Scholarlink

Background <p>Robotic surgery has rapidly gained acceptance in rectal cancer owing to improved visualization and precision. This study compared perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resections at a single tertiary oncology centre.</p> Methods <p>All patients undergoing curative rectal cancer resection between 2016 and 2022 (laparoscopic) and 2022–2025 (robotic) were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed based on age, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT), pathological stage, tumour grade, circumferential resection margin (CRM) and preoperative CEA, yielding 35 matched cases per group. Balance between groups before and after matching was assessed using standardized mean differences (SMD), with an SMD &lt; 0.1 considered indicative of adequate covariate balance. Perioperative parameters, complications, and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used; projected 36-month DFS was reported where robotic follow-up was &lt; 36 months.</p> Results <p>Seventy matched patients were analysed. Baseline characteristics, including CRM status and lymph node harvest, were comparable. Estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the robotic group (82.6 ± 22.3&#xa0;ml vs. 129.4 ± 48.6&#xa0;ml; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Operative duration was longer for robotic surgery (138.4 ± 21.2&#xa0;min vs. 99.0 ± 9.1&#xa0;min; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Postoperative morbidity, including ileus, urinary retention, and stoma-related complications, did not differ significantly. Observed 24-month DFS was numerically higher in the robotic group (81% vs. 73.5%). Projected 36-month DFS showed no statistically significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.591).</p> Conclusion <p>Robotic rectal resection offers reduced intraoperative blood loss with comparable postoperative morbidity and short-term oncologic outcomes to laparoscopy. Longer follow-up is needed to validate survival outcomes.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evolving Experience with Minimally Invasive Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Nine-Year Single-Centre Propensity-Matched Analysis from South India

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月22日

查看全文
  • D. Suresh Kumar,
  • Navin Noushad,
  • Jerub Alex Silas A

摘要

Background

Robotic surgery has rapidly gained acceptance in rectal cancer owing to improved visualization and precision. This study compared perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resections at a single tertiary oncology centre.

Methods

All patients undergoing curative rectal cancer resection between 2016 and 2022 (laparoscopic) and 2022–2025 (robotic) were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed based on age, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT), pathological stage, tumour grade, circumferential resection margin (CRM) and preoperative CEA, yielding 35 matched cases per group. Balance between groups before and after matching was assessed using standardized mean differences (SMD), with an SMD < 0.1 considered indicative of adequate covariate balance. Perioperative parameters, complications, and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used; projected 36-month DFS was reported where robotic follow-up was < 36 months.

Results

Seventy matched patients were analysed. Baseline characteristics, including CRM status and lymph node harvest, were comparable. Estimated blood loss was significantly lower in the robotic group (82.6 ± 22.3 ml vs. 129.4 ± 48.6 ml; p < 0.001). Operative duration was longer for robotic surgery (138.4 ± 21.2 min vs. 99.0 ± 9.1 min; p < 0.001). Postoperative morbidity, including ileus, urinary retention, and stoma-related complications, did not differ significantly. Observed 24-month DFS was numerically higher in the robotic group (81% vs. 73.5%). Projected 36-month DFS showed no statistically significant difference (p = 0.591).

Conclusion

Robotic rectal resection offers reduced intraoperative blood loss with comparable postoperative morbidity and short-term oncologic outcomes to laparoscopy. Longer follow-up is needed to validate survival outcomes.