Advantages of using a robotic stapler in rectal cancer surgery.
Patricia TejedorF SagiasD NockK FlashmanS NaqviN Li KandalaJim S KhanPublished in: Journal of robotic surgery (2019)
To compare short-term postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) after the use of robotic and laparoscopic staplers. Over a 5-year period, 196 patients were divided into 2 groups according to the use of laparoscopic (LS) or robotic stapler (RS). Patient demographics and postoperative complications were compared. A total of 145 (74%) robotic TME were performed using the LS and 51 (26%) the RS. No conversions to laparoscopy or laparotomy were observed, in either group. Transection of the rectum using one or two firings was achieved in a higher proportion of RS cases (91%) compared with LS cases (60%; p < 0.001). The anastomotic leakage (AL) rate was 4% in the RS group vs. 7% in the LS group (p > 0.05). However, when three or more firings were needed for the rectal transection, the risk of AL increased (3.4% with ≤ 2 firings vs. 10.7% with ≥ 3 firings, p = 0.006). Our data confirm that multiple stapler firings for rectal transection have a major impact on AL. The robotic stapler simplifies the transaction, so that rectal division requires fewer stapler firings, with a potential reduction in the incidence of AL.
Keyphrases
- rectal cancer
- robot assisted
- minimally invasive
- patients undergoing
- locally advanced
- end stage renal disease
- type diabetes
- newly diagnosed
- skeletal muscle
- risk factors
- radiation therapy
- case report
- patient reported outcomes
- adipose tissue
- percutaneous coronary intervention
- human health
- coronary artery bypass
- surgical site infection
- climate change
- weight loss
- glycemic control
- deep learning