Advertisement

Right Hemicolectomy and Ileocecectomy: Robotic Intracorporeal Anastomosis

  • Stephen M. Rauh
  • Margaret De Guzman
  • Steven J. Ognibene
Chapter

Abstract

Right colectomy may be most beneficial when utilizing an intracorporeal anastomosis. The advantages of minimally invasive surgery for neoplastic and nonneoplastic disease are well established. Unfortunately, some benefits are lessened when extracorporeal reconstruction is performed. The use of an incision to accommodate any extracorporeal technique is associated with increased risks of such undesirable outcomes: hernia, superficial wound infection, pain, and suboptimal cosmesis. Also, there are added technical difficulties when performing extracorporeal anastomosis in the obese. The techniques elucidated in this chapter address such issues by utilizing the robotic platform to perform intracorporeal ileocolostomy.

Keywords

Right hemicolectomy Ileocecectomy Robotic intracorporeal anastomosis Colorectal surgery 

Supplementary material

Video 11.1

Robotic-assisted antiperistaltic anastomosis (MP4 268653 kb)

Video 11.2

Robotic isoperistaltic anastomosis (MP4 298272 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Lacy AM, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2002;359(9325):2224–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abstracted from: Nelson H, Sargent D, Wieand HS, et al.; for the Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted colectomy is as safe and effective as open colectomy in people with colon cancer. Cancer Treat Rev. 2004;30(8):707–9. Web 21 Jun 2014.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guillou PJ, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365(9472):1718–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Delaney CP, et al. Clinical outcomes and resource utilization associated with laparoscopic and open colectomy using a large national database. Ann Surg. 2008;247(5):819–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zimmern A, et al. Robotic colon and rectal surgery: a series of 131 cases. World J Surg. 2010;34(8):1954–8. Web. 21 June 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Marecik SJ, et al. Total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: the potential advantage of robotic assistance. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53(12):1611–7. Web. 21 June 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baik SH, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16.6(6):1480–7. Web. 21 June 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pigazzi A, et al. Multicentric study on robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(6):1614–20. Web. 21 June 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Antoniou SA. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery of the colon and rectum. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:1–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Witkiewicz W, et al. Robot-assisted right colectomy: surgical technique and review of the literature. Wideochir Inne Tech Malo Inwazyjne. 2013;8(3): 253–7. Web. 21 Jun 2014.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    DeSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ, et al. Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum. 2010;53(7):1000–6. Web. 21 June 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jamali FR, et al. Evaluating the degree of difficulty of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Arch Surg (Chicago, Ill : 1960). 2008;143(8):762–7; discussion 768.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Trastulli S, et al. Robotic right colectomy for cancer with intracorporeal anastomosis: short-term outcomes from a single institution. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013;28(6):807–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cadiere GB, et al. Feasibility of robotic laparoscopic surgery: 146 cases. World J Surg. 2001;25(11):1467–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cirocchi R, et al. Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis during laparoscopic right hemicolectomy E systematic review and. Surg Oncol. 2013;22(1):1–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stein SA, Bergamaschi R. Extracorporeal versus intracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis. Tech Coloproctol. 2013;17 Suppl 1:S35–9. Web. 21 June 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Trastulli S, et al. Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Color Dis : Off J Assoc Coloproctology G B Irel. 2012;14(4):e134–56. Web. 22 June 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morpurgo E, et al. Robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a case control study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23(5):414–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Park SY, et al. Robot-assisted right colectomy with lymphadenectomy and intracorporeal anastomosis for colon cancer: technical considerations. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2012;22(5):e271–6. Web. 21 Jun 2014Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen M. Rauh
    • 1
  • Margaret De Guzman
    • 2
  • Steven J. Ognibene
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of SurgeryRochester General Hospital, University of Rochester School of MedicineRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Nevada School of MedicineLas VegasUSA

Personalised recommendations