Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical stress response after colorectal resection: a comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Techniques in Coloproctology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The perioperative immune status of colorectal robotic surgery (RS), laparoscopic surgery (LS), and open surgery (OS) patients has not been compared. Our aim was to evaluate perioperative stress and immune response after RS, LS and OS.

Methods

This prospective study included 46 colorectal surgery patients from the Department of Surgical Oncology of the University of Tokyo Hospital. Peripheral venous blood samples were obtained preoperatively and on postoperative days 1, 3, and 6. We evaluated expression of HLA-DR (marker of immune competence), C-reactive protein (CRP) levels, and lymphocyte subset counts (natural killers, cytotoxic T cells and helper T cells).

Results

Fifteen, 23, and 8 patients underwent RS, LS and OS, respectively. HLA-DR expression was the lowest on day 1 and gradually increased on days 3 and 6 in all the groups. There was no significant difference in postoperative HLA-DR expression between the RS and LS group. However, on day 3, HLA-DR expression in the RS group was significantly higher than in the OS group (p = 0.04). On day 1, CRP levels in the LS group were significantly lower than in the RS group (p = 0.038). There were no significant perioperative changes in the lymphocyte subset cell count between the three groups.

Conclusions

Perioperative surgical stress, as evaluated by immunological parameters, was comparable between robotic and laparoscopic surgery and higher with open surgery. Robotic surgery may be an alternative to laparoscopic surgery, as a minimally invasive surgery option for colorectal cancer.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Group COoSTS (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 13:2050–2059

    Google Scholar 

  2. Biondi A, Grosso G, Mistretta A et al (2013) Laparoscopic vs. open approach for colorectal cancer: evolution over time of minimal invasive surgery. BMC Surg 13(Suppl 2):S12

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Veldkamp R, Gholghesaei M, Bonjer HJ et al (2004) Laparoscopic resection of colon cancer: consensus of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc 18:1163–1185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA et al (2013) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14:210–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H et al (2007) Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol 25:3061–3068

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jayne DG, Thorpe HC, Copeland J, Quirke P, Brown JM, Guillou PJ (2010) Five-year follow-up of the Medical Research Council CLASICC trial of laparoscopically assisted versus open surgery for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 97:1638–1645

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E et al (2007) Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial. Ann Surg 246:655–662 discussion 662–654

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Braga M, Vignali A, Zuliani W et al (2002) Metabolic and functional results after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1070–1077

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Han SA, Lee WY, Park CM, Yun SH, Chun HK (2010) Comparison of immunologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open approaches in clinical stage III colorectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 25:631–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Veenhof AA, Sietses C, von Blomberg BM et al (2011) The surgical stress response and postoperative immune function after laparoscopic or conventional total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer: a randomized trial. Int J Colorectal Dis 26:53–59

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Karanika S, Karantanos T, Theodoropoulos GE (2013) Immune response after laparoscopic colectomy for cancer: a review. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf) 1:85–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pigazzi A, Ellenhorn JD, Ballantyne GH, Paz IB (2006) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc 20:1521–1525

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Peterson CY, Weiser MR (2014) Robotic colorectal surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 18:398–403

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Keller DS, Senagore AJ, Lawrence JK, Champagne BJ, Delaney CP (2013) Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection. Surg Endosc 28:212–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Saklani AP, Lim DR, Hur H et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: comparison of oncologic outcomes. Int J Colorectal Dis 28:1689–1698

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Salman M, Bell T, Martin J, Bhuva K, Grim R, Ahuja V (2013) Use, cost, complications, and mortality of robotic versus nonrobotic general surgery procedures based on a nationwide database. Am Surg 79:553–560

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kerr SF, Klonizakis M, Glynne-Jones R (2010) Suppression of the postoperative neutrophil leucocytosis following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer and implications for surgical morbidity. Colorectal Dis 12:549–554

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wichmann MW, Meyer G, Adam M et al (2003) Detrimental immunologic effects of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in advanced rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 46:875–887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hartley A, Giridharan S, Srihari N, McConkey C, Geh JI (2003) Impaired postoperative neutrophil leucocytosis and acute complications following short course preoperative radiotherapy for operable rectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 29:155–157

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kawai K, Tsuno NH, Kitayama J et al (2003) Epigallocatechian gallate, the main component of tea polyphenol, binds to CD4 and interferes with gp120 binding. J Allergy Clin Immunol 112:951–957

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Halabi WJ, Kang CY, Jafari MD et al (2013) Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes. World J Surg 37:2782–2790

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Scarpinata R, Aly EH (2013) Does robotic rectal cancer surgery offer improved early postoperative outcomes? Dis Colon Rectum 56:253–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hyun MH, Lee CH, Kwon YJ et al (2013) Robot versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for cancer by an experienced surgeon: comparisons of surgery, complications, and surgical stress. Ann Surg Oncol 20:1258–1265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Park JY, Jo MJ, Nam BH et al (2012) Surgical stress after robot-assisted distal gastrectomy and its economic implications. Br J Surg 99:1554–1561

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kawasaki T, Ogata M, Kawasaki C, Tomihisa T, Okamoto K, Shigematsu A (2001) Surgical stress induces endotoxin hyporesponsiveness and an early decrease of monocyte mCD14 and HLA-DR expression during surgery. Anesth Analg 92:1322–1326

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Flohe S, Lendemans S, Schade FU, Kreuzfelder E, Waydhas C (2004) Influence of surgical intervention in the immune response of severely injured patients. Intensive Care Med 30:96–102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mokart D, Textoris J, Chow-Chine L et al (2011) HLA-DR and B7-2 (CD86) monocyte expressions after major cancer surgery: profile in sepsis. Minerva Anestesiol 77:522–527

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kono K, Sekikawa T, Matsumoto Y (1995) Influence of surgical stress on monocytes and complications of infection in patients with esophageal cancer–monocyte HLA-DR antigen expression and respiratory burst capacity. J Surg Res 58:275–280

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Veenhof AA, Vlug MS, van der Pas MH et al (2012) Surgical stress response and postoperative immune function after laparoscopy or open surgery with fast track or standard perioperative care: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 255:216–221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tsimogiannis KE, Tellis CC, Tselepis AD, Pappas-Gogos GK, Tsimoyiannis EC, Basdanis G (2012) Toll-like receptors in the inflammatory response during open and laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 26:330–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Baumgartner JM, Silliman CC, Moore EE, Banerjee A, McCarter MD (2009) Stored red blood cell transfusion induces regulatory T cells. J Am Coll Surg 208:110–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tyler JA, Fox JP, Desai MM, Perry WB, Glasgow SC (2013) Outcomes and costs associated with robotic colectomy in the minimally invasive era. Dis Colon Rectum 56:458–466

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Park EJ, Cho MS, Baek SJ et al (2014) Long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg. doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000000613

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kim CW, Kim CH, Baik SH (2014) Outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic and open surgery: a systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg 18:816–830

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan

    J. Shibata, S. Ishihara, N. Tada, K. Kawai, H. Yamaguchi, E. Sunami, J. Kitayama & T. Watanabe

  2. Department of Transfusion Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    N. H. Tsuno

Authors
  1. J. Shibata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Ishihara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. Tada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Kawai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. N. H. Tsuno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. H. Yamaguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. E. Sunami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. J. Kitayama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. T. Watanabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Shibata.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shibata, J., Ishihara, S., Tada, N. et al. Surgical stress response after colorectal resection: a comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery. Tech Coloproctol 19, 275–280 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-014-1263-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-014-1263-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation