Implementation of a standardized surgical technique in robot-assisted restorative rectal cancer resection: a single center cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing focus on the technical performance of total mesorectal excision over recent decades, anastomotic leakage (AL) continues to be a serious complication for many patients, even in the hands of experienced surgical teams. This study describes implementation of standardized surgical technique in an effort to reduce variability, decrease the risk of anastomotic leakage, and improve associated short-term outcomes for rectal cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted restorative rectal resection (RRR). METHODS: We evaluated all rectal cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted RRR at Aarhus University Hospital between 2017 and 2020. Six standardized surgical steps directed to improve anastomotic healing were mandatory for all RRR. Additional changes were made during the period with prohibition of systemic dexamethasone and limiting the use of endoscopic stapling devices. RESULTS: The use of the full standardization, including all six surgical steps, increased from 40.3% (95% CI, 0.28-0.54) to 86.2% (95% CI, 0.68-0.95). The incidence of AL decreased from 21.0% (95% CI, 0.12-0.33) to 6.9% (95% CI, 0.01-0.23). Length of hospital stay (LOS) decreased from 6 days (range 2-50) to 5 days (range 2-26). The rate of patients readmitted within 90 days decreased from 21.0% (95% CI, 0.12-0.33), to 6.9% (95% CI, 0.01-0.23). CONCLUSION: The full standardization was effectively implemented for rectal cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted RRR. The risk of AL, LOS and readmission decreased during the study period. A team focus on high-reliability and peri-operative complications can improve patient outcomes.

Perioperative pain after robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal resection.

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.

Outcome one year after robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery: a consecutive cohort study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate outcome after robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery (RARCS). We focused on conversion rate, postoperative complications, pathological evaluation (adequacy of resection margins), and bowel function (low anterior resection syndrome (LARS)) 1 year after surgery. METHODS: An observational study of prospectively registered patients with data obtained from medical records. Data comprise the initial 208 rectal cancer patients operated with robot-assisted surgery at a single Danish university hospital from October 2011 to October 2014. RESULTS: In total, 27 procedures (13%) were converted to open surgery, and 23 of the 27(85%) conversions were in the obese and overweight patients. The anastomotic leak rate was 12 (9%), and further 5 (2%) developed a complication requiring re-operation (ileus, bleeding, wound abscess). In total, 14 (7%) patients had a circumferential resection margin (CRM) ≤ 1 mm (R1-resection). In regard to bowel function, 15/22 (68%) of TME patients had major LARS at 6 months follow-up but at 12 months follow-up this proportion was reduced to 18/34 (53%). CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes after RARCS at a single high-volume university center are overall comparable to outcomes reported from laparoscopic surgery. The results are satisfying because they are achieved during implementation of RARCS. Randomized trials are, however, needed and focus should especially be on long-term follow-up in regard to functional outcome.

Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to Open Laparotomy Among Patients Undergoing Resection for Rectal Cancer: The ROLARR Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Robotic rectal cancer surgery is gaining popularity, but limited data are available regarding safety and efficacy. Objective: To compare robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery for risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial comparing robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery among 471 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma suitable for curative resection conducted at 29 sites across 10 countries, including 40 surgeons. Recruitment of patients was from January 7, 2011, to September 30, 2014, follow-up was conducted at 30 days and 6 months, and final follow-up was on June 16, 2015. Interventions: Patients were randomized to robotic-assisted (n = 237) or conventional (n = 234) laparoscopic rectal cancer resection, performed by either high (upper rectum) or low (total rectum) anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection (rectum and perineum). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was conversion to open laparotomy. Secondary end points included intraoperative and postoperative complications, circumferential resection margin positivity (CRM+) and other pathological outcomes, quality of life (36-Item Short Form Survey and 20-item Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory), bladder and sexual dysfunction (International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function, and Female Sexual Function Index), and oncological outcomes. Results: Among 471 randomized patients (mean [SD] age, 64.9 [11.0] years; 320 [67.9%] men), 466 (98.9%) completed the study. The overall rate of conversion to open laparotomy was 10.1%: 19 of 236 patients (8.1%) in the robotic-assisted laparoscopic group and 28 of 230 patients (12.2%) in the conventional laparoscopic group (unadjusted risk difference = 4.1% [95% CI, -1.4% to 9.6%]; adjusted odds ratio = 0.61 [95% CI, 0.31 to 1.21]; P = .16). The overall CRM+ rate was 5.7%; CRM+ occurred in 14 (6.3%) of 224 patients in the conventional laparoscopic group and 12 (5.1%) of 235 patients in the robotic-assisted laparoscopic group (unadjusted risk difference = 1.1% [95% CI, -3.1% to 5.4%]; adjusted odds ratio = 0.78 [95% CI, 0.35 to 1.76]; P = .56). Of the other 8 reported prespecified secondary end points, including intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, plane of surgery, 30-day mortality, bladder dysfunction, and sexual dysfunction, none showed a statistically significant difference between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with rectal adenocarcinoma suitable for curative resection, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery, as compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery, did not significantly reduce the risk of conversion to open laparotomy. These findings suggest that robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery, when performed by surgeons with varying experience with robotic surgery, does not confer an advantage in rectal cancer resection. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN80500123.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for advanced polyps and early cancers in the rectum-Long-term outcome: A STROBE compliant observational study.

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) allows for the resection of large adenomas and early stage cancers in the rectum. The rate of complications and recurrence for malignant tumors compared with benign tumors has been questioned.The objective of our study was to analyze the outcome after TEM procedures for adenomas and cancers with focus on local recurrence and complications.All 280 patients who had a TEM procedure between January 2008 and September 2015 were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Outcome was described for benign and malignant tumors. Mortality, recurrence, and complications were recorded.Two hundred eighty tumors were treated with TEM, 176 (63%) were benign and 104 (37%) were malignant. Complication rates were significantly different in the 2 groups, 10.8% (n = 19) in the benign and 24.0% (n = 25) in the malignant group (P = 0.003). A significant difference in perforation/penetration to the peritoneal cavity was noted (P = 0.034). There were no significant difference in the recurrence rate of 8.3% (n = 13) in the benign and 9.0% (n = 7) in the malignant groups. Thirty days mortality rates were 1.1% in the benign group versus 1.9% in the malignant. Other complications were noted in 2.8% and 3.8% in the benign and malignant group, respectively.TEM seems to be a safe and viable procedure for removing both benign and malignant lesions from the rectum. TEM offers low mortality and complication rates also recurrence after resection of malignant tumors.

[Pseudoaneurysm in the femoral artery after repeated hip surgery--combined thrombolytic and surgical treatment]. / Pseudoaneurisme i arteria femoralis communis efter gentagen hoftekirurgi--kombineret trombolytisk og kirurgisk behandling.

Pseudoaneurysms in the femoral artery seldom occur spontaneously. Commonly they occur secondarily to trauma or as a complication to surgery or angiography. This study reports the occurrence of a pseudoaneurysm in the left common femoral artery. The patient, a 54-year-old woman, had undergone leftsided hip replacement five years before and several subsequent operations on the left hip due to dislocation and loose cup. She was admitted with a palpable non-pulsating mass in her left inguinal region and pain and cyanosis in her left lower limb. Ultrasound and angiography showed a pseudoaneurysm with occlusion of the popliteal, the tibial, and the peroneal arteries. The patients was successfully treated with actilysis for 48 hours and subsequent vascular surgery.