Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic-assisted transabdominal total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision: which approach offers optimal short-term outcomes for mid-to-low rectal adenocarcinoma?
Butterworth, J W; Butterworth, W A; Meyer, J; Giacobino, C; Buchs, N; Ris, F; Scarpinata, R.
Affiliation
  • Butterworth JW; Kings College Hospitals, Princess Royal University Hospital, Farnborough Common, London, BR6 8ND, Kent, UK. jamesfomsf@gmail.com.
  • Butterworth WA; Hereford County Hospital, Hereford, UK.
  • Meyer J; Division of Digestive Surgery, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Giacobino C; Division of Digestive Surgery, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Buchs N; Division of Digestive Surgery, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Ris F; Division of Digestive Surgery, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Scarpinata R; Kings College Hospitals, Princess Royal University Hospital, Farnborough Common, London, BR6 8ND, Kent, UK.
Tech Coloproctol ; 25(11): 1183-1198, 2021 Nov.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34562160
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Resection of low rectal adenocarcinoma can be challenging in the narrow pelvis of male patients. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) appears to offer technical advantages for distal rectal tumours, and robotic-assisted transabdominal TME (rTME) was introduced in effort to improve operative precision and ergonomics. However, no study has comprehensively compared these approaches. The aim of the present study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to compare postoperative short-term outcomes in rTME and TaTME.

METHODS:

A systematic online search (1974-July 2020) of MEDLINE, Embase, web of science and google scholar was conducted for trials, prospective or retrospective studies involving rTME, or TaTME for rectal cancer. Outcome variables included hospital stay; operation duration, blood loss; resection margins; proportion of histologically complete resected specimens; lymph nodes; overall complications; anastomotic leak, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS:

Sixty-two articles met the inclusion criteria, including 37 studies (3835 patients) assessing rTME resection, 23 studies (1326 patients) involving TaTME and 2 comparing both (165 patients). Operating time was longer in rTME (309.2 min, 95% CI 285.5-332.8) than in TaTME studies (256.2 min, 95% CI 231.5-280.9) (p = 0.002). rTME resected specimens had a larger distal resection margin (2.62 cm, 95% CI 2.35-2.88) than in TaTME studies (2.10 cm, 95% CI 1.83-2.36) (p = 0.007). Other outcome variables did not significantly differ between the two techniques.

CONCLUSIONS:

rTME provides similar pathological and short-term outcomes to TaTME and both are reasonable surgical approaches for patients with mid-to-low rectal cancer. To definitively answer the question of the optimal TME technique, we suggest a prospective trial comparing both techniques assessing long-term survival as a primary outcome.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Rectal Neoplasms / Adenocarcinoma / Laparoscopy / Robotic Surgical Procedures / Transanal Endoscopic Surgery Type of study: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Tech Coloproctol Journal subject: GASTROENTEROLOGIA Year: 2021 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Rectal Neoplasms / Adenocarcinoma / Laparoscopy / Robotic Surgical Procedures / Transanal Endoscopic Surgery Type of study: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans / Male Language: En Journal: Tech Coloproctol Journal subject: GASTROENTEROLOGIA Year: 2021 Type: Article Affiliation country: United kingdom