Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic complete mesocolic excision for transverse colon cancer can be performed with a morbidity profile similar to that of conventional laparoscopic colectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Techniques in Coloproctology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In minimally invasive surgery, complete mesocolic excision (CME) for transverse colon cancer is challenging; thus, non-CME resections are commonly preferred when laparoscopy is used. Robotic technology has been developed to reduce the limitations of laparoscopy. The aim of our study was to evaluate whether robotic CME for transverse colon cancer can be performed with short-term outcomes similar to those of laparoscopic conventional colectomy (CC).

Methods

A retrospective review of 118 consecutive patients having robotic CME or laparoscopic CC for transverse colon cancer in two specialized centers between May 2011 and September 2018 was performed. Perioperative 30-day outcomes of the two procedures were compared.

Results

There were 38 and 80 patients in the robotic CME group and laparoscopic CC group, respectively. The groups were comparable regarding preoperative characteristics. Intraoperative results were similar, including blood loss (median 50 vs 25 ml), complications (5.3% vs 3.8%), and conversions (none vs 7.5%). The rate of intracorporeal anastomosis was significantly higher (86.8% vs 20.0%), mean operative time was longer (325.0 ± 123.2 vs 159.3 ± 56.1 min (p < 0.001), and the mean number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the robotic CME group (46.1 ± 22.2 vs 39.1 ± 17.8, p = 0.047). There were only minor differences in length of hospital stay (7.2 ± 3.1 vs 7.9 ± 4.0 days), anastomotic leak (none vs 2.6%), bleeding (none vs 1.3%), surgical site infections (10.5% vs 12.5%), and reoperations (2.6% vs 6.3%).

Conclusions

Robotic CME can be performed with a similar morbidity profile as laparoscopic CC for transverse colon cancer along with a higher rate of intracorporeal anastomosis, and higher number of lymph nodes retrieved, but longer operative times.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hohenberger W, Weber K, Matzel K et al (2009) Standardized surgery for colonic cancer: complete mesocolic excision and central ligation-technical notes and outcome. Colorectal Dis 11:354–364

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Søndenaa K, Quirke P, Kennedy RH et al (2014) The rationale behind complete mesocolic excision (CME) and a central vascular ligation for colon cancer in open and laparoscopic surgery: proceedings of a consensus conference. Int J Colorectal Dis 29:419–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Merkel S, Weber K, Matzel KE et al (2016) Prognosis of patients with colonic carcinoma before, during and after implementation of complete mesocolic excision. Br J Surg 103:1220–1229

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Brouwer NPM, Hugen N, Nagtegaal ID (2020) More extensive lymphadenectomy in colon cancer; how far are we willing to go for a biomarker? Tech Coloproctol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02239-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Schlachta CM, Mamazza J, Poulin EC (2007) Are transverse colon cancers suitable for laparoscopic resection? Surg Endosc 21:396–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fernández-Cebrián JM, Gil Yonte P, Jimenez-Toscano M et al (2013) Laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon carcinoma: a surgical challenge but oncologically feasible. Colorectal Dis 15:e79–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ichihara T, Takada M, Fukumoto S et al (2004) Lymphadenectomy along the middle colic artery in laparoscopic resection of transverse colon. Hepatogastroenterology 51:455–456

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mori S, Kita Y, Baba K et al (2017) Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision via combined medial and cranial approaches for transverse colon cancer. Surg Today 47:643–649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ozben V, de Muijnck C, Esen E et al (2018) Is robotic complete mesocolic excision feasible for transverse colon cancer? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 28:1443–1450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML et al (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250:187–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Aghayeva A, Baca B, Atasoy D et al (2016) Robotic complete mesocolic excision for splenic flexure of colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 59:1098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yozgatli TK, Aytac E, Ozben V et al (2019) Robotic complete mesocolic excision versus conventional laparoscopic hemicolectomy for right-sided colon cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2018.0348(Epub ahead of print)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Storli KE, Eide GE (2016) Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision versus open complete mesocolic excision for transverse colon cancer: long-term survival results of a prospective single centre non-randomized study. Dig Surg 33:114–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang Y, Zhang C, Feng YF et al (2017) Comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic-assisted and open complete mesocolic excision (CME) for the treatment of transverse colon cancer. Chin Clin Oncol 6:6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Matsuda T, Sumi Y, Yamashita K et al (2018) Anatomical and embryological perspectives in laparoscopic complete mesocoloic excision of splenic flexure cancers. Surg Endosc 32:1202–1208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kwak HD, Ju JK, Lee SY et al (2017) A comparison of laparoscopic and open D3 lymphadenectomy for transverse colon cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 32:1733–1739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jung KU, Park Y, Lee KY et al (2015) Robotic transverse colectomy for mid-transverse colon cancer: surgical techniques and oncologic outcomes. J Robot Surg 9:131–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. de’Angelis N, Alghamdi S, Renda A et al (2015) Initial experience of robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer: a matched case-control study. World J Surg Oncol 13:295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ozben V, Aytac E, Atasoy D et al (2019) Totally robotic complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer. J Robot Surg 13:107–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Trastulli S, Coratti A, Guarino S et al (2015) Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared with laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal and intracorporeal anastomosis: a retrospective multicentre study. Surg Endosc 29:1512–1521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Tarta C, Bishawi M, Bergamaschi R (2013) Intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis: a review. Tech Coloproctol 17:479–485

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Benlice C, Stocchi L, Costedio MM et al (2016) Impact of the specific extraction-site location on the risk of incisional hernia after laparoscopic colorectal resection. Dis Colon Rectum 59:743–750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Perrakis A, Weber K, Merkel S et al (2014) Lymph node metastasis of carcinomas of transverse colon including flexures. Consideration of the extramesocolic lymph node stations. Int J Colorectal 29:1223–1229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kotake K, Honjo S, Sugihara K et al (2012) Number of lymph nodes retrieved is an important determinant of survival of patients with stage II and stage III colorectal cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 42:29–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University, School of Medicine, Atakent Hastanesi, Halkali Merkez Mah, Turgut Ozal Bulv, No. 16, Kucukcekmece, 34303, Istanbul, Turkey

    V. Ozben, C. de Muijnck, E. Aytac, I. A. Bilgin, B. Baca, I. Hamzaoglu & T. Karahasanoglu

  2. Department of General Surgery, Koc University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey

    B. Sengun, S. Zenger, O. Agcaoglu, E. Balik & D. Bugra

Authors
  1. V. Ozben
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. de Muijnck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. Sengun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Zenger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. O. Agcaoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. E. Balik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. E. Aytac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. I. A. Bilgin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. B. Baca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. I. Hamzaoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. T. Karahasanoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. D. Bugra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Ozben.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments.

Informed Consent

For this type of retrospective study formal informed consent is not required.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ozben, V., de Muijnck, C., Sengun, B. et al. Robotic complete mesocolic excision for transverse colon cancer can be performed with a morbidity profile similar to that of conventional laparoscopic colectomy. Tech Coloproctol 24, 1035–1042 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02249-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-020-02249-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation