ELHT Evidence Hub
  • Home
  • Meet the Team
  • Library Facilities
  • Library News
  • FAQS
  • Evidence Search Request
Picture

Real-world comparison of curative open, laparoscopic and robotic resections for sigmoid and rectal cancer-single center experience

17/6/2021

0 Comments

 
Author(s) Ansari S.A.; Javed M.A.; Hedayat F.; Harris C.; Gill M. et al.
Source Journal of Robotic Surgery; 2021
There has been an increase in the utilization of robotic surgery in addition to traditional open or laparoscopic approaches. Aim of this study is to compare the short-term outcomes for open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery for rectal and sigmoid cancer. One hundred and forty-seven patients (open n = 48, laparoscopic n = 49, robotic n = 50) undergoing curative resections by two surgeons between 2013 and 2020 were included. Data analyzed included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, length of stay, post-operative outcomes, and pathologic surrogates of oncologic results, including total mesorectal excision (TME) quality, circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement and lymph node (LN) yield. Median age of population was 68 years (IQR 59-73), majority (68%) were males. Median distance from anal verge in the robotic surgery group was 8 cm, compared to 15 and 14.5 cm in the open and laparoscopic groups, respectively, p = 0.029, (laparoscopic vs robotic, p = 0.005 and open vs robotic, p = 0.027). Proportion of patients who received neoadjuvant radiotherapy in robotic surgery group was higher, p = 0.04. In sub-group of tumors between 3 and 7 cm from anal verge more patients in the robotic surgery group had sphincter preservation, p = 0.006. Length of stay, maximum C-reactive protein, and white blood cell rise favored minimally invasive approaches compared to open surgery. There were no differences in post-operative complications, lymph node yield or CRM positivity rate between the three groups. Robotic surgery approach is safe and allows sphincter preservation without compromising TME quality in rectal cancer surgery.Copyright © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    The following databases were searched:
    EMBASE,  MEDLINE, PsycINFO, BNI, CINAHL, 
    to find  ELHT staff publications

    Specialties

    All
    ANAESTHETICS
    CAMHS
    CARDIOLOGY
    COVID 19
    DEMENTIA
    DERMATOLOGY
    DIABETES
    DIETETICS
    EMERGENCY CARE
    ENDOCRINOLOGY
    EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE
    GASTROENTEROLOGY
    GYNAECOLOGY
    HAEMATOLOGY
    MATERNITY
    MAXILLOFACIAL
    NEONATOLOGY
    NEUROLOGY
    NURSING
    OBSTETRICS
    ONCOLOGY
    ORTHOPAEDICS
    PAEDIATRICS
    PHARMACY
    PHYSIOTHERAPY
    RADIOLOGY
    RESPIRATORY
    RHEUMATOLOGY
    STROKE
    SURGERY
    UROLOGY
    VASCULAR SURGERY

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    August 2022
    July 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019

Learning Centre Library
Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital
01254 734312 or Ext 84312
library.blackburn@elht.nhs.uk
​Find us
​​Mackenzie Library
Burnley General Teaching Hospital
01282 803114 or Ext. 13114
library.burnley@elht.nhs.uk

Find us
​Staffed Opening Hours
Mon     08:30-16:30
Tue      08:30-16:30
Wed     08:30-16:30
Thu      08:30-16:30
Fri        08:30-16:00
24/7 access to both libraries is available - please see library staff
View our Quality Standards and Performance
Picture
Picture
  • Home
  • Meet the Team
  • Library Facilities
  • Library News
  • FAQS
  • Evidence Search Request