Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection for the treatment of stage II and III sigmoid colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

  • Research
  • Published:
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Robot-assisted laparoscopic anterior resection is a novel technique. However, evidence in the literature regarding the advantages of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RLS) is insufficient. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of RLS versus conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for the treatment of sigmoid colon cancer. We performed a retrospective study at the Northern Jiangsu People’s Hospital. Patients diagnosed with sigmoid colon cancer and underwent anterior resection between January 2019 to September 2023 were included in the study. We compared the basic characteristics of the patients and the short-term and long-term outcomes of patients in the two groups. A total of 452 patients were included. Based on propensity score matching, 212 patients (RLS, n = 106; CLS, n = 106) were included. The baseline data in RLS group was comparable to that in CLS group. Compared with CLS group, RLS group exhibited less estimated blood loss (P = 0.015), more harvested lymph nodes (P = 0.005), longer operation time (P < 0.001) and higher total hospitalization costs (P < 0.001). Meanwhile, there were no significant differences in other perioperative or pathologic outcomes between the two groups. For 3-year prognosis, overall survival rates were 92.5% in the RLS group and 90.6% in the CLS group (HR 0.700, 95% CI 0.276–1.774, P = 0.452); disease-free survival rates were 91.5% in the RLS group and 87.7% in the CLS group (HR 0.613, 95% CI 0.262–1.435, P = 0.259). Compared with CLS, RLS for sigmoid colon cancer was found to be associated with a higher number of lymph nodes harvested, similar perioperative outcomes and long-term survival outcomes. High total hospitalization costs of RLS did not translate into better long-term oncology outcomes.

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

Data availability

Data supporting the findings of this study can be made available by the corresponding author upon request.

References

  1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al (2021) Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA A Cancer J Clinicians 71:209–249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Benson AB, Venook AP, Bekaii-Saab T et al (2014) Colon cancer, version 3.2014. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 12:1028–1059. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2014.0099

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. McCombie AM, Frizelle F, Bagshaw PF et al (2018) The ALCCaS trial: a randomized controlled trial comparing quality of life following laparoscopic versus open colectomy for colon cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 61:1156–1162. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000001165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cuk P, Kjær MD, Mogensen CB et al (2022) Short-term outcomes in robot-assisted compared to laparoscopic colon cancer resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 36:32–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08782-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Polat F, Willems LH, Dogan K, Rosman C (2019) The oncological and surgical safety of robot-assisted surgery in colorectal cancer: outcomes of a longitudinal prospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 33:3644–3655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-06653-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne GH (2002) Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1689–1696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-004-7261-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kuo L-J, Ngu JC-Y, Tong Y-S, Chen C-C (2017) Combined robotic transanal total mesorectal excision (R-taTME) and single-site plus one-port (R-SSPO) technique for ultra-low rectal surgery—initial experience with a new operation approach. Int J Colorectal Dis 32:249–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2686-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kim J, Baek S-J, Kang D-W et al (2017) Robotic resection is a good prognostic factor in rectal cancer compared with laparoscopic resection: long-term survival analysis using propensity score matching. Dis Colon Rectum 60:266–273. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000770

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wang X, Cao G, Mao W et al (2020) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Can Res Ther 16:979. https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_533_18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Genova P, Pantuso G, Cipolla C et al (2021) Laparoscopic versus robotic right colectomy with extra-corporeal or intra-corporeal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 406:1317–1339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-020-01985-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Feng Q, Yuan W, Li T et al (2022) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for middle and low rectal cancer (REAL): short-term outcomes of a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenter Hepat 7:991–1004. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-1253(22)00248-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhang Y, Feng H, Wang S et al (2022) Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic- versus laparoscopic-assisted right hemicolectomy: a propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 105:106855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2022.106855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Beltzer C, Knoerzer L, Bachmann R et al (2019) Robotic versus laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticular disease: a single-center experience of 106 cases. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 29:1451–1455. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2019.0451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Giordano L, Kassir AA, Gamagami RA et al (2020) Robotic-assisted and laparoscopic sigmoid resection. JSLS 24(e2020):00028. https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2020.00028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 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. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b13ca2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Weiser MR (2018) AJCC 8th Edition: colorectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 25:1454–1455. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6462-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Leal Ghezzi T, Campos Corleta O (2016) 30 years of robotic surgery. World J Surg 40:2550–2557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3543-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Crolla RMPH, Tersteeg JJC, Van Der Schelling GP et al (2018) Robot-assisted laparoscopic resection of clinical T4b tumours of distal sigmoid and rectum: initial results. Surg Endosc 32:4571–4578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6210-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chang T-C, Lin E-K, Lu Y-J et al (2021) Single-incision robotic colectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic colectomy: A matched case control study. Asian J Surg 44:749–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asjsur.2020.12.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zheng H, Wang Q, Fu T et al (2023) Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy with complete mesocolic excision for left-sided colon cancer: a multicentre study with propensity score matching analysis. Tech Coloproctol 27:569–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-023-02788-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lim DR, Min BS, Kim MS et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection of sigmoid colon cancer: comparative study of long-term oncologic outcomes. Surg Endosc 27:1379–1385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2619-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. de Angelis N, Lizzi V, Azoulay D, Brunetti F (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer: analysis of the initial simultaneous learning curve of a surgical fellow. J Laparoendoscopic Adv Surg Tech 26:882–892. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2016.0321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. On behalf of the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group, Lykke J, Rosenberg J et al (2019) Lymph node yield and tumour subsite are associated with survival in stage I-III colon cancer: results from a national cohort study. World J Surg Onc 17:62. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-019-1604-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Maeda Y, Shinohara T, Futakawa N et al (2018) The oncologic outcomes of inferior mesenteric artery-preserving laparoscopic lymph node dissection for upper-rectal or sigmoid colon cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 28:1352–1358. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2018.0201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim CW, Cho MS, Baek SJ et al (2015) Oncologic outcomes of single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid colon cancer: a propensity-score matching analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 22:924–930. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4039-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by the Key Laboratory of Digestive/Metabolic Disease Fundamentals and Clinical Transformation (No. YZ2020159), the Provincial Clinical Key Specialty (No. ZDZKB0002).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Yangzhou University College of Medicine, Yangzhou, 225001, Jiangsu, China

    Jie Wang, Yayan Fu & Daorong Wang

  2. Clinical Teaching Hospital of Medical School, Northern Jiangsu People’s Hospital, Nanjing University, Yangzhou, 225001, Jiangsu, China

    Jiajie Zhou, Shuai Zhao, Ruiqi Li & Daorong Wang

  3. The Forth People’s Hospital of Taizhou, Taizhou, China

    Longhe Sun

  4. Northern Jiangsu People’s Hospital, Yangzhou, 225001, China

    Wei Wang, Liuhua Wang & Daorong Wang

  5. Yangzhou Key Laboratory of Basic and Clinical Transformation of Digestive and Metabolic Diseases, Yangzhou, 225001, Jiangsu, China

    Daorong Wang

  6. General Surgery Institute of Yangzhou, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, 225001, Jiangsu, China

    Daorong Wang

Authors
  1. Jie Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jiajie Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shuai Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ruiqi Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yayan Fu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Longhe Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Wei Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Liuhua Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Daorong Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors have read and approved the final manuscript. J.W. wrote the main manuscript text. J.J.Z and S.Z. performed materials, methods and data collection and results. Y.Y.F. and L.H.S. prepared figures and tables. W.W. and L.H.W. prepared tables. D.R.W. independent corresponding author, supervised the study and provided guarantee for the study. All authors were involved in the review and revision of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daorong Wang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors state that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethics approval

The study adhered to the ethical guidelines outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and received approval from the Ethics Committee of Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital (Ethical Application Ref: 2016KY-022).

Patient consent

All participants consent to participate in the research, with written informed consent secured from each individual.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOC 28 KB)

Supplementary file2 (DOC 30 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, J., Zhou, J., Zhao, S. et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic anterior resection for the treatment of stage II and III sigmoid colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis. J Robotic Surg 18, 207 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-01967-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-01967-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation