Advertisement

Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision and Sphincter-Saving Operation

  • Jin Cheon KimEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The concept of total mesorectal excision (TME), which is the standard technique in rectal cancer operations, was established by Heald and Ryall in 1978. Overall local recurrence rates vary widely from 3% to 33% in conventional surgery, whereas TME has consistently achieved LR rates below or equal to 10%. Otherwise, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and technical advances with stapling devices facilitate sphincter-saving operation (SSO) in lower rectal cancer (LRC) patients with competent oncological and functional outcomes. The SSO consists of anterior resection and low anterior resection (LAR) including ultra-LAR with intersphincteric resection (ISR), according to the level of dissection and anastomosis. With the advent of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery, robot-assisted SSO appears to be a promising technique with its minimal invasiveness and clear visualization into the deep pelvic cavity. Robot-assisted TME and SSO have become recognized as being safe and feasible in comparison with open and laparoscopic approaches. The robot approach possesses many advantages over the latter two approaches, including its magnified view, dexterity supported by wristed instruments and stable traction, and ergonomic excellence. Robot-assisted TME could therefore enable deeper dissection and lower anastomosis in the pelvic region than is possible with a laparoscopy or open approach, with slightly better functional recovery. Several comparative studies reported robot-assisted ISR showing an equivalent oncological outcome with a little improved immediate postoperative outcome compared with open ISR. However, further studies including randomized controlled trials are needed to complement and establish the evidence for the oncological superiority of robot-assisted SSO compensating its financial burden.

Keywords

Robot Rectal cancer Total mesorectal excision (TME) Sphincter-saving operation (SSO) Intersphincteric resection (ISR) Operative method Complications Outcomes 

Supplementary material

Video 15.1

(MP4 75289 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer. Nature. 2012;487:330–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery–the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69:613–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Campa-Thompson M, Weir R, Calcetera N, Quirke P, Carmack S. Pathologic processing of the total mesorectal excision. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2015;28:43–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abulafi AM, Williams NS. Local recurrence of colorectal cancer: the problem, mechanisms, management and adjuvant therapy. Br J Surg. 1994;81:7–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martling AL, Holm T, Rutqvist LE, et al. Effect of a surgical training programme on outcome of rectal cancer in the county of Stockholm: Stockholm colorectal cancer study group. Basingstoke bowel cancer research project. Lancet. 2000;356:93–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bossema E, Stiggelbout A, Baas-Thijssen M, et al. Patients’ preferences for low rectal cancer surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34:42–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fritsch H, Brenner E, Lienemann A, Ludwikowski B. Anal sphincter complex: reinterpreted morphology and its clinical relevance. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45:188–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Martin ST, Heneghan HM, Winter DC. Systematic review of outcomes after intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2012;99:603–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saito N, Ito M, Kobayashi A, Nishizawa Y, et al. Long-term outcomes after intersphincteric resection for low-lying rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:3608–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ohtani H, Tamamori Y, Azuma T, et al. A meta-analysis of the short- and long-term results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopy-assisted and conventional open surgery for rectal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15:1375–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH, Jang YS, Jun SH. S052: a comparison of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:240–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kang J, Yoon KJ, Min BS, Hur H, et al. The impact of robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer: a case-matched analysis of a 3-arm comparison—open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery. Ann Surg. 2013;257:95–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim JC, Yu CS, Lim SB, Park IJ, Kim CW, Yoon YS. Comparative analysis focusing on surgical and early oncological outcomes of open, laparoscopy-assisted, and robot-assisted approaches in rectal cancer patients. Int J Color Dis. 2016;31:1179–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH, Cooperative Clinical Investigators of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:1729–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Colquhoun P, Wexner SD, Cohen A. Adjuvant therapy is valuable in the treatment of rectal cancer despite total mesorectal excision. J Surg Oncol. 2003;83:133–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Williams NS. The rectal ‘no man’s land’ and sphincter preservation during rectal excision. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1749–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Memon S, Heriot AG, Murphy DG, Bressel M, Lynch AC. Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2095–101.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Speicher PJ, Englum BR, Ganapathi AM, Nussbaum DP, Mantyh CR, Migaly J. Robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a national perspective on short-term oncologic outcomes. Ann Surg. 2015;262:1040–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Rubio-Dorado-Manzanares M, Díaz-Pavón JM, et al. Learning curve in robotic rectal cancer surgery: current state of affairs. Int J Color Dis. 2016;31:1807–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rosenblatt PL, McKinney J, Adams SR. Ergonomics in the operating room: protecting the surgeon. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2013;20:744.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lykke J, Roikjaer O, Jess P, Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. Tumour stage and preoperative chemoradiotherapy influence the lymph node yield in stages I-III rectal cancer: results from a prospective nationwide cohort study. Color Dis. 2014;16:O144–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mezhir JJ, Shia J, Riedel E, Temple LK, et al. Whole-mount pathologic analysis of rectal cancer following neoadjuvant therapy: implications of margin status on long-term oncologic outcome. Ann Surg. 2012;256:274–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pahlman L, Bujko K, Rutkowski A, Michalski W. Altering the therapeutic paradigm towards a distal bowel margin of <1 cm in patients with low-lying rectal cancer: a systematic review and commentary. Color Dis. 2013;15:e166–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lin HH, Lin JK, Lin CC, et al. Circumferential margin plays an independent impact on the outcome of rectal cancer patients receiving curative total mesorectal excision. Am J Surg. 2013;206:771–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Biffi R, Luca F, Bianchi PP, et al. Dealing with robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current status and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol. 2016;22:546–56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mirnezami A, Mirnezami R, Chandrakumaran K, Sasapu K, Sagar P, Finan P. Increased local recurrence and reduced survival from colorectal cancer following anastomotic leak: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011;253:890–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pommergaard HC, Gessler B, Burcharth J, Angenete E, Haglind E, Rosenberg J. Preoperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage after resection for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Color Dis. 2014;16:662–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kim JC, Lee JH, Park SH. Interpretative guidelines and possible indications for indocyanine green fluorescence imaging in robot-assisted sphincter-saving operations. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60:376–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vignali A, Gianotti L, Braga M, Radaelli G, Malvezzi L, Di Carlo V. Altered microperfusion at the rectal stump is predictive for rectal anastomotic leak. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:76–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jafari MD, Wexner SD, Martz JE, et al. Perfusion assessment in laparoscopic left-sided/anterior resection (PILLAR II): a multi-institutional study. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220:82–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hellan M, Spinoglio G, Pigazzi A, Lagares-Garcia JA. The influence of fluorescence imaging on the location of bowel transection during robotic left-sided colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:1695–702.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brown SR, Seow Choen F. Preservation of rectal function after low anterior resection with formation of a neorectum. Semin Surg Oncol. 2000;19:376–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Seo SI, Yu CS, Kim GS, et al. Characteristics and risk factors associated with permanent stomas after sphincter-saving resection for rectal cancer. World J Surg. 2013;37:2490–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kim MJ, Kim YS, Park SC, et al. Risk factors for permanent stoma after rectal cancer surgery with temporary ileostomy. Surgery. 2016;159:721–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kim JC, Lim SB, Yoon YS, Park IJ, Kim CW, Kim CN. Completely abdominal intersphincteric resection for lower rectal cancer: feasibility and comparison of robot-assisted and open surgery. Surg Endosc. 2014;28:2734–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH. A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:2485–93.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Loos M, Quentmeier P, Schuster T, et al. Effect of preoperative radio(chemo)therapy on long-term functional outcome in rectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1816–28.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Luca F, Valvo M, Ghezzi TL, et al. Impact of robotic surgery on sexual and urinary functions after fully robotic nerve-sparing total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2013;257:672–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Heald RJ, Moran BJ, Ryall RD, Sexton R, MacFarlane JK. Rectal cancer: the Basingstoke experience of total mesorectal excision, 1978-1997. Arch Surg. 1998;133:894–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown JM, Guillou PJ. Five-year follow-up of the medical research council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1638–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kang SB, Park JW, Jeong SY, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:637–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: the ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1346–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Stevenson AR, Solomon MJ, Lumley JW, et al. Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection on pathological outcomes in rectal cancer: the ALaCaRT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;314:1356–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kim J, Paek SJ, Kang DW, et al. 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. 2017;60:266–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ, et al. Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. 2015;261:129–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Schiessel R, Novi G, Holzer B, et al. Technique and long-term results of intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005;48:1858–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Park JS, Kim NK, Kim SH, et al. Multicentre study of robotic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2015;102:1567–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Yoo BE, Cho JS, Shin JW, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison of the operative, oncological, and functional outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:1219–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Ulsan College of Medicine and Asan Medical CenterSeoulSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations