Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 29, Issue 6, pp 1419–1424 | Cite as

Robotic surgery for rectal cancer can overcome difficulties associated with pelvic anatomy

  • Se Jin Baek
  • Chang Hee Kim
  • Min Soo Cho
  • Sung Uk Bae
  • Hyuk Hur
  • Byung Soh Min
  • Seung Hyuk Baik
  • Kang Young Lee
  • Nam Kyu KimEmail author
Article

Abstract

Introduction

Total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer can be challenging to perform in the presence of difficult pelvic anatomy. In our previous studies based on open and laparoscopic TME, we found that pelvic MRI-based pelvimetry could well reflect anatomical difficulty of the pelvis and operative time increased in direct proportion to the difficulty. We explored different outcomes of robotic surgery for TME based on classifications of difficult pelvic anatomies to determine whether this method can overcome these challenges.

Methods

We reviewed data from 182 patients who underwent robotic surgery for rectal cancer between January 2008 and August 2010. Patient demographics, pathologic outcomes, pelvimetric results, and operative and postoperative outcomes were assessed. The data were compared between easy, moderate, and difficult groups classified by MRI-based pelvimetry.

Results

Comparing the three groups, there was no difference between the groups in terms of operative and pathologic outcomes, including operation time. High BMI, history of preoperative chemoradiotherapy, and lower tumor levels were significantly associated with longer operation time (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.009), but the pelvimetric parameter was not.

Conclusion

There was no difference between the easy, moderate, and difficult groups in terms of surgical outcomes, such as operation time, for robotic rectal surgery. The robot system can provide more comfort during surgery for the surgeon, and may overcome challenges associated with difficult pelvic anatomy.

Keywords

Pelvimetry Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) Pelvic anatomy Rectal neoplasm Robot surgery 

Notes

Disclosure

Se Jin Baek, Chang Hee Kim, Min Soo Cho, Sung Uk Bae, Hyuk Hur, Byung Soh Min, Seung Hyuk Baik, Kang Young Lee, Nam Kyu Kim have no actual or potential personal, political, or financial conflicts of interest with regards to this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD (1982) The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg 69:613–616CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leung KL, Kwok SP, Lam SC, Lee JF, Yiu RY, Ng SS, Lai PB, Lau WY (2004) Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trial. Lancet 363:1187–1192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM (2007) Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the uk mrc clasicc trial group. J Clin Oncol 25:3061–3068CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    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 97:1638–1645CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maslekar S, Sharma A, Macdonald A, Gunn J, Monson JR, Hartley JE (2007) Mesorectal grades predict recurrences after curative resection for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 50:168–175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim JG, Heo YJ, Son GM, Lee YS, Lee IK, Suh YJ, Cho HM, Chun CS (2009) Impact of laparoscopic surgery on the long-term outcomes for patients with rectal cancer. ANZ J Surg 79:817–823CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jeyarajah S, Sutton CD, Miller AS, Hemingway D (2007) Factors that influence the adequacy of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 9:808–815CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Akiyoshi T, Kuroyanagi H, Oya M, Konishi T, Fukuda M, Fujimoto Y, Ueno M, Miyata S, Yamaguchi T (2009) Factors affecting the difficulty of laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with double stapling technique anastomosis for low rectal cancer. Surgery 146:483–489CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boyle KM, Petty D, Chalmers AG, Quirke P, Cairns A, Finan PJ, Sagar PM, Burke D (2005) Mri assessment of the bony pelvis may help predict resectability of rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 7:232–240CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Salerno G, Daniels IR, Brown G, Norman AR, Moran BJ, Heald RJ (2007) Variations in pelvic dimensions do not predict the risk of circumferential resection margin (crm) involvement in rectal cancer. World J Surg 31:1313–1320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Targarona EM, Balague C, Pernas JC, Martinez C, Berindoague R, Gich I, Trias M (2008) Can we predict immediate outcome after laparoscopic rectal surgery? Multivariate analysis of clinical, anatomic, and pathologic features after 3-dimensional reconstruction of the pelvic anatomy. Ann Surg 247:642–649CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim JY, Kim YW, Kim NK, Hur H, Lee K, Min BS, Cho HJ (2011) Pelvic anatomy as a factor in laparoscopic rectal surgery: a prospective study. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 21:334–339PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baik SH, Kim NK, Lee KY, Sohn SK, Cho CH, Kim MJ, Kim H, Shinn RK (2008) Factors influencing pathologic results after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: analysis of consecutive 100 cases. Ann Surg Oncol 15:721–728CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gutt CN, Oniu T, Mehrabi A, Kashfi A, Schemmer P, Buchler MW (2004) Robot-assisted abdominal surgery. Br J Surg 91:1390–1397CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP, Meyers WC (2004) Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg 239:14–21CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maeso S, Reza M, Mayol JA, Blasco JA, Guerra M, Andradas E, Plana MN (2010) Efficacy of the da vinci surgical system in abdominal surgery compared with that of laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 252:254–262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baik SH, Kwon HY, Kim JS, Hur H, Sohn SK, Cho CH, Kim H (2009) Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1480–1487CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alasari S, Min BS (2012) Robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review. ISRN Surg 2012:293894CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Patel VR, Thaly R, Shah K (2007) Robotic radical prostatectomy: outcomes of 500 cases. BJU Int 99:1109–1112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Veljovich DS, Paley PJ, Drescher CW, Everett EN, Shah C, Peters WA 3rd (2008) Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: program initiation and outcomes after the first year with comparison with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging. Am J Obstet Gynecol 198(679):e671–e679 discussion 679 e679–610Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leff JD, Enriquez LJ (2012) Robotic-assisted cardiac surgery. Int Anesthesiol Clin 50:78–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bartoli A, Spaziani A, Biancafarina A, Casciola L (2009) Short- and medium-term outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic rectal resection. JSLS 13:176–183PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kwak JM, Kim SH, Kim J, Son DN, Baek SJ, Cho JS (2011) Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a case-control study. Dis Colon Rectum 54:151–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Barbash GI, Glied SA (2010) New technology and health care costs—the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363:701–704CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Turchetti G, Palla I, Pierotti F, Cuschieri A (2012) Economic evaluation of da vinci-assisted robotic surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 26:598–606CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Luca F, Valvo M, Ghezzi TL, Zuccaro M, Cenciarelli S, Trovato C, Sonzogni A, Biffi R (2013) Impact of robotic surgery on sexual and urinary functions after fully robotic nerve-sparing total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg 257:672–678CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    D’Annibale A, Pernazza G, Monsellato I, Pende V, Lucandri G, Mazzocchi P, Alfano G (2013) Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27:1887–1895CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Leong QM, Son DN, Cho JS, Baek SJ, Kwak JM, Amar AH, Kim SH (2011) Robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: technique and short-term outcome for 29 consecutive patients. Surg Endosc 25:2987–2992CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Baek SJ, Al-Asari S, Jeong DH, Hur H, Min BS, Baik SH, Kim NK (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic coloanal anastomosis with or without intersphincteric resection for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 27:4157–4163CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Se Jin Baek
    • 1
  • Chang Hee Kim
    • 1
  • Min Soo Cho
    • 1
  • Sung Uk Bae
    • 1
  • Hyuk Hur
    • 1
  • Byung Soh Min
    • 1
  • Seung Hyuk Baik
    • 1
  • Kang Young Lee
    • 1
  • Nam Kyu Kim
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of SurgeryYonsei University College of MedicineSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations