Ann Surg Treat Res.  2015 Oct;89(4):190-201. 10.4174/astr.2015.89.4.190.

Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Nursing Science, College of Nursing, Gachon University, Incheon, Korea.
  • 2National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, Korea.
  • 3Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, Chosun University, Gwangju, Korea.
  • 4Department of Surgery, Kyung Hee University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. isaac34@korea.com

Abstract

PURPOSE
Robotic surgery (RS) overcomes the limitations of previous conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS). Although meta-analyses have been published recently, our study evaluated the latest comparative surgical, urologic, and sexual results for rectal cancer and compares RS with CLS in patients with rectal cancer only.
METHODS
We searched three foreign databases (Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, and Cochrane Library) and five Korean databases (KoreaMed, KMbase, KISS, RISS, and KisTi) during July 2013. The Cochrane Risk of Bias and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized were utilized to evaluate quality of study. Dichotomous variables were pooled using the risk ratio (RR), and continuous variables were pooled using the mean difference (MD). All meta-analyses were conducted with Review Manager, V. 5.3.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies involving 2,224 patients were included. RS was associated with a lower rate of intraoperative conversion than that of CLS (RR, 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.54). Time to first flatus was short (MD, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.25 to -0.01). Operating time was longer for RS than that for CLS (MD, 49.97; 95% CI, 20.43-79.52, I2 = 97%). International Prostate Symptom Score scores at 3 months better RS than CLS (MD, -2.90; 95% CI, -5.31 to -0.48, I2 = 0%). International Index of Erectile Function scores showed better improvement at 3 months (MD, -2.82; 95% CI, -4.78 to -0.87, I2 = 37%) and 6 months (MD, -2.15; 95% CI, -4.08 to -0.22, I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSION
RS appears to be an effective alternative to CLS with a lower conversion rate to open surgery, a shorter time to first flatus and better recovery in voiding and sexual function. RS could enhance postoperative recovery in patients with rectal cancer.

Keyword

Robotic surgical procedures; Rectal neoplasms

MeSH Terms

Bias (Epidemiology)
Flatulence
Humans
Laparoscopy*
Odds Ratio
Prostate
Rectal Neoplasms*

Figure

  • Fig. 1 Flow diagram of the study selection process. RS, robotic surgery; CLS, conventional laparoscopic surgery.

  • Fig. 2 The risk of bias for eligible randomized controlled trials.

  • Fig. 3 Forest plot and meta-analysis of conversion to open surgery. RS, robotic surgery; CLS, conventional laparoscopic surgery; M-H, Mantel-Haenszel; CI, confidence interval; df, degree of freedom.

  • Fig. 4 Forest plot and meta-analysis of time to first flatus. RS, robotic surgery; CLS, conventional laparoscopic surgery; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; df, degree of freedom.

  • Fig. 5 Forest plot and meta-analysis of operation time. RS, robotic surgery; CLS, conventional laparoscopic surgery; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; df, degree of freedom.

  • Fig. 6 Forest plot and meta-analysis of International Prostate Symptom Score 3 months after surgery. RS, robotic surgery; CLS, conventional laparoscopic surgery; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; df, degree of freedom.

  • Fig. 7 Forest plot and meta-analysis of International Index of Erectile Function score change from baseline to 3 months after surgery. RS, robotic surgery; CLS, conventional laparoscopic surgery; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; df, degree of freedom.

  • Fig. 8 Forest plot and meta-analysis of International Index of Erectile Function score change from baseline to 6 months after surgery. RS, robotic surgery; CLS, conventional laparoscopic surgery; SD, standard deviation; CI, confidence interval; df, degree of freedom.

  • Fig. 9 Funnel plot of the studies used in the meta-analysis. IPSS, International Prostate Symptom Score; IIEF, International Index of Erectile Function; SE, standard error; MD, mean difference; RR, risk ratio.


Cited by  1 articles

Comparative analysis of robot-assisted vs. open abdominoperineal resection in terms of operative and initial oncological outcomes
Jin Cheon Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim
Ann Surg Treat Res. 2018;95(1):37-44.    doi: 10.4174/astr.2018.95.1.37.


Reference

1. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, 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; 365:1718–1726.
2. Park SY, Choi GS, Park JS, Kim HJ, Ryuk JP. Short-term clinical outcome of robot-assisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: a retrospective comparison with conventional laparoscopy. Surg Endosc. 2013; 27:48–55.
3. Arezzo A, Passera R, Scozzari G, Verra M, Morino M. Laparoscopy for rectal cancer reduces short-term mortality and morbidity: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2013; 27:1485–1502.
4. Sammour T, Kahokehr A, Srinivasa S, Bissett IP, Hill AG. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is associated with a higher intraoperative complication rate than open surgery. Ann Surg. 2011; 253:35–43.
5. Patel VR, Thaly R, Shah K. Robotic radical prostatectomy: outcomes of 500 cases. BJU Int. 2007; 99:1109–1112.
6. Veljovich DS, Paley PJ, Drescher CW, Everett EN, Shah C, Peters WA 3rd. Robotic surgery in gynecologic oncology: program initiation and outcomes after the first year with comparison with laparotomy for endometrial cancer staging. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 198:679.e1. 679.e9.
7. Weber PA, Merola S, Wasielewski A, Ballantyne GH. Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic right and sigmoid colectomies for benign disease. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002; 45:1689–1694.
8. Corcione F, Esposito C, Cuccurullo D, Settembre A, Miranda N, Amato F, et al. Advantages and limits of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery: preliminary experience. Surg Endosc. 2005; 19:117–119.
9. Baik SH, Kim NK, Lim DR, Hur H, Min BS, Lee KY. Oncologic outcomes and perioperative clinicopathologic results after robot-assisted tumor-specific mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013; 20:2625–2632.
10. Bae SU, Saklani AP, Hur H, Min BS, Baik SH, Lee KY, et al. Robotic and laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of 21 consecutive series. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014; 86:76–82.
11. Memon S, Heriot AG, Murphy DG, Bressel M, Lynch AC. Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012; 19:2095–2101.
12. Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R, Cavaliere D, Avenia N, Sciannameo F, et al. Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis. 2012; 14:e134–e156.
13. Xiong B, Ma L, Huang W, Zhao Q, Cheng Y, Liu J. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of eight studies. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015; 19:516–526.
14. Broholm M, Pommergaard HC, Gogenur I. Possible benefits of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery regarding urological and sexual dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Colorectal Dis. 2015; 17:375–381.
15. Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley-Blackwell;2008.
16. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003; 73:712–716.
17. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002; 21:1539–1558.
18. Kang J, Yoon KJ, Min BS, Hur H, Baik SH, Kim NK, 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.
19. D'Annibale A, Pernazza G, Monsellato I, Pende V, Lucandri G, Mazzocchi P, et al. Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2013; 27:1887–1895.
20. Shin JY. Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes between a robotic colectomy and a laparoscopic colectomy during early experience. J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2012; 28:19–26.
21. Baek JH, Pastor C, Pigazzi A. Robotic and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched study. Surg Endosc. 2011; 25:521–525.
22. Popescu I, Vasilescu C, Tomulescu V, Vasile S, Sgarbura O. The minimally invasive approach, laparoscopic and robotic, in rectal resection for cancer: a single center experience. Acta Chir Iugosl. 2010; 57:29–35.
23. Bianchi PP, Ceriani C, Locatelli A, Spinoglio G, Zampino MG, Sonzogni A, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a comparative analysis of oncological safety and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:2888–2894.
24. Patriti A, Ceccarelli G, Bartoli A, Spaziani A, Biancafarina A, Casciola L. Short- and medium-term outcome of robot-assisted and traditional laparoscopic rectal resection. JSLS. 2009; 13:176–183.
25. Baik SH, Ko YT, Kang CM, Lee WJ, Kim NK, Sohn SK, et al. Robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized trial. Surg Endosc. 2008; 22:1601–1608.
26. Fernandez R, Anaya DA, Li LT, Orcutt ST, Balentine CJ, Awad SA, et al. Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population. Am J Surg. 2013; 206:509–517.
27. Cho MS, Baek SJ, Hur H, Min BS, Baik SH, Lee KY, et al. Short and long-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2015; 94:e522.
28. Baek SJ, Kim SH, Cho JS, Shin JW, Kim J. Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a cost analysis from a single institute in Korea. World J Surg. 2012; 36:2722–2729.
29. 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; 25:240–248.
30. Patel CB, Ragupathi M, Ramos-Valadez DI, Haas EM. A three-arm (laparoscopic, hand-assisted, and robotic) matched-case analysis of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011; 54:144–150.
31. Erguner I, Aytac E, Boler DE, Atalar B, Baca B, Karahasanoglu T, et al. What have we gained by performing robotic rectal resection? Evaluation of 64 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic low anterior resection for rectal adenocarcinoma. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013; 23:316–319.
32. Kuo LJ, Lin YK, Chang CC, Tai CJ, Chiou JF, Chang YJ. Clinical outcomes of robotassisted intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopy and multifactorial analysis of the learning curve for robotic surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014; 29:555–562.
33. 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; 19:2485–2493.
34. Vennix S, Pelzers L, Bouvy N, Beets GL, Pierie JP, Wiggers T, et al. Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; 4:CD005200.
35. Sng KK, Hara M, Shin JW, Yoo BE, Yang KS, Kim SH. The multiphasic learning curve for robot-assisted rectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2013; 27:3297–3307.
36. Schwab KE, Dowson HM, Van Dellen J, Marks CG, Rockall TA. The uptake of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in Great Britain and Ireland: a questionnaire survey of consultant members of the ACPGBI. Colorectal Dis. 2009; 11:318–322.
37. Shiomi A, Kinugasa Y, Yamaguchi T, Tomioka H, Kagawa H. Robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery: short-term outcomes for 113 consecutive patients. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2014; 29:1105–1111.
38. Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, Shi C, Zou Y, Qin H, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012; 19:3727–3736.
39. Ortiz-Oshiro E, Sanchez-Egido I, Moreno-Sierra J, Perez CF, Diaz JS, Fernandez-Represa JA. Robotic assistance may reduce conversion to open in rectal carcinoma laparoscopic surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot. 2012; 8:360–370.
40. Alasari S, Min BS. Robotic colorectal surgery: a systematic review. ISRN Surg. 2012; 2012:293894.
41. Franks PJ, Bosanquet N, Thorpe H, Brown JM, Copeland J, Smith AM, et al. Short-term costs of conventional vs laparoscopic assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial). Br J Cancer. 2006; 95:6–12.
42. Yamamoto S, Fukunaga M, Miyajima N, Okuda J, Konishi F, Watanabe M, et al. Impact of conversion on surgical outcomes after laparoscopic operation for rectal carcinoma: a retrospective study of 1,073 patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2009; 208:383–389.
43. Rottoli M, Bona S, Rosati R, Elmore U, Bianchi PP, Spinelli A, et al. Laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: effects of conversion on short-term outcome and survival. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009; 16:1279–1286.
44. Arezzo A, Passera R, Salvai A, Arolfo S, Allaix ME, Schwarzer G, et al. Laparoscopy for rectal cancer is oncologically adequate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Surg Endosc. 2015; 29:334–348.
45. Hassan I, Larson DW, Cima RR, Gaw JU, Chua HK, Hahnloser D, et al. Long-term functional and quality of life outcomes after coloanal anastomosis for distal rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2006; 49:1266–1274.
46. Yamada K, Ogata S, Saiki Y, Fukunaga M, Tsuji Y, Takano M. Functional results of intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2007; 94:1272–1277.
47. Quah HM, Jayne DG, Eu KW, Seow-Choen F. Bladder and sexual dysfunction following laparoscopically assisted and conventional open mesorectal resection for cancer. Br J Surg. 2002; 89:1551–1556.
48. Masui H, Ike H, Yamaguchi S, Oki S, Shimada H. Male sexual function after autonomic nerve-preserving operation for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 1996; 39:1140–1145.
49. Collinson FJ, Jayne DG, Pigazzi A, Tsang C, Barrie JM, Edlin R, et al. An international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, controlled, unblinded, parallel-group trial of robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic surgery for the curative treatment of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012; 27:233–241.
Full Text Links
  • ASTR
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr