The Impact of a Modular Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision Training Program on Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes in Robotic Rectal Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Structured training programs for robotic colorectal surgery are limited, and there are concerns about surgical outcomes and operating times. OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer performed by expert consultants and surgical trainees in a modular surgical training program. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: Conducted at a colorectal training referral center for robotic surgery. PATIENTS: Consecutive robotic total mesorectal excision cases between May 2013 and December 2017 were evaluated retrospectively from a prospectively maintained institutional database and divided into 2 groups: group I comprised expert surgeons and group II comprised supervised trainees. Robotic total mesorectal excision training modules (5 modules) were performed stepwise with increasing complexity. Patients' demographic, perioperative, and oncological data were collected. INTERVENTIONS: Modular robotic training. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparable R0 resection rate, lymph node harvest, and oncological outcomes between experts and trainees, suggesting good quality in oncological resection. RESULTS: A total of 177 robotic total mesorectal excision resections were performed (group I: n = 80, group II: n = 97). Four trainees completed 37.5 modules each. Patients' age, sex, and BMI were similar between groups. Group II had a higher ASA III score (6.3% vs 25.8%, p = 0.002). Clinical TNM and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy rates were similar. Group II had a longer operative time (225 [197.5-297.5] vs 250 [230-300] minutes, p = 0.004). No conversion occurred. There were no differences in intra- or postoperative outcomes between groups. The rate of R0 resection and the number of harvested lymph nodes were also similar between groups. The median follow-up was 75 (64.0-81.7) and 47 (38.0-55.0) months, respectively. Local and distant recurrence rates, 5-year overall survival (81.1% group I vs 81.3% group II, p = 0.832), and 5-year disease-free survival (79.7% group I vs 80.7% group II, p = 0.725) were similar between groups. LIMITATIONS: The groups operated in 2 consecutive periods. CONCLUSIONS: The robotic total mesorectal excision modular surgical training program maximizes training experience without significantly affecting the perioperative and oncological outcomes of patients with rectal cancer. See Video Abstract. EL IMPACTO DEL PROGRAMA MODULAR DE ENTRENAMIENTO EN ESCISIN MESORRECTAL TOTAL ROBTICA EN LOS RESULTADOS PERIOPERATORIOS Y ONCOLGICOS EN LA CIRUGA ROBTICA DEL CNCER DE RECTO: ANTECEDENTES:Los programas de entrenamiento estructurados para la cirugía colorrectal robótica están limitados debido a preocupaciones sobre los resultados quirúrgicos y los tiempos de operación.OBJETIVO:Comparar los resultados perioperatorios y oncológicos de la escisión mesorrectal total robótica para el cáncer de recto realizada por consultores expertos y aprendices de cirugía en un programa modular de entrenamiento quirúrgica.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Realizado en un centro de referencia de entrenamiento colorrectal para cirugía robótica.PACIENTES:Se evaluaron retrospectivamente casos consecutivos de escisión mesorrectal total robótica entre mayo de 2013 y diciembre de 2017 a partir de una base de datos institucional mantenida prospectivamente y se dividieron en dos grupos: Grupo I: cirujanos expertos; Grupo II: aprendices supervisados. Los módulos de entrenamiento robótico de escisión mesorrectal total (cinco módulos) se realizaron paso a paso con complejidad creciente. Se recogieron datos demográficos, perioperatorios y oncológicos.INTERVENCIONES:Entrenamiento modular en robótica.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tasa de resección R0 comparable, extracción de ganglios linfáticos y resultados oncológicos entre expertos y aprendices que sugieren buena calidad en la resección oncológica.RESULTADOS:Se realizaron un total de 177 resecciones por escisión mesorrectal total robótica (Grupo I: n = 80, Grupo II: n = 97). Cuatro alumnos completaron 37,5 módulos cada uno. La edad, el sexo y el IMC fueron similares entre los grupos. El grupo II tuvo una puntuación más alta de la Sociedad Americana de Anestesiólogos III (6,3% frente a 25,8%, p = 0,002). Las tasas clínicas de TNM y quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante fueron similares. El grupo II tuvo mayor tiempo operatorio (225 (197,5-297,5) vs 250 (230-300) minutos, p = 0,004). No se produjo ninguna conversión. No hubo diferencias en los resultados intra o posoperatorios entre los grupos. La tasa de resección R0 y el número de ganglios linfáticos extraídos también fueron similares entre los grupos. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 75 (64,0-81,7) y 47 (38,0-55,0) meses, respectivamente. Tasas de recurrencia local y a distancia, supervivencia general a 5 años (81,1% Grupo I vs. 81,3% Grupo II, p = 0,832) y supervivencia libre de enfermedad a 5 años (79,7% Grupo I vs. 80,7% Grupo II, p = 0,725) fueron similares entre los grupos.LIMITACIONES:Los grupos operaron en dos períodos consecutivos.CONCLUSIONES:El programa de entrenamiento quirúrgico modular para la escisión mesorrectal total robótica maximiza la experiencia de capacitación sin afectar significativamente los resultados perioperatorios y oncológicos de los pacientes con cáncer de recto. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez).

Robotic approach to colonic resection: For some or for all patients?

The robotic approach is rapidly gaining momentum in colorectal surgery. Its benefits in pelvic surgery have been extensively discussed and are well established amongst those who perform minimally invasive surgery. However, the same cannot be said for the robotic approach for colonic resection, where its role is still debated. Here we aim to provide an extensive debate between selective and absolute use of the robotic approach for colonic resection by combining the thoughts of experts in the field of robotic and minimally invasive colorectal surgery, dissecting all key aspects for a critical view on this exciting new paradigm in colorectal surgery.

Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for nonmetastatic pT4 colon cancer: A European multicentre propensity score-matched analysis.

AIM: Minimally invasive surgery has been increasingly adopted for locally advanced colon cancer. However, evidence comparing robotic (RRC) versus laparoscopic right colectomy (LRC) for nonmetastatic pT4 cancers is lacking. METHODS: This was a multicentre propensity score-matched (PSM) study of a cohort of consecutive patients with pT4 right colon cancer treated with RRC or LRC. The two surgical approaches were compared in terms of R0, number of lymph nodes harvested, intra- and postoperative complication rates, overall (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Among a total of 200 patients, 39 RRC were compared with 78 PS-matched LRC patients. The R0 rate was similar between RRC and LRC (92.3% vs. 96.2%, respectively; p = 0.399), as was the odds of retrieving 12 or more lymph nodes (97.4% vs. 96.2%; p = 1). No significant difference was noted for the mean operating time (192.9 min vs. 198.3 min; p = 0.750). However, RRC was associated with fewer conversions to laparotomy (5.1% vs. 20.5%; p = 0.032), less blood loss (36.9 vs. 95.2 mL; p < 0.0001), fewer postoperative complications (17.9% vs. 41%; p = 0.013), a shorter time to flatus (2 vs. 2.8 days; p = 0.009), and a shorter hospital stay (6.4 vs. 9.5 days; p < 0.0001) compared with LRC. These results were confirmed even when converted procedures were excluded from the analysis. The 1-, 3- and 5-year OS (p = 0.757) and DFS (p = 0.321) did not significantly differ between RRC and LRC. CONCLUSION: Adequate oncological outcomes are observed for RRC and LRC performed for pT4 right colon cancer. However, RRC is associated with lower conversion rates and improved short-term postoperative outcomes.

Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (r-TAMIS): perioperative and short-term outcomes for local excision of rectal cancers.

BACKGROUND: Transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is an advanced technique for excision of early rectal cancers. Robotic TAMIS (r-TAMIS) has been introduced as technical improvement and potential alternative to total mesorectal excision (TME) in early rectal cancers and in frail patients. This study reports the perioperative and short-term oncological outcomes of r-TAMIS for local excision of early-stage rectal cancers. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected r-TAMIS database (July 2021-July 2023). Demographics, clinicopathological features, short-term outcomes, recurrences, and survival were investigated. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included. Median age and body mass index were 69.5 (62.0-77.7) years and 31.0 (21.0-36.5) kg/m2. Male sex was prevalent (n = 12, 60.0%). ASA III accounted for 66.7%. Median distance from anal verge was 7.5 (5.0-11.7) cm. Median operation time was 90.0 (60.0-112.5) minutes. Blood loss was minimal. There were no conversions. Median postoperative stay was 2.0 (1.0-3.0) days. Minor and major complication rates were 25.0% and 0%, respectively. Seventeen (85.0%) patients had an adenocarcinoma whilst three patients had an adenoma. R0 rate was 90.0%. Most tumours were pT1 (55.0%), followed by pT2 (25.0%). One patient (5.0%) had a pT3 tumour. Specimen and tumour maximal median diameter were 51.0 (41.0-62.0) mm and 21.5 (17.2-42.0) mm, respectively. Median specimen area was 193.1 (134.3-323.3) cm2. Median follow-up was 15.5 (10.0-24.0) months. One patient developed local recurrence (5.0%). CONCLUSIONS: r-TAMIS, with strict postoperative surveillance, is a safe and feasible approach for local excision of early rectal cancer and may have a role in surgically unfit and elderly patients who refuse or cannot undergo TME surgery. Future prospective multicentre large-scale studies are needed to report the long-term oncological outcomes.

Laparoscopic D3 oncological resection in splenic flexure cancer: Technical details and its impact on long-term survival.

AIM: The applicability of laparoscopic D3 oncological resection for splenic flexure cancer (SFC) surgery has not been fully explored due to technical difficulties and variations in surgical procedure. The aim of this work is to describe the feasibility of performing laparoscopic D3 resection in SFC and its impact on long-term survival. METHOD: A retrospective study on 47 out of 52 consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colectomy for SFC from December 2006 until December 2019 at Korea University Anam Hospital was performed. Data on patients' demographic and clinical features, surgical procedures, intraoperative and postoperative complications, pathological features and follow-up were collected. Categorical data are expressed as frequencies (n) and percentages (%). Continuous data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation and median (range). The Kaplan-Meier test was used to determine the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: The median age of patients was 67.0 years (range 27-87 years) and 72.3% were men. Ten (21.3%) patients presented with an obstructing tumour and underwent an elective laparoscopic colectomy, while 68.1% of patients presented with Stage II and III disease. The conversion rate was 4.3% and the morbidity rate was 31.9%. There was one postoperative death secondary to splenic infarction and anastomotic leak leading to multi-organ failure. Four deaths occurred due to disease progression during a median follow-up of 63.8 months. The rate of recurrence was 20%, the 5-year OS was 89.6% and the 5-year PFS was 72.9%. After R0 resection, the 5-year OS was 91.5% and the 5-year DFS was 74.5%. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic D3 colectomy for SFC is feasible, with an acceptable morbidity and long-term oncological outcome when performed by highly skilled laparoscopic colorectal surgeons with knowledge of the complex anatomy around the splenic flexure. Further randomized trials should be performed to determine the advantage of laparoscopic D3 colectomy over conventional colectomy for SFC.

International standardization and optimization group for intersphincteric resection (ISOG-ISR): modified Delphi consensus on anatomy, definition, indication, surgical technique, specimen description and functional outcome.

AIM: Intersphincteric resection (ISR) is an oncologically complex operation for very low-lying rectal cancers. Yet, definition, anatomical description, operative indications and operative approaches to ISR are not standardized. The aim of this study was to standardize the definition of ISR by reaching international consensus from the experts in the field. This standardization will allow meaningful comparison in the literature in the future. METHOD: A modified Delphi approach with three rounds of questionnaire was adopted. A total of 29 international experts from 11 countries were recruited for this study. Six domains with a total of 37 statements were examined, including anatomical definition; definition of intersphincteric dissection, intersphincteric resection (ISR) and ultra-low anterior resection (uLAR); indication for ISR; surgical technique of ISR; specimen description of ISR; and functional outcome assessment protocol. RESULTS: Three rounds of questionnaire were performed (response rate 100%, 89.6%, 89.6%). Agreement (≥80%) reached standardization on 36 statements. CONCLUSION: This study provides an international expert consensus-based definition and standardization of ISR. This is the first study standardizing terminology and definition of deep pelvis/anal canal anatomy from a surgical point of view. Intersphincteric dissection, ISR and uLAR were specifically defined for precise surgical description. Indication for ISR was determined by the rectal tumour's maximal radial infiltration (T stage) below the levator ani. A new surgical definition of T3isp was reached by consensus to define T3 low rectal tumours infiltrating the intersphincteric plane. A practical flowchart for surgical indication for uLAR/ISR/abdominoperineal resection was developed. A standardized ISR surgical technique and functional outcome assessment protocol was defined.

Utility of near infrared fluorescent cholangiography in detecting biliary structures during challenging minimally invasive cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons can minimize the risk of bile duct injury (BDI) during challenging mini-invasive cholecystectomy through technical standardization by means of a precise anatomical landmark identification (Critical View of Safety) and advanced technology for biliary visualization. Among these systems, the adoption of magnified stereoscopic 3-dimensional view provided by robotic platforms and near infrared fluorescent cholangiography (NIRF-C) is the most promising. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we evaluated all consecutive minimally invasive cholecystectomies (laparoscopic and robotic) performed with NIRF-C between May 2022 and January 2023 at General Surgery Unit, Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan, San Paolo Hospital (Milan, Italy). Inclusions criteria were as follows: (1) acute cholecystitis (emergency group), (2) history of chronic cholecystitis or complicated cholelithiasis (deferred urgent group), (3) difficult cases (patients affected by cirrhosis, with scleroatrophic gallbladder or BMI > 35 kg/m2). For each group, the detection rate and visualization order of the main biliary structures were reported (cystic duct, CD; common hepatic duct, CHD; common bile duct, CBD; and CD-CHD junction). RESULTS: A total of 101 consecutive patients were enrolled, including 83 laparoscopic and 18 robotic cholecystectomies. All patients were stratified into three subgroups: (a) emergency group (n = 33, 32.7%), (b) deferred urgent group (n = 46, 45.5%), (c) difficult group (n = 22, 21.8%). Visualization of at least one biliary structure was possible in 94.1% of cases (95/101). Interestingly, all four main structures were detected in 43.6% of cases (44/101). The CD was the structure identified most frequently, being recognized in 91/101 patients (90.1%), followed by CBD (83.2%), CHD (62.4%), and CD-CHD junction (52.5%). In the subset of patients that underwent emergency surgery for AC, the CD-CHD confluence was identified in only 45.5% of cases. However, early and precise identification of CBD (75.8%) and CD (87.9%) allowed safe isolation, clipping, and transection of the cystic duct. In the deferred urgent group, the CBD and the CD were easily identified as first structure in a high percentage of cases (65.2% and 41.3% respectively), whereas the CD-CHD junction was the third structure to be identified in 67.4% of cases, the highest value among the three subgroups. In the difficult group, NIRF-C did not prove to be a useful tool for biliary visualization. The rates of failure of visualization were elevated: CBD (27.3%), CD (18.2%), CHD (54.5%), and CD-CHD (68.2%). CONCLUSIONS: NIRF-C is a powerful real-time diagnostic tool to detect CBD and CD during minimally invasive cholecystectomy, especially when inflammation due to acute or chronic cholecystitis subverted the anatomy of the hepatoduodenal ligament.

Robotic approach may be associated with a lower risk of lung metastases compared to laparoscopic approach for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a multivariate analysis on long-term recurrence patterns.

PURPOSE: Describe differences on recurrence patterns of mid-low rectal cancers treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and low anterior resection between laparoscopic and robotic approach. METHODS: Patients were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database between 2006 and 2019. Demographics, clinicopathological features, recurrence, and survival were investigated. Cox regression analysis was performed for risk factor analysis. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients (36 laparoscopic and 124 robotic) were included. Systemic recurrence rate was higher in laparoscopic group (27.8 vs 12.1%, p = 0.023). Liver recurrence was similar (11.1 vs 4.0%). Lung recurrence was higher after laparoscopy (19.4 vs 6.5%, p = 0.019). Time to lung recurrence was shorter after laparoscopy (13.0 months, IQR 4.0-20.0) compared to robotic (23.5 months, IQR 17.0-42.7) with no statistical significance. Time to liver recurrence was similar between laparoscopy (19.5 months, IQR 4.7-37.5) and robotic (19.0 months, IQR 10.5-33.0). Median overall survival after lung recurrence was different (p = 0.021) between laparoscopy (19.0 months, IQR 16.0-67.0) and robotic (74.0 months, IQR 50.2-112.2). OS after liver recurrence was similar between groups. Overall survival and lung disease-free survival were different between the two groups (p = 0.032 and p = 0.020), while liver disease-free survival and local recurrence-free survival were not. Laparoscopy (p = 0.030; HR 3.074, 95% CI: 1.112-8.496) was a risk factor for lung disease-free survival on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Lung recurrences were less frequent and with better overall survival in the robotic group. Liver recurrences were not influenced by choice of approach. Trials are needed to investigate why the robotic approach affects distant metastasis control.

Hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes and the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a survey conducted in patients enrolled in a dedicated registry.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had profound consequences also for non-infected patients. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the pandemic on the quality of life of a population with hereditary gastrointestinal cancer predisposition syndromes and on the surveillance/oncological care program of patients enrolled in a dedicated registry. METHODS: The study was conducted by means of an online self-report survey during the first Italian national lockdown. The survey comprised four sections: demographics; perception/knowledge of COVID-19; impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surveillance and cancer care; health status (SF-12 questionnaire). RESULTS: 211 complete questionnaires were considered. 25.12% of respondents reported being not at all frightened by COVID-19, 63.98% felt "not at all" or "a little" more fragile than the healthy general population, and 66.82% felt the coronavirus to be no more dangerous to them than the healthy general population. 88.15% of respondents felt protected knowing they were monitored by a team of dedicated professionals. CONCLUSION: Patients with hereditary gastrointestinal cancer predisposition syndromes reported experiencing less fear related to COVID-19 than the healthy general population. The study results suggest that being enrolled in a dedicated registry can reassure patients, especially during health crises.

Chemoradiation and consolidation chemotherapy for rectal cancer provides a high rate of organ preservation with a very good long-term oncological outcome: a single-center cohort series.

AIM: To report long-term oncological outcomes and organ preservation rate with a chemoradiotherapy-consolidation chemotherapy (CRT-CNCT) treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). METHOD: Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained database was performed. Oncological outcomes of mid-low LARC patients (n=60) were analyzed after a follow-up of 63 (50-83) months. Patients with clinical complete response (cCR) were treated with the watch-and-wait (WW) protocol. Patients who could not achieve cCR were treated with total mesorectal excision (TME) or local excision (LE). RESULTS: Thirty-nine (65%) patients who achieved cCR were treated with the WW protocol. TME was performed in 15 (25%) patients and LE was performed in 6 (10%) patients. During the follow-up period, 10 (25.6%) patients in the WW group had regrowth (RG) and 3 (7.7%) had distant metastasis (DM). Five-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 90.1% and 71.6%, respectively, in the WW group. Five-year OS and DFS were 94.9% (95% CI: 88-100%) and 80% (95% CI: 55.2-100%), respectively, in the RG group. For all patients (n=60), 5-year TME-free DFS was 57.3% (95% CI: 44.3-70.2%) and organ preservation-adapted DFS was 77.5% (95% CI: 66.4-88.4%). For the WW group (n=39), 5-year TME-free DFS was 77.5% (95% CI: 63.2-91.8%) and organ preservation-adapted DFS was 85.0% (95% CI: 72.3-97.8%). CONCLUSION: CRT-CNCT provides cCR as high as 2/3 of LARC patients. Regrowths, developed during follow-up, can be successfully salvaged without causing oncological disadvantage if strict surveillance is performed.

Risk factors for metachronous colorectal cancer in Lynch syndrome patients: a registry-based observational mono-institutional study cohort.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors for metachronous colorectal cancer (mCRC) in Lynch Syndrome (LS) patients are essential for colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment strategy to perform not only a curative but also preventive surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk factors for mCRC development in LS patients to define the patient subset that may benefit an extended curative and preventive surgical resection. METHODS: Patient's clinical history, oncological, molecular and follow-up were collected retrospectively from the Hereditary Digestive Tumors Registry at the National Cancer Institute of Milan. The age-related cumulative risk of mCRC was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors significantly associated with mCRC were analyzed with a Cox regression model. Overall and specific competitive risks were also calculated. RESULTS: In a total of 1346 CRC patients, 159 (11.8%) developed a mCRC after a mean follow-up of 138 months from the primary tumor. The independent risk factors reported by a multivariate analysis were: pathogenetic variants in MLH1 and MSH2 (HR 2.96 and 1.91, respectively) and history of colorectal adenomas (HR 1.54); whereas female sex and extended surgery were protective (HR 0.59 and 0.79, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among a high-risk population for CRC, in particular LS, an extended surgery may be considered in CRC patients with specific risk factors (MLH1 or MSH2 germline pathogenic variants, history of colorectal adenomas) to reduce the risk of mCRC development.

Radical cholecystectomy without liver resection for peritoneal side early incidental gallbladder cancer.

Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is a rare disease with a poor prognosis. Simple cholecystectomy may be an adequate treatment only for very early disease (Tis, T1a), whereas reoperation is recommended for more advanced disease (T1b and T2). Radical cholecystectomy should have two fundamental objectives: To radically resect the liver parenchyma and to achieve adequate clearance of the lymph nodes. However, recent studies have shown that compared with lymph node dissection alone, liver resection does not improve survival outcomes. The oncological roles of lymphadenectomy and liver resection is distinct. Therefore, for patients with incidental GBC without liver invasion, hepatic resection is not always mandatory.

Robotic Approach to Paediatric Gastrointestinal Diseases: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: The use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for paediatric surgery has been on the rise since the early 2000s and is complicated by factors unique to paediatric surgery. The rise of robotic surgery has presented an opportunity in MIS for children, and recent developments in the reductions in port sizes and single-port surgery offer promising prospects. This study aimed to present a systematic overview and analysis of the existing literature around the use of robotic platforms in the treatment of paediatric gastrointestinal diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In accordance with the PRISMA Statement, a systematic review on paediatric robotic gastrointestinal surgery was conducted on Pubmed, Cochrane, and Scopus. A critical appraisal of the study was performed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included, of which seven were on Hirschsprung's disease and eight on other indications. Included studies were heterogeneous in their populations, age, and sex, but all reported low incidences of intraoperative complications and conversions in their robotic cohorts. Only one study reported on a comparator cohort, with a longer operative time in the robotic cohort (180 vs. 152 and 156 min, p < 0.001), but no significant differences in blood loss, length of stay, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, or conversion. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery may play a role in the treatment of paediatric gastrointestinal diseases. There is limited data available on modern robotic platforms and almost no comparative data between any robotic platforms and conventional minimally invasive approaches. Further technological developments and research are needed to enhance our understanding of the potential that robotics may hold for the field of paediatric surgery.

Robotic colorectal surgery training: Portsmouth perspective.

This study aims to discuss the principles and pillars of robotic colorectal surgery training and share the training pathway at Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust. A narrative review is presented to discuss all the relevant and critical steps in robotic surgical training. Robotic training requires a stepwise approach, including theoretical knowledge, case observation, simulation, dry lab, wet lab, tutored programs, proctoring (in person or telementoring), procedure-specific training, and follow-up. Portsmouth Colorectal has an established robotic training model with a safe stepwise approach that has been demonstrated through perioperative and oncological results. Robotic surgery training should enable a trainee to use the robotic platform safely and effectively, minimize errors, and enhance performance with improved outcomes. Portsmouth Colorectal has provided such a stepwise training program since 2015 and continues to promote and augment safe robotic training in its field. Safe and efficient training programs are essential to upholding the optimal standard of care.

Comparing total mesorectal excision with partial mesorectal excision for proximal rectal cancer: evaluating postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes.

The treatment role of Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) in proximal rectal cancers (PRC) is still debated. Partial Mesorectal Excision (PME) can reduce morbidity in PRC patients. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term clinical and long-term oncological outcomes between the two groups. A total of 157 PRC patients were enrolled in this study (114 performed with PME and 43 with TME). The two groups were compared in terms of perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes. The overall postoperative complications rate was higher in TME group (18.4% vs. 32.5%, p < 0.05). The incidence of diverting ileostomy was also significantly higher in TME group (86.0% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.001). Overall survival rates for 3, 5, and 7 years in PME and TME group accordingly were: 94.6%, 89.3%, 81.5% and 93.2%, 87.6%, 78.4% (p = 0.324). Disease-free survival rates for 3, 5, and 7 years in PME and TME group were: 90.2%, 84.5%, 78.6% and 88.7%, 81.2%, 75.3% (p = 0.297), respectively. Local recurrence rates for 3, 5, and 7 years in PME and TME group were: 2.6%, 6.1%, 8.8% and 4.6%, 9.3%, 11.2% (p = 0.061), respectively. PME is feasible and can be safely performed in PRC patients with favorable oncological outcomes. TME is associated with increasing risk of surgical complications and requires a two-step surgery for stoma takedown.