Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome
- PMID: 22151033
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02907.x
Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome
Abstract
Aim: The study aimed to compare robotic rectal resection with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer. Robotic surgery has been used successfully in many branches of surgery but there is little evidence in the literature on its use in rectal cancer.
Methods: We performed a systematic review of the available literature in order to evaluate the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. We compared robotic and laparoscopic surgery with respect to twelve end-points including operative and recovery outcomes, early postoperative mortality and morbidity, and oncological parameters. A subgroup analysis of patients undergoing full-robotic or robot-assisted rectal resection and robotic total mesorectal excision was carried out. All aspects of Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalysis (PRISMA) statement were followed to conduct this systematic review. Comprehensive electronic search strategies were developed using the following electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EBM reviews and CINAHL. Randomized and nonrandomized clinical trials comparing robotic and laparoscopic resection for rectal cancer were included. No language or publication status restrictions were imposed. A data-extraction sheet was developed based on the data extraction template of the Cochrane Group. The statistical analysis was performed using the odd ratio (OR) for categorical variables and the weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous variables.
Results: Eight non randomized studies were identified that included 854 patients in total, 344 (40.2%) in the robotic group and 510 (59.7%) in the laparoscopic group. Meta-analysis suggested that the conversion rate to open surgery in the robotic group was significantly lower than that with laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.12-0.57, P = 0.0007). There were no significant differences in operation time, length of hospital stay, time to resume regular diet, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and the oncological accuracy of resection.
Conclusion: Robotic surgery for rectal cancer has a lower conversion rate and a similar operative time compared with laparoscopic surgery, with no difference in recovery, oncological and postoperative outcomes.
© 2011 The Authors. Colorectal Disease © 2011 The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.
Similar articles
-
Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and perioperative outcomes compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision.BMC Cancer. 2016 Jul 4;16:380. doi: 10.1186/s12885-016-2428-5. BMC Cancer. 2016. PMID: 27377924 Free PMC article.
-
Short-term clinical outcomes of laparoscopic vs open rectal excision for rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.World J Gastroenterol. 2017 Nov 28;23(44):7906-7916. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i44.7906. World J Gastroenterol. 2017. PMID: 29209132 Free PMC article.
-
Comparing the perioperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes between robotic and transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies with a subgroup analysis for overweight patients.J Robot Surg. 2025 Jun 8;19(1):276. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02460-9. J Robot Surg. 2025. PMID: 40483613
-
Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal of the prostate in men with localised prostate cancer.Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(41):1-313. doi: 10.3310/hta16410. Health Technol Assess. 2012. PMID: 23127367 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: systematic reviews and economic evaluation.Health Technol Assess. 2006 Nov;10(45):1-141, iii-iv. doi: 10.3310/hta10450. Health Technol Assess. 2006. PMID: 17083853
Cited by
-
Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer.Visc Med. 2016 Jun;32(3):192-8. doi: 10.1159/000445815. Epub 2016 Jun 8. Visc Med. 2016. PMID: 27493947 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Paradigm shift in the management of rectal cancer.Indian J Surg. 2014 Dec;76(6):474-81. doi: 10.1007/s12262-014-1089-3. Epub 2014 May 18. Indian J Surg. 2014. PMID: 25614723 Free PMC article.
-
Robotic vs. TaTME Rectal Surgery (ROTA STUDY) Matched Cohort Trial for Mid to Low Rectal Cancer Surgery Evaluation Trial in the Hands of an Experienced Surgeon.Int J Surg Protoc. 2022 Feb 18;26(1):7-13. doi: 10.29337/ijsp.163. eCollection 2022. Int J Surg Protoc. 2022. PMID: 35280494 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of surgical approach on short- and long-term outcomes in early-stage rectal cancer: a multicenter, propensity score-weighted cohort study.Surg Endosc. 2022 Aug;36(8):5833-5839. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09033-z. Epub 2022 Feb 4. Surg Endosc. 2022. PMID: 35122149
-
Robotic gastrointestinal surgery.Curr Probl Surg. 2018 Jun;55(6):198-246. doi: 10.1067/j.cpsurg.2018.07.001. Epub 2018 Aug 8. Curr Probl Surg. 2018. PMID: 30470267 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical