Advantages of Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision With Partial Prostatectomy Compared With Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

IF 0.9 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Rumi Shimano, Shunsuke Kasai, Hiroyasu Kagawa, Akio Shiomi, Shoichi Manabe, Yusuke Yamaoka, Yusuke Tanaka, Takahiro Igaki, Akitoshi Nankaku, Yusuke Kinugasa
{"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,&nbsp;Shunsuke Kasai,&nbsp;Hiroyasu Kagawa,&nbsp;Akio Shiomi,&nbsp;Shoichi Manabe,&nbsp;Yusuke Yamaoka,&nbsp;Yusuke Tanaka,&nbsp;Takahiro Igaki,&nbsp;Akitoshi Nankaku,&nbsp;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> &lt; 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> &lt; 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.

Abstract Image

一项单中心回顾性队列研究:机器人全直肠肠系膜切除联合部分前列腺切除术与开放手术治疗直肠癌的优势
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。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
129
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信