Advantages of Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision With Partial Prostatectomy Compared With Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study
{"title":"Advantages of Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision With Partial Prostatectomy Compared With Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study","authors":"Rumi Shimano, Shunsuke Kasai, Hiroyasu Kagawa, Akio Shiomi, Shoichi Manabe, Yusuke Yamaoka, Yusuke Tanaka, Takahiro Igaki, Akitoshi Nankaku, Yusuke Kinugasa","doi":"10.1111/ases.70003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) with resection of adjacent organs has been increasingly used for locally advanced rectal cancer; however, few studies have focused on robotic TME with partial prostatectomy. Therefore, this study aimed to demonstrate the advantages of robotic TME with partial prostatectomy compared with open surgery for rectal cancer.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>This retrospective cohort study examined consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent robotic or open TME with partial prostatectomy at a high-volume center in Japan from April 2003 to March 2022. The patients were divided into robotic (<i>n</i> = 14) and open (<i>n</i> = 11) surgery groups. The short- and long-term outcomes of these patients were compared.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>More transabdominal partial prostatectomies were performed in the robotic surgery group than in the open surgery group (71.4% vs. 9.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.001). Moreover, sphincter-preserving surgery was performed in 35.7% of patients in the robotic surgery group. The robotic surgery group had shorter operative times (401 min vs. 435 min, <i>p</i> = 0.047), less blood loss (56 mL vs. 484 mL, <i>p</i> < 0.001), lower complication rates (28.6% vs. 72.7%, <i>p</i> = 0.047), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (8 days vs. 18 days, <i>p</i> < 0.001) than the open surgery group. No significant differences were observed in the positive radial margin rate (7.1% vs. 9.1%, <i>p</i> = 1.000) or long-term outcomes between the two groups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Compared with open surgery, robotic TME with partial prostatectomy facilitates transabdominal partial prostatectomy, resulting in more sphincter-preserving surgeries and better short-term outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47019,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11710923/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ases.70003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim
Robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) with resection of adjacent organs has been increasingly used for locally advanced rectal cancer; however, few studies have focused on robotic TME with partial prostatectomy. Therefore, this study aimed to demonstrate the advantages of robotic TME with partial prostatectomy compared with open surgery for rectal cancer.
Method
This retrospective cohort study examined consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent robotic or open TME with partial prostatectomy at a high-volume center in Japan from April 2003 to March 2022. The patients were divided into robotic (n = 14) and open (n = 11) surgery groups. The short- and long-term outcomes of these patients were compared.
Results
More transabdominal partial prostatectomies were performed in the robotic surgery group than in the open surgery group (71.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.001). Moreover, sphincter-preserving surgery was performed in 35.7% of patients in the robotic surgery group. The robotic surgery group had shorter operative times (401 min vs. 435 min, p = 0.047), less blood loss (56 mL vs. 484 mL, p < 0.001), lower complication rates (28.6% vs. 72.7%, p = 0.047), and shorter postoperative hospital stays (8 days vs. 18 days, p < 0.001) than the open surgery group. No significant differences were observed in the positive radial margin rate (7.1% vs. 9.1%, p = 1.000) or long-term outcomes between the two groups.
Conclusion
Compared with open surgery, robotic TME with partial prostatectomy facilitates transabdominal partial prostatectomy, resulting in more sphincter-preserving surgeries and better short-term outcomes.
目的:机器人全肠系膜切除(TME)并切除邻近器官已越来越多地用于局部晚期直肠癌;然而,很少有研究关注机器人TME与部分前列腺切除术。因此,本研究旨在证明机器人TME与直肠癌部分前列腺切除术相比开放手术的优势。方法:这项回顾性队列研究于2003年4月至2022年3月在日本的一个大容量中心对接受机器人或开放式TME联合部分前列腺切除术的连续直肠癌患者进行了研究。将患者分为机器人手术组(n = 14)和开放手术组(n = 11)。比较这些患者的短期和长期预后。结果:机器人手术组经腹部分前列腺切除术的发生率高于开放手术组(71.4%比9.1%,p = 0.001)。此外,机器人手术组中35.7%的患者进行了保留括约肌手术。机器人手术组手术时间更短(401 min vs. 435 min, p = 0.047),出血量更少(56 mL vs. 484 mL, p结论:与开放手术相比,机器人TME联合部分前列腺切除术更方便经腹部分前列腺切除术,保留括约肌手术次数更多,近期疗效更好。