Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis: a multicenter comparative analysis on short-term outcomes

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In literature, most of the comparative studies of robotic (RRC) versus laparoscopic (LRC) right colectomy are biased by the type of the anastomotic technique adopted. With this study, we aim to understand whether there is a role for robotics in performing right colectomies, comparing RRC versus LRC, both performed with intracorporeal anastomosis.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, all consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive right colectomy (robotic or laparoscopic) with intracorporeal anastomosis in three Italian high-volume centers between February 1, 2007 and December 31, 2017 were included. Patients were grouped according to the method of surgery: RRC or LRC.

Results

A total of 389 patients were included in the study (305 RRC vs. 84 LRC). Patients’ baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. Operative time was significantly longer in RRC (250 min, IQR 209–305) group than LRC group (160 min, IQR 130–200) (p < 0.001). The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 22 (IQR 18–29) in RRC group while it was 19 (IQR 15–27) in LRC one (p = 0.028). No significant differences between the groups were seen in terms of time-to-first flatus, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. Re-admission rate was significantly higher in LRC (n = 3, 3.6%) group than in RRC group (n = 1, 0.3%) (p = 0.033).

Conclusions

In conclusion, RRC and LRC are comparable in terms of functional postoperative outcomes and length of hospital stay. RRC requires longer operative time, but the number of lymph nodes harvested may be higher.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rondelli F, Trastulli S, Avenia N, Schillaci G, Cirocchi R, Gulla N, Mariani E, Bistoni G, Noya G (2012) Is laparoscopic right colectomy more effective than open resection? A meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studies. Colorectal Dis 14(8):e447–e469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03054.x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bosker RJI, Van’t Riet E, de Noo M, Vermaas M, Karsten TM, Pierie JP (2018) Minimally invasive versus open approach for right-sided colectomy: a study in 12,006 patients from the dutch surgical colorectal audit. Dig Surg. https://doi.org/10.1159/000486400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Solaini L, Bazzocchi F, Cavaliere D, Avanzolini A, Cucchetti A, Ercolani G (2018) Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 32(3):1104–1110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5980-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Rawlings AL, Woodland JH, Vegunta RK, Crawford DL (2007) Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy. Surg Endosc 21(10):1701–1708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9231-y

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Park JS, Choi GS, Park SY, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP (2012) Randomized clinical trial of robot-assisted versus standard laparoscopic right colectomy. Br J Surg 99(9):1219–1226. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8841

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dolejs SC, Waters JA, Ceppa EP, Zarzaur BL (2016) Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5239-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lujan HJ, Plasencia G, Rivera BX, Molano A, Fagenson A, Jane LA, Holguin D (2017) Advantages of robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000384

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. deSouza AL, Prasad LM, Park JJ, Marecik SJ, Blumetti J, Abcarian H (2010) Robotic assistance in right hemicolectomy: is there a role? Dis Colon Rectum 53(7):1000–1006. https://doi.org/10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181d32096

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Deutsch GB, Sathyanarayana SA, Gunabushanam V, Mishra N, Rubach E, Zemon H, Klein JD, Denoto G 3rd (2012) Robotic vs. laparoscopic colorectal surgery: an institutional experience. Surg Endosc 26(4):956–963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1977-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Casillas MA Jr, Leichtle SW, Wahl WL, Lampman RM, Welch KB, Wellock T, Madden EB, Cleary RK (2014) Improved perioperative and short-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal operations. Am J Surg 208(1):33–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.08.028

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 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 Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 26(11):882–892. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2016.0321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kang J, Park YA, Baik SH, Sohn SK, Lee KY (2016) A Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery in the treatment of right-sided colon cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 26(6):497–502. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Agha RA, Borrelli MR, Vella-Baldacchino M, Thavayogan R, Orgill DP (2017) The STROCSS statement: strengthening the reporting of cohort studies in surgery. Int J Surg 46:198–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.08.586

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Trastulli S, Coratti A, Guarino S, Piagnerelli R, Annecchiarico M, Coratti F, Di Marino M, Ricci F, Desiderio J, Cirocchi R, Parisi A (2015) Robotic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis compared with laparoscopic right colectomy with extracorporeal and intracorporeal anastomosis: a retrospective multicentre study. Surg Endosc 29(6):1512–1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3835-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ricci C, Casadei R, Alagna V, Zani E, Taffurelli G, Pacilio CA, Minni F (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(3):417–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-016-1509-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Parisi A, Scrucca L, Desiderio J, Gemini A, Guarino S, Ricci F, Cirocchi R, Palazzini G, D’Andrea V, Minelli L, Trastulli S (2017) Robotic right hemicolectomy: analysis of 108 consecutive procedures and multidimensional assessment of the learning curve. Surg Oncol 26(1):28–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2016.12.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. General and Oncologic Surgery, Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, Ausl Romagna, Forlì, Italy

    Leonardo Solaini, Davide Cavaliere, Francesca Bazzocchi, Andrea Avanzolini, Alessandro Cucchetti & Giorgio Ercolani

  2. Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Leonardo Solaini, Alessandro Cucchetti & Giorgio Ercolani

  3. Division of Oncological and Robotic General Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy

    Federico Perna, Paolo Checcacci & Andrea Coratti

  4. Division of General, Emergency Surgery and New Technologies, OCSAE (Ospedale Civile Sant’Agostino Estense), Baggiovara, Modena, Italy

    Francesca Pecchini, Domenico Marchi & Micaela Piccoli

Authors
  1. Leonardo Solaini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Davide Cavaliere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Francesca Pecchini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Federico Perna
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Francesca Bazzocchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrea Avanzolini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Domenico Marchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Paolo Checcacci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Alessandro Cucchetti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Andrea Coratti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Micaela Piccoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Giorgio Ercolani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leonardo Solaini.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Leonardo Solaini, Davide Cavaliere, Francesca Pecchini, Federico Perna, Francesca Bazzocchi, Andrea Avanzolini, Domenico Marchi, Paolo Checcacci, Alessandro Cucchetti, Andrea Coratti, Micaela Piccoli, and Giorgio Ercolani have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Solaini, L., Cavaliere, D., Pecchini, F. et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis: a multicenter comparative analysis on short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 33, 1898–1902 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6469-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6469-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation