共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
Jonas F. Schiemer Lennart Zimniak Edin Hadzijusufovic Hauke Lang Werner Kneist 《Techniques in coloproctology》2018,22(6):445-448
Background
Pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring during nerve-sparing robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (RTME) is feasible. However, visual separation of the neuromonitoring process from the surgeon console interrupts the workflow and limits the usefulness of available information as the procedure progresses. Since the robotic surgical system provides multi-image views in the surgeon console, the aim of this study was to integrate cystomanometry and internal anal sphincter electromyography signals to aid the robotic surgeon in his/her nerve-sparing technique.Methods
We prospectively investigated 5 consecutive patients (1 male, 4 females) who underwent RTME for rectal cancer at our institution in 2017. The robotic surgery was performed using the da Vinci Xi combined with pelvic intraoperative neuromapping with real-time electromyography and cystomanometry signal transmission by multi-image view during RTME.Results
The adapted two-dimensional pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring imaging successfully simulcasted to the surgeon console view in all 5 cases. The technical note is complemented by an intraoperative video.Conclusions
This report demonstrates the technical feasibility of an improved neuromonitoring process during nerve-sparing RTME. Robotic neuromapping can be fully visualized from the surgeon console.2.
Aim
Robotic surgery allows for a better visualization and more precise dissection especially in the narrow male pelvis and mid and lower third of the rectum. However, superiority to laparoscopic TME has yet to be proven. We therefore analyzed short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic low anterior rectal resection for rectal cancer.Patients and methods
From 2011 to 2016, 44 robotic (RTME) and 41 laparoscopic (LTME) low anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision were performed at a single institution. Specimen quality was assessed and reported by an independent pathologist following international guidelines.Results
The groups did not differ significantly regarding gender, age, ASA stage, BMI, and distance of the lower tumor margin from the anal verge. More patients in the RTME group underwent preoperative chemoradiation (43.2 vs. 19.5%, p?=?0.019). The quality of the TME specimen was significantly better in the RTME group (complete/nearly complete/incomplete for RTME 97/0/3% and for LTME 78/17/5%, p?=?0.03). The conversion rate tended to be lower in the RTME group (7 vs. 17%, p?=?0.143). There was no difference in CRM positivity between the groups.Conclusion
Robotic surgery is safe and can improve the quality of TME for rectal cancer compared to laparoscopy. Any effect on long-term survival remains to be established.3.
Purpose
Sparing the extrinsic autonomic innervation of the internal anal sphincter during total mesorectal excision is important for the preservation of anal sphincter function. This study electrophysiologically confirmed the topography of the internal anal sphincter nerve supply during laparoscopic-assisted transanal minimally invasive surgery for total mesorectal excision.Methods
This prospective study was conducted at two large multispecialty referral centers. Six patients (five males and one female) aged between 45 and 65 years with low rectal cancer (≤5 cm from the anal verge) were enrolled. Surgery was performed under electric stimulation of the pelvic autonomic nerves with observation of the electromyographic signals of the internal anal sphincter.Results
The minimally invasive transanal surgical approach enabled advantageous visualization of the pelvic autonomic nerves in all patients. In particular, extrinsic innervation to the internal anal sphincter near the levator muscle was consciously spared under electrophysiological confirmation. The evoked absolute electromyographic amplitudes of the internal anal sphincter during transanal minimally invasive surgery were significantly lower than the initial results of the laparoscopic approach [3.7 μV (interquartile range 2.4; 5.7) vs. 4.3 μV (interquartile range 3.1; 8.6); p?=?0.002]. Five key zones of risk for pelvic autonomic nerve damage were identified. No complications occurred.Conclusions
The electromyographic results of this preliminary study indicate advantages for sparing the internal anal sphincter innervation during transanal minimally invasive mesorectal dissection considering the specific in situ neuroanatomical topography.4.
Introduction
Sexual and urological problems after surgery for rectal cancer are common, multifactorial, inadequately discussed, and untreated. The urogenital function is dependent on dual autonomic sympathetic and parasympathetic innervation, and four key danger zones exist that are at risk for nerve damage during colorectal surgery: one of these sites is in the abdomen and three are in the pelvis. The aim of this study is to systematically review the epidemiology of sexual dysfunction following rectal cancer surgery, to describe the anatomical basis of autonomic nerve-preserving techniques, and to explore the scientific evidence available to support the laparoscopic or robotic approach over open surgery.Methods
According to the PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive literature search of studies evaluating sexual function in patients undergoing rectal surgery for cancer was performed in Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials.Results
An increasing number of studies assessing the incidence and prevalence of sexual dysfunction following multimodality treatment for rectal cancer has been published over the last 30 years. Significant heterogeneity in the prevalence of sexual dysfunction is reported in the literature, with rates between 5 and 90%.Conclusions
There is no evidence to date in favor of any surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic vs robotic). Standardized diagnostic tools should be routinely used to prospectively assess sexual function in patients undergoing rectal surgery.5.
D. Kanellos M. G. Pramateftakis G. Vrakas H. Demetriades I. Kanellos I. Mantzoros S. Agelopoulos Ch. Lazaridis 《Techniques in coloproctology》2010,14(1):35-37
Aim
Aim of this study is to present the incidence of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal cancer and to demonstrate the therapeutic approach for the treatment of this complication.Patients and methods
Between 1990 and 2009, 170 patients underwent low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision (TME).Results
A total of 14 (8.2%) anastomotic leaks were confirmed. Reoperation was carried out in six patients with major leaks. Eight patients with minor leaks were treated conservatively by nutritional support and antibiotic therapy.Conclusion
The incidence of anastomotic leakage after anterior resection of the rectum for rectal cancer is relatively low.6.
Purpose
Sparing the extrinsic autonomic innervation of the internal anal sphincter during total mesorectal excision is important for the preservation of anal sphincter function. This study electrophysiologically confirmed the topography of the internal anal sphincter nerve supply during laparoscopicassisted transanal minimally invasive surgery for total mesorectal excision.Methods
This prospective study was conducted at two large multispecialty referral centers. Six patients (five males and one female) aged between 45 and 65 years with low rectal cancer (≤5 cm from the anal verge) were enrolled. Surgery was performed under electric stimulation of the pelvic autonomic nerves with observation of the electromyographic signals of the internal anal sphincter.Results
The minimally invasive transanal surgical approach enabled advantageous visualization of the pelvic autonomic nerves in all patients. In particular, extrinsic innervation to the internal anal sphincter near the levator muscle was consciously spared under electrophysiological confirmation. The evoked absolute electromyographic amplitudes of the internal anal sphincter during transanal minimally invasive surgery were significantly lower than the initial results of the laparoscopic approach (3.7 μV (interquartile range 2.4; 5.7) vs. 4.3 μV (interquartile range 3.1; 8.6); p = 0.002). Five key zones of risk for pelvic autonomic nerve damage were identified. No complications occurred.Conclusions
The electromyographic results of this preliminary study indicate advantages for sparing the internal anal sphincter innervation during transanal minimally invasive mesorectal dissection considering the specific in situ neuroanatomical topography.7.
G.?zur Hausen J.?Gr?ne D.?Kaufmann S.?M.?Niehues K.?Aschenbrenner A.?Stroux B.?Hamm M.?E.?Kreis Johannes?C.?Lauscher
Background
Low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer is a potentially challenging operation due to limited space in the pelvis. CT pelvimetry allows to quantify pelvic space, so that its relationship with outcome after LAR may be assessed. Studies investigating this, however, yielded conflicting results. We hypothesized that a small pelvis is associated with a higher rate of incomplete mesorectal excision, anastomotic leakages, and increased rate of urinary dysfunction in patients operated for rectal cancer.Methods
In a single-center retrospective analysis, we studied 74 patients that underwent LAR for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis. Thin-layered multi-slice CT datasets were used for slice by slice depiction of the inner pelvic surface, and the inner pelvic volume was automatically compounded. The primary outcome was quality of total mesorectal excision (TME; Mercury grading); secondary outcomes were anastomotic leakage and urinary dysfunction with regard to pelvic dimensions. Univariate analyses and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed for the primary and the secondary outcomes.Results
Shorter obstetric conjugate diameters were associated with a higher probability of a worse TME quality (110.8 ± 10.2 vs. 105.0 ± 8.6 mm; OR 0.85; 95% CI 0.73–0.99; p = 0.038). Short interspinous distance showed a trend towards an increased risk for deteriorated TME quality (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.76–1.0; p = 0.06). Anastomotic leakage was associated with anemia (OR 2.77; 95% CI 1.0–7.7; p = 0.047). Association between pelvic diameters or pelvic volume and anastomotic leakage or urinary dysfunction was not observed. Perioperative blood transfusions were administered more often in patients with postoperative urinary dysfunction (OR 17.67; 95% CI 2.44–127.7; p = 0.004).Conclusion
Shorter obstetric conjugate diameter might be a risk factor for incompleteness of total mesorectal excision. Anastomotic leakage seems to be influenced more by clinical factors such as anemia rather than pelvic dimensions. Further studies have to prove the influence of pelvic diameter on local recurrence of rectal cancer after LAR.8.
Introduction
Laparoscopy is widely used in colorectal practice, but recent trial results have questioned its use in rectal cancer resections. Patient outcomes are directly linked to the quality of total mesorectal excision (TME) specimen. Objective assessment of intraoperative performance could help ensure competence and delivery of optimal outcomes. Objective tools may also contribute to TME intervention trials, but their nature, structure and utilisation is unknown.Aim
To systemically review the available literature to report on the available tools for the objective assessment of minimally invasive TME operative performance and their use within multicentre laparoscopic TME randomised controlled trials.Methods
A systematic search of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed to identify tools used in the objective intraoperative assessment of minimally invasive TME performance in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, independently by two authors. The identified tools were then evaluated within reported TME RCTs.Results
A total of 8642 abstracts were screened of which 12 papers met the inclusion criteria; ten prospective observational studies, one randomised trial and one educational consensus. Eight assessment methods were described, which include formative and summative tools. The tools were mostly adaptations of colonic surgery tools based on either operative video review or post-operative trainer rating. All studies reported objective assessment of intraoperative performance was feasible, but only 126 (7%) of the 1762 included laparoscopic cases were TME. No multicentre laparoscopic TME trial reported using any objective surgical performance assessment tool.Conclusion
Objective intraoperative laparoscopic TME performance assessment is feasible, but most of the current tools are adaptation of colonic surgery. There is a need to develop dedicated assessment tools for minimal access rectal surgery. No multicentre minimally invasive TME RCT reported using any objective assessment tool.9.
Purpose
Transanal surgery remains both an innovative approach to rectal pathology and a demonstrated technical challenge. Improved technology using a single-port system robotic platform (SPS) offers a promising option for this surgery.Methods
SPS robotic system was utilized to perform submucosal, full-thickness and cylindrical excision on four cadavers. Operative performance and surgeon fatigue were measured.Results
On all types of resections, the SPS system performed well. There were no piecemeal or fragmented resections. Closure was judged to be good to excellent in all cases. Surgeon assessment of setup and performance of the SPS was excellent in all cases.Conclusions
SPS robotic transanal surgery represents an exciting new option for transanal surgery.10.
Purpose
Laparoscopic rectal surgery in obese patients is technically challenging. The technological advantages of robotic instruments can help overcome some of those challenges, but whether this translates to superior short-term outcomes is largely unknown. The aim of this study is to compare the short-term surgical outcomes of obese (BMI?≥?30) robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery patients.Methods
All consecutive obese patients receiving laparoscopic and robotic rectal cancer resection surgery from three centres, two from the UK and one from Portugal, between 2006 and 2017 were identified from prospectively collated databases. Robotic surgery patients were propensity score matched with laparoscopic patients for ASA grade, neoadjuvant radiotherapy and pathological T stage. Their short-term outcomes were examined.Results
A total of 222 patients were identified (63 robotic, 159 laparoscopic). The 63 patients who received robotic surgery were matched with 61 laparoscopic patients. Cohort characteristics were similar between the two groups. In the robotic group, operative time was longer (260 vs 215 min; p?=?0.000), but length of stay was shorter (6 vs 8 days; p?=?0.014), and thirty-day readmission rate was lower (6.3% vs 19.7%; p?=?0.033).Conclusions
In this study population, robotic rectal surgery in obese patients resulted in a shorter length of stay and lower 30-day readmission rate but longer operative time when compared to laparoscopic surgery. Robotic rectal surgery in the obese may be associated with a quicker post-operative recovery and reduced morbidity profile. Larger-scale multi-centre prospective observational studies are required to validate these results.11.
Purpose
Urological and sexual dysfunction are recognised risks of rectal cancer surgery; however, there is limited evidence regarding urogenital function comparing robotic to laparoscopic techniques. The aim of this study was to assess the urogenital functional outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic rectal cancer surgery.Methods
Urological and sexual functions were assessed using gender-specific validated standardised questionnaires. Questionnaires were sent a minimum of 6 months after surgery, and patients were asked to report their urogenital function pre- and post-operatively, allowing changes in urogenital function to be identified. Questionnaires were sent to 158 patients (89 laparoscopy, 69 robotic) of whom 126 (80 %) responded. Seventy-eight (49 male, 29 female) of the responders underwent laparoscopic and 48 (35 male, 13 female) robotic surgery.Results
Male patients in the robotic group deteriorated less across all components of sexual function and in five components of urological function. Composite male urological and sexual function score changes from baseline were better in the robotic cohort (p < 0.001). In females, there was no difference between the two groups in any of the components of urological or sexual function. However, composite female urological function score change from baseline was better in the robotic group (p = 0.003).Conclusion
Robotic rectal cancer surgery might offer better post-operative urological and sexual outcomes compared to laparoscopic surgery in male patients and better urological outcomes in females. Larger scale, prospective randomised control studies including urodynamic assessment of urogenital function are required to validate these results.12.
Background
The techniques of robotic splenic flexure mobilization in the colorectal surgery setting are not well defined and have been challenging due to limited range of motion of the second-generation robotic platform in multiple quadrants.Methods
This report describes a novel technique for robotic splenic flexure mobilization with medial-to-lateral approach without a need for robotic cart repositioning during left-sided colon and rectal surgery. The dissection is started with ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery and vein. Unique in this approach, entering the lesser sac is accomplished by extension of the dissection cranially by lifting up the mesocolon from the anterior surface of the pancreatic body toward the stomach.Results
This technique presented in the video allows the mobilization of the splenic flexure without excessive tractions and avoidance of potential splenic injuries.Conclusions
The described novel approach demonstrates total robotic splenic flexure takedown without excessive traction, with improved visualization, and reduction of potential risk of splenic injury. This approach provides totally robotic mobilization of the splenic flexure at single docking without changing the patient’s position.13.
Rosa M. Jiménez-Rodríguez Mercedes Rubio-Dorado-Manzanares José Manuel Díaz-Pavón M. Luisa Reyes-Díaz Jorge Manuel Vazquez-Monchul Ana M. Garcia-Cabrera Javier Padillo Fernando De la Portilla 《International journal of colorectal disease》2016,31(12):1807-1815
Introduction
Robotic-assisted rectal cancer surgery offers multiple advantages for surgeons, and it seems to yield the same clinical outcomes as regards the short-time follow-up of patients compared to conventional laparoscopy. This surgical approach emerges as a technique aiming at overcoming the limitations posed by rectal cancer and other surgical fields of difficult access, in order to obtain better outcomes and a shorter learning curve.Material and methods
A systematic review of the literature of robot-assisted rectal surgery was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The search was conducted in October 2015 in PubMed, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, for articles published in the last 10 years and pertaining the learning curve of robotic surgery for colorectal cancer. It consisted of the following key words: “rectal cancer/learning curve/robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery”.Results
A total of 34 references were identified, but only 9 full texts specifically addressed the analysis of the learning curve in robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery, 7 were case series and 2 were non-randomised case-comparison series. Eight papers used the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method, and only one author divided the series into two groups to compare both. The mean number of cases for phase I of the learning curve was calculated to be 29.7 patients; phase II corresponds to a mean number 37.4 patients. The mean number of cases required for the surgeon to be classed as an expert in robotic surgery was calculated to be 39 patients.Conclusion
Robotic advantages could have an impact on learning curve for rectal cancer and lower the number of cases that are necessary for rectal resections.14.
Purpose
The costs involved in performing robotic surgery present a critical issue which has not been well addressed yet. The aims of this study are to compare the clinical outcomes and cost differences of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer and to conduct a literature review of the cost analysis.Methods
This is an observational, comparative study whereby data were abstracted from a retrospective database of patients who underwent laparoscopic and robotic rectal resection from October 2010 to March 2017, at Sanchinarro University Hospital, Madrid. An independent company performed the financial analysis, and fixed costs were excluded.Results
A total of 86 robotic and 112 laparoscopic rectal resections were included. The mean operative time was significantly lower in the laparoscopic approach (336 versus 283 min; p = 0.001). The main pre-operative data, overall morbidity, hospital stay and oncological outcomes were similar in both groups, except for the readmission rate (robotic: 5.8%, laparoscopic: 11.6%; p = 0.001). The mean operative costs were higher for robotic surgery (4285.16 versus 3506.11€; p = 0.04); however, the mean overall costs were similar (7279.31€ for robotic and 6879.8€ for the laparoscopic approach; p = 0.44). We found four studies reporting costs, three comparing robotic versus laparoscopy costs, with all of them reporting a higher overall cost for the robotic rectal resection.Conclusion
Robotic rectal resection has similar clinical outcomes to that of the conventional laparoscopic approach. Despite the higher operative costs of robotic rectal resection, overall mean costs were similar in our series.15.
Jin Cheon Kim Chang Sik Yu Seok-Byung Lim In Ja Park Chan Wook Kim Yong Sik Yoon 《International journal of colorectal disease》2016,31(6):1179-1187
Purpose
Because there are few comparative studies of open, laparoscopy-assisted (LA), and robot-assisted (RA) total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer, we aimed to compare these three procedures in terms of sphincter-saving operation (SSO) achievement, surgical complications, and early oncological outcomes.Methods
The short-term outcomes of 2114 patients with rectal cancer consecutively enrolled between July 2010 and February 2015 at Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea) were retrospectively evaluated. Patients underwent either open, LA, or RA TME (n?=?1095, 486, and 533, respectively) performed by experienced surgeons.Results
RA TME was a significant determinant of SSO in multivariate analysis that included potential variables such as tumor location and T4 category (odds ratio, 2.458; 95 % confidence interval, 1.497–4.036; p?<?0.001). The cumulative rates of 3-year local recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival did not differ among the three groups: 2.5–3.4, 91.9–94.6, and 82.2–83.1 % (p?=?0.85, 0.352, and 0.944, respectively). Early general surgical complications occurred more frequently in the open group than in the LA and RA groups (19.3 versus 13.0 versus 12.2 %, p?<?0.001), specifically ileus and wound infection.Conclusions
There were no significant differences in 3-year survival outcomes and local recurrence among open, LA, and RA TME. RA TME is useful for SSO achievement, regardless of advanced stage and location of rectal cancer. The open procedure had a slightly but significantly higher incidence of postoperative complications than LA and RA.16.
Emily F. Midura Andrew D. Jung Meghan C. Daly Dennis J. Hanseman Bradley R. Davis Shimul A. Shah Ian M. Paquette 《Digestive diseases and sciences》2017,62(8):1906-1912
Background
Neoadjuvant chemoradiation reduces local recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer, and adherence to national and societal recommendations remains unknown.Objective
To determine variability in guideline adherence in rectal cancer treatment and investigate whether hospital volume correlated with variability seen.Design
We performed a retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database rectal cancer participant user files from 2005 to 2010. Stage-specific predictors of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation use were determined, and variation in use across hospitals analyzed. Hospitals were ranked based on likelihood of preoperative therapy use by stage, and observed-to-expected ratios for neoadjuvant therapy use calculated. Hospital outliers were identified, and their center characteristics compared.Results
A total of 23,488 patients were identified at 1183 hospitals. There was substantial variability in the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation across hospitals. Patients managed outside clinical guidelines for both stage 1 and stage 3 disease tended to receive treatment at lower-volume, community cancer centers.Conclusions
There is substantial variability in adherence to national guidelines in the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer across all stages. Both hospital volume and center type are associated with over-treatment of early-stage tumors and under-treatment of more invasive tumors. These findings identify a clear need for national quality improvement efforts in the treatment of rectal cancer.17.
Purpose
Few studies have compared robotic and laparoscopic intersphincteric resection (ISR) in rectal cancer. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of recently published studies to compare perioperative outcomes of ISR for the treatment of low rectal cancer.Methods
We performed a systematic literature search of the Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic ISR in patients with low rectal cancer. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from articles that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Perioperative outcomes of interest included the rate of diverting stoma, open conversion rate, operation time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, time to first flatus, and time to initiate the postoperative diet. Oncological outcomes included the number of retrieved lymph nodes, distal resection margin, proximal resection margin, circumferential resection margin, 3-year overall survival, 3-year disease-free survival, and local recurrence. Postoperative complications included overall complications, a Dindo-Clavien classification ≥ III, and anastomotic leakage. All outcomes were compared between the two groups.Results
We included 5 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 510 patients undergoing 273 (53.5%) robotic ISR procedures and 237 (46.5%) laparoscopic ISR procedures. The robotic ISR group lower conversion rate, lower blood loss, and longer operation times than the laparoscopic group. We also noted that fewer lymph nodes were harvested in the robotic ISR group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Other outcomes were similar between the two groups.Conclusions
Robotic and laparoscopic ISR showed comparable perioperative outcomes, functional outcomes, and 3-year oncologic outcomes; however, robotic ISR was associated with a lower conversion rate and less blood loss despite longer operation times compared to laparoscopic ISR. These findings suggest that robotic ISR maybe a safe and effective technique for treating low rectal cancer in selected patients. The potential oncologic and functional benefits of robotic ISR should be evaluated in larger randomized controlled trials.18.
Objective
Robot-assisted rectal surgery is gaining popularity, and robotic single-site surgery is also being explored clinically. We report our initial experience with robotic transanal total mesorectal excision (R-taTME) and radical proctectomy using the robotic single-site plus one-port (R-SSPO) technique for low rectal surgery.Methods
Between July 2015 and March 2016, 15 consecutive patients with ultra-low rectal lesions underwent R-taTME followed by radical proctectomy using the R-SSPO technique by a single surgeon. The clinical and pathological results were retrospectively analyzed.Results
The median operative time was 473 (range, 335–569) min, and the estimated blood loss was 33 (range, 30–50) mL. The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 12 (range, 8–18). The median distal resection margin was 1.4 (range, 0.4–3.5) cm, and all patients had clear circumferential resection margins. We encountered a left ureteric transection intraoperatively in one patient, and another patient required reoperation for postoperative adhesive intestinal obstruction. There was no 30-day mortality.Conclusion
R-taTME followed by radical proctectomy using the R-SSPO technique for patients with low rectal lesions is technically feasible and safe without compromising oncologic outcomes. However, there were considerable limitations and a steep learning curve using current robotic technology.19.
Background
In order to improve the surgical treatment of rectal cancer, robot-assisted laparoscopy has been introduced. The robot has gained widespread use; however, the scientific basis for treatment of rectal cancer is still unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal resection cause less perioperative pain than standard laparoscopic resection measured by the numerical rating scale (NRS score) as well as morphine consumption.Methods
Fifty-one patients were randomized to either laparoscopic or robot-assisted rectal resection at the Department of Surgery at Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark. The intra-operative analgetic consumption was recorded prospectively and registered in patient records. Likewise all postoperative medicine administration including analgesia was recorded prospectively at the hospital medical charts. All morphine analogues were converted into equivalent oral morphine by a converter. Postoperative pain where measured by numeric rating scale (NRS) every hour at the postoperative care unit and three times a day at the ward.Results
Opioid consumption during operation was significantly lower during robotic-assisted surgery than during laparoscopic surgery (p=0.0001). However, there were no differences in opioid consumption or NRS in the period of recovery. We found no differences in length of surgery between the two groups; however, ten patients from the laparoscopic group underwent conversion to open surgery compared to one from the robotic group (p=0.005). No significant difference between groups with respect to complications where found.Conclusions
In the present study, we found that patients who underwent rectal cancer resection by robotic technique needed less analgetics during surgery than patients operated laparoscopically. We did, however, not find any difference in postoperative pain score or morphine consumption postoperatively between the robotic and laparoscopic group.20.
Luca Morelli Alessandra Perutelli Matteo Palmeri Simone Guadagni Maria Donatella Mariniello Gregorio Di Franco Vito Cela Benedetta Brundu Maria Giovanna Salerno Giulio Di Candio Franco Mosca 《International journal of colorectal disease》2016,31(3):643-652