Recent advances in robotic surgery for rectal cancer
- 334 Downloads
Robotic technology, which has recently been introduced to the field of surgery, is expected to be useful, particularly in treating rectal cancer where precise manipulation is necessary in the confined pelvic cavity. Robotic surgery overcomes the technical drawbacks inherent to laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer through the use of multi-articulated flexible tools, three-dimensional stable camera platforms, tremor filtering and motion scaling functions, and greater ergonomic and intuitive device manipulation. Assessments of the feasibility and safety of robotic surgery for rectal cancer have reported similar operation times, blood loss during surgery, rates of postoperative morbidity, and circumferential resection margin involvement when compared with laparoscopic surgery. Furthermore, rates of conversion to open surgery are reportedly lower with increased urinary and male sexual functions in the early postoperative period compared with laparoscopic surgery, demonstrating the technical advantages of robotic surgery for rectal cancer. However, long-term outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of robotic surgery for rectal cancer have not been fully evaluated yet; therefore, large-scale clinical studies are required to evaluate the efficacy of this new technology.
KeywordsRectal cancer Robotic surgery Laparoscopic surgery
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059Google Scholar
- 8.Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A et al (2012) An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 27:233–241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Tewari A, Sooriakumaran P, Bloch DA et al (2012) Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy. Eur Urol 62:1–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bartoli A et al (2009) Short- and medium-term outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic rectal resection. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg/Soc Laparoendosc Surg 13:176–183Google Scholar
- 27.Shibata J, Ishihara S, Tada N et al (2015) Surgical stress response after colorectal resection: a comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery. Tech Coloproctol 19:275–280Google Scholar
- 30.Park SY, Choi GS, Park JS et al (2014) Urinary and erectile function in men after total mesorectal excision by laparoscopic or robot-assisted methods for the treatment of rectal cancer: a case-matched comparison. World J Surg 38:1834–1842Google Scholar
- 31.Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ et al (2015) Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 261:129–37Google Scholar
- 47.Watanabe T, Itabashi M, Shimada Y et al (2015) Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum (JSCCR) Guidelines 2014 for treatment of colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol 20:207–239Google Scholar
- 50.Kagawa H, Kinugasa Y, Shiomi A et al (2014) Robotic-assisted lateral lymph node dissection for lower rectal cancer: short-term outcomes in 50 consecutive patients. Surg Endosc 29:995–1000Google Scholar
- 55.Ishihara S, Sunami E, Watanabe T (2015) The state of the art in minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer: Robotic surgery. New perspective in the treatment of colorectal cancer (in press)Google Scholar