Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Short-term outcomes of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in robotic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Review
  • Published:
Techniques in Coloproctology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ileocolic anastomosis is performed via extracorporeal or intracorporeal techniques in robotic right hemicolectomy. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term outcomes of intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) and extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) for robotic right colectomy. The EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically (from inception until March 1, 2020) for randomized and non-randomized control trials reporting the short-term outcomes of IA and EA for robotic right colectomy. Five observational cohort studies involving 585 participants were included in our meta-analysis. Compared to the EA group, the IA group showed significantly longer operation time [weighted mean difference (WMD): 28.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 13.88–43.89, p = 0.0002], lower rate of anastomotic leak (odds ratio: 0.26, 95% CI 0.08–0.85, p = 0.03), and shorter time to first flatus (WMD: − 0.57, 95% CI − 0.95 to 0.19, p = 0.003). However, pooled results revealed no difference in blood loss, complications, wound infection, incisional hernia, length of incision, and hospital stay between the IA and EA groups (p < 0.05). This meta-analysis indicated that IA was superior to EA in terms of anastomotic leak and time to first flatus, but inferior in terms of operation time. Large-scale, multicenter, randomized studies are needed to confirm our findings.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Ballantyne GH (2007) Telerobotic gastrointestinal surgery: phase 2—safety and efficacy. Surg Endosc 21:1054–1062. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-006-9130-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne GH (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-7261-2 (discussion 1695–1686)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yeo HL, Isaacs AJ, Abelson JS, Milsom JW, Sedrakyan A (2016) Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomies using a large national database: outcomes and trends related to surgery center volume. Dis Colon Rectum 59:535–542. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000580

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. van Oostendorp S et al (2017) Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in right hemicolectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 31:64–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4982-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Milone M et al (2015) Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis. Results from a multicentre comparative study on 512 right-sided colorectal cancers. Surg Endosc 29:2314–2320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3950-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shapiro R et al (2016) Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis: short- and long-term benefits in comparison with extracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 30:3823–3829. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4684-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Clark HD et al (1999) Assessing the quality of randomized trials: reliability of the Jadad scale. Control Clin Trials 20:448–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0197-2456(99)00026-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stang A (2010) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 25:603–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Akram WM et al (2018) A propensity score-matched comparison of intracorporeal and extracorporeal techniques for robotic-assisted right colectomy in an Enhanced Recovery Pathway. Am J Surg 216:1095–1100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.06.010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Liu D et al (2019) Short- and long-term outcomes of totally robotic versus robotic-assisted right hemicolectomy for colon cancer: a retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore) 98:e15028. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Morpurgo E et al (2013) Robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a case control study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23:414–417. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2012.0404

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Reitz ACW, Lin E, Rosen SA (2018) A single surgeon’s experience transitioning to robotic-assisted right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Endosc 32:3525–3532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6074-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rattenborg S et al (2021) Intracorporeal anastomosis in right hemicolectomy for colon cancer: short-term outcomes with the DaVinci Xi robot. J Robot Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-020-01188-y

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Minjares-Granillo RO, Dimas BA, LeFave JJ, Haas EM (2019) Robotic left-sided colorectal resection with natural orifice IntraCorporeal anastomosis with extraction of specimen: the NICE procedure. A pilot study of consecutive cases. Am J Surg 217:670–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.11.048

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Megevand JL et al (2019) Right colectomy: consecutive 100 patients treated with laparoscopic and robotic technique for malignancy. Cumulative experience in a single centre. Updates Surg 71:151–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-018-0599-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Spinoglio G et al (2016) Robotic right colectomy with modified complete mesocolic excision: long-term oncologic outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 23:684–691. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5580-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ozben V et al (2019) Totally robotic complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer. J Robot Surg 13:107–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-018-0817-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ricci C et al (2017) A critical and comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 402:417–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-016-1509-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Martin TD et al (2016) Newly implemented enhanced recovery pathway positively impacts hospital length of stay. Surg Endosc 30:4019–4028. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4714-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bollo J et al (2018) Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in right hemicolectomy assisted by laparoscopy: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Int J Colorect Dis 33:1635–1641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-018-3157-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Krouchev R et al (2018) Total intracorporeal anastomosis for right hemicolectomy: experience from a Canadian center. Am J Surg 215:905–908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.02.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Biondi A et al (2017) Totally laparoscopic right colectomy versus laparoscopically assisted right colectomy: a propensity score analysis. Surg Endosc 31:5275–5282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5601-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. DeSouza A et al (2011) Incisional hernia, midline versus low transverse incision: what is the ideal incision for specimen extraction and hand-assisted laparoscopy? Surg Endosc 25:1031–1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1309-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, China

    Y. Liang, Q. Su, Y. Liu, H. Yin & D. Wu

  2. Department of Anorectal Surgery, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, China

    L. Li

Authors
  1. Y. Liang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Q. Su
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Y. Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. H. Yin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. D. Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

YL, DW and QS conception and design of study, acquisition of data, drafting article and final approval. YL and HY analysis and interpretation of data. LL acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting article, final approval.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. Wu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors have claimed no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

The study does not contain any human participants and does not require ethical approval.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

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

Liang, Y., Li, L., Su, Q. et al. Short-term outcomes of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis in robotic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Tech Coloproctol 26, 529–535 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-022-02599-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-022-02599-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation