazza J, Seshadri PA, Cadeddu M, Gregoire R, Poulin EC (2001) Defining a learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal resections. Dis Colon Rectum 44:217–222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li GX, Yan HT, Yu J, Lei ST, Xue Q, Cheng X (2006) Learning curve of laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao 26:535–538PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Iversen LH, Harling H, Laurberg S, Wille-Jørgensen P (2007) Influence of caseload and surgical speciality on outcome following surgery for colorectal cancer: a review of evidence. Part 1: short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis 9:28–37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Balik E, Asoglu O, Saglam S, Yamaner S, Akyuz A, Buyukuncu Y, Gulluoglu M, Bulut T, Bugra D (2010) Effects of surgical laparoscopic experience on the short-term postoperative outcome of rectal cancer: results of a high volume single center institution. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 20:93–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Agha A, Fürst A, Iesalnieks I, Fichtner-Feigl S, Ghali N, Krenz D, Anthuber M, Jauch KW, Piso P, Schlitt HJ (2008) Conversion rate in 300 laparoscopic rectal resections and its influence on morbidity and oncological outcome. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:409–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bege T, Lelong B, Esterni B, Turrini O, Guiramand J, Francon D, Mokart D, Houvenaeghel G, Giovannini M, Delpero JR (2010) The learning curve for the laparoscopic approach to conservative mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: lessons drawn from a single institution’s experience. Ann Surg 251:249–253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Park IJ, Choi GS, Lim KH, Kang BM, Jun SH (2009) Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: lessons from 1,000 cases of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 23:839–846PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Germay O et al (2001) Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg 25:1467–1477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Berguer R, Rab GT, Abu-Ghaida H, Alarcon A, Chung J (1997) A comparison of surgeons’ posture during laparoscopic and open surgical procedures. Surg Endosc 11:139–142PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20:1729–1734PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wasserberg N, Gutman H (2008) Resection margins in modern rectal cancer surgery. J Surg Oncol 98:611–615PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Quirke P, Durdey P, Dixon MF, Williams NS (1986) Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection: histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision. Lancet 2:996–999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Park IJ, Kim JC (2010) Adequate length of the distal resection margin in rectal cancer: from the oncological point of view. J Gastrointest Surg 14:1331–1337PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tilney HS, Rasheed S, Northover JM, Tekkis PP (2009) The influence of circumferential resection margins on long-term outcomes following rectal cancer surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1723–1729PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hermanek P, Junginger T (2005) The circumferential resection margin in rectal carcinoma surgery. Tech Coloproctol 9:193–199PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nagtegaal ID, van Krieken JHJM (2002) The role of pathologists in the quality control of diagnosis and treatment of rectal cancer—an overview. Eur J Cancer 38:964–972PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CA, Kranenbarg EK, van de Velde CJ, van Krieken JH (2002) Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit. Am J Surg Pathol 26:350–357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Shirouzu K, Isomoto H, Kakegawa T (1995) Distal spread of rectal cancer and optimal distal margin of resection for sphincter preserving surgery. Cancer 76:388–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vernava AM 3rd, Moran M, Rothenberger DA, Wong WD (1992) A prospective evaluation of distal margins in carcinoma of the rectum. Surg Gynecol Obstet 175:333–336PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bokhari MB, Patel CB, Ramos-Valadez DI, Ragupathi M, Haas EM (2011) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc 25:855–860PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Havenga K, Maas CP, DeRuiter MC, Welvaart K, Trimbos JB (2000) Avoiding long-term disturbance to bladder and sexual function in pelvic surgery, particularly with rectal cancer. Semin Surg Oncol 18:235–243PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cunsolo A, Bragaglia RB, Manara G, Poggioli G, Gozzetti G (1990) Urogenital dysfunction after abdominoperineal resection for carcinoma of the rectum. Dis Colon Rectum 33:918–922PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Leveckis J, Boucher NR, Parys BT, Reed MW, Shorthouse AJ, Anderson JB (1995) Bladder and erectile dysfunction before and after rectal surgery for cancer. Br J Urol 76:752–756PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Heald RJ (1988) The “holy plane” of rectal surgery. J R Soc Med 81:503–508PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lee JF, Maurer MV, Block GE (1993) Anatomic relations of pelvic autonomic nerves to pelvic operations. Arch Surg 107:324–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kim NK, Aahn TW, Park JK, Lee KY, Lee WH, Sohn SK, Min JS (2002) Assessment of sexual and voiding function after total mesorectal excision with pelvic autonomic nerve preservation in males with rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1178–1185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Phang PT (2004) Total mesorectal excision: technical aspects. Can J Surg 47:130–137PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annibale D’Annibale
    • 1
  • Graziano Pernazza
    • 1
    Email author
  • Igor Monsellato
    • 1
  • Vito Pende
    • 1
  • Giorgio Lucandri
    • 1
  • Paolo Mazzocchi
    • 1
  • Giovanni Alfano
    • 1
  1. 1.Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery UnitSan Giovanni Addolorata HospitalRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations