Robotic intracorporeal single-stapling versus double-stapling anastomosis in left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-weighted pilot study
- PMID: 40715693
- DOI: 10.1007/s11701-025-02609-6
Robotic intracorporeal single-stapling versus double-stapling anastomosis in left-sided colorectal cancer: a propensity score-weighted pilot study
Abstract
Colorectal cancer remains a major cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Surgical resection is still the mainstay treatment for malignancies situated in the left colon and rectum. Selection of the anastomosis method significantly affects patient recovery and the likelihood of postoperative complications. In this pilot study, we compare early clinical results between two robotic anastomosis techniques, intracorporeal single-stapling (RiSSA) and extracorporeal double-stapling (DSA), used in robotic surgeries for left-sided colorectal cancer.A total of 49 consecutive patients underwent curative-intent robotic procedures at a tertiary academic hospital in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, from May 2023 to February 2025. Of these, 31 patients received the RiSSA technique, while 18 underwent DSA for anastomosis. Baseline differences were accounted for using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Patients undergoing RiSSA experienced shorter surgery times, faster gastrointestinal recovery, reduced hospital stays, and fewer diverting stomas. While the RiSSA group had a lower anastomotic leakage rate (0% compared to 9.5%), this difference did not reach statistical significance. Additional sensitivity analyses reinforced the robustness of the findings. Despite inherent limitations, such as its retrospective design, modest sample size, selection bias, and possible operator learning curve, this exploratory analysis supports the notion that RiSSA may represent a viable and safe alternative to conventional extracorporeal techniques, with potential benefits in short-term postoperative outcomes. Further prospective studies are required to validate these initial findings.
Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Minimally invasive surgery; Robotic colorectal surgery; Single-stapling anastomosis.
© 2025. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Competing interests:: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethical approval: The study adhered to the ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and received approval from the Institutional Review Board of Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital (IRB No. 241028-3). Given the retrospective design and exclusive use of routine clinical data, the informed consent was waived. Measures were taken to safeguard patient privacy, and all identifiable information was removed to ensure complete anonymity during analysis.
Similar articles
-
A comparative analysis of staple height used for robotic right colectomy.J Robot Surg. 2025 Jun 26;19(1):327. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02503-1. J Robot Surg. 2025. PMID: 40569493
-
Short-term Outcomes of Linear vs. Circular Stapling for Esophagojejunostomy in Gastric Cancer: an Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Analysis.J Gastric Cancer. 2025 Jul;25(3):509-519. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2025.25.e38. J Gastric Cancer. 2025. PMID: 40631478 Free PMC article.
-
Complete Intracorporeal Single-Stapling Technique Anastomosis Using a Novel Detachable Purse-String Instrument in Robotic Surgery With Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer.Asian J Endosc Surg. 2025 Jan-Dec;18(1):e70096. doi: 10.1111/ases.70096. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2025. PMID: 40494397
-
Compression versus hand-sewn and stapled anastomosis in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Tech Coloproctol. 2016 Oct;20(10):667-76. doi: 10.1007/s10151-016-1521-8. Epub 2016 Aug 23. Tech Coloproctol. 2016. PMID: 27554096
-
Stapled versus handsewn methods for colorectal anastomosis surgery.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Feb 15;2012(2):CD003144. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003144.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012. PMID: 22336786 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Bray F, Laversanne M, Sung H et al (2024) Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 74(3):229–263. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21834 - DOI
-
- Wéber A, Vignat J, Shah R, Morgan E, Laversanne M, Nagy P, Znaor A (2024) Global burden of bladder cancer mortality in 2020 and 2040 according to GLOBOCAN estimates. World J Urol 42(1):237
-
- Kube R, Mroczkowski P, Granowski D, Benedix F, Sahm M, Schmidt U, Gastinger I, Lippert H (2010) Study group Qualitätssicherung Kolon/Rektum-Karzinome (Primärtumor) (Quality assurance in primary colorectal carcinoma). Anastomotic leakage after colon cancer surgery: a predictor of significant morbidity and hospital mortality, and diminished tumour-free survival. Eur J Surg Oncol 36(2):120–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2009.08.011 - DOI
-
- Tsai YY, Chen WT (2019) Management of anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery: a review article. J Gastrointest Oncol 10(6):1229–1237. https://doi.org/10.21037/jgo.2019.07.07 - DOI
-
- Branagan G, Finnis D (2005) Prognosis after anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery. Dis Colon Rectum 48(5):1021–1026
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical