Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2026 Feb 1;36(1):e1424.
doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000001424.

Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Pelvic Exenteration for Anteriorly Invaded Primary Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Tatsuya Manabe  1 , Shin Takesue  1 , Takaaki Fujimoto  2 , Yusuke Mizuuchi  2 , Yohei Ando  1 , Masatsugu Hiraki  1 , Masafumi Nakamura  2 , Hirokazu Noshiro  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Pelvic Exenteration for Anteriorly Invaded Primary Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Tatsuya Manabe et al. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. .

Abstract

Background: Robot-assisted surgery has been widely adopted in digestive, urological, and gynecologic procedures, leading to its application in complex operations such as pelvic exenteration (PE). However, limited data are available regarding the perioperative outcomes of robotic PE compared directly to conventional laparoscopic PE in the treatment of colorectal cancer.

Methods: To assess the feasibility of robotic PE compared with laparoscopic PE for locally advanced colorectal cancer invading the anterior pelvic organs, we retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent either robotic or laparoscopic PE with curative intent (R0 resection) between May 2012 and August 2024.

Results: A total of 24 patients were included in the study (12 in the robotic group and 12 in the laparoscopic group). Patient characteristics revealed that the robotic group had an older median age and a lower prognostic nutritional index. In terms of surgical outcomes, no significant differences were observed in PE type, total operative time, estimated blood loss, or the number of retrieved lymph nodes. Conversion to open surgery occurred in 3 patients in the laparoscopic group, whereas no conversions were noted in the robotic group ( P = 0.032). The reasons for conversion in the laparoscopic group included uncontrollable bleeding and technical difficulty due to large tumor size.

Conclusions: Robotic surgery may offer greater suitability for complex procedures such as PE, compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, particularly in challenging cases involving large tumors.

Keywords: colorectal cancer; pelvic exenteration; robotic surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Simillis C, Baird DL, Kontovounisios C, et al. A Systematic review to assess resection margin status after abdominoperineal excision and pelvic exenteration for rectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2017;265:291–299.
    1. PelvEx Collaborative. Surgical and survival outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced primary rectal cancer: results from an international collaboration. Ann Surg. 2019;269:315–321.
    1. Brunschwig A. Complete excision of pelvic viscera for advanced carcinoma; a one-stage abdominoperineal operation with end colostomy and bilateral ureteral implantation into the colon above the colostomy. Cancer. 1948;1:177–183.
    1. Brown KGM, Solomon MJ, Koh CE. Pelvic exenteration surgery: the evolution of radical surgical techniques for advanced ans recurrent pelvic malignancy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60:745–754.
    1. PelvEx Collaborative. Changing outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer. BJS Open. 2019;3:516–520.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources