A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery
- 780 Downloads
Current data addressing the role of robotic surgery for the management of colorectal disease are primarily from single-institution and case-matched comparative studies as well as administrative database analyses. The purpose of this study was to compare minimally invasive surgery outcomes using a large regional protocol-driven database devoted to surgical quality, improvement in patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness.
This is a retrospective cohort study from the prospectively collected Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative registry designed to compare outcomes of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and robotic colon and rectal operations between July 1, 2012 and October 7, 2014. We adjusted for differences in baseline covariates between cases with different surgical approaches using propensity score quintiles modeled on patient demographics, general health factors, diagnosis, and preoperative co-morbidities. The primary outcomes were conversion rates and hospital length of stay. Secondary outcomes included operative time, and postoperative morbidity and mortality.
A total of 2735 minimally invasive colorectal operations met inclusion criteria. Conversion rates were lower with robotic as compared to laparoscopic operations, and this was statistically significant for rectal resections (colon 9.0 vs. 16.9 %, p < 0.06; rectum 7.8 vs. 21.2 %, p < 0.001). The adjusted length of stay for robotic colon operations (4.00 days, 95 % CI 3.63–4.40) was significantly shorter compared to laparoscopic (4.41 days, 95 % CI 4.17–4.66; p = 0.04) and hand-assisted laparoscopic cases (4.44 days, 95 % CI 4.13–4.78; p = 0.008). There were no significant differences in overall postoperative complications among groups.
When compared to conventional laparoscopy, the robotic platform is associated with significantly fewer conversions to open for rectal operations, and significantly shorter length of hospital stay for colon operations, without increasing overall postoperative morbidity. These findings and the recent upgrades in minimally invasive technology warrant continued evaluation of the role of the robotic platform in colorectal surgery.
KeywordsLaparoscopic colorectal surgery Hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery Robotic colorectal surgery Conversion rates Complication rates Length of hospital stay
Dr. Michael S. Tam, Dr. Christodoulos Kaoutzanis, Andrew J. Mullard, Dr. Scott R. Regenbogen, Dr. Michael G. Franz, Dr. Samantha Hendren, Dr. Greta Krapohl, James F. Vandewarker, and Dr. Richard M. Lampman have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Dr. Cleary is an educational speaker and has received honoraria from Intuitive Surgical Inc.
- 18.Kuo LJ, Lin YK, Chang CC, Tai CJ, Chiou JF, Chang YJ (2014) Clinical outcomes of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopy and multifactorial analysis of the learning curve for robotic surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 29:555–562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 23.Faries D, Leon AC, Haro JM, Obenchain RL (2010) Analysis of observational health care data using SAS. SAS Institute Inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
- 32.Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM, MRC CLASICC trial group (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multi-centre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365:1718–1726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 40.Pigazzi A (2014) Robotic versus laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer (ROLARR). www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01736072