Laparoscopic approach for rectal cancer surgery: Triumph of reason or necessity of evolution?

Abstract

The role of laparoscopy in rectal cancer surgery has evolved considerably since the early 2000s. Initial randomized trials, such as COLOR II and COREAN, indicated that laparoscopic approaches offered similar pathological outcomes with better postoperative recovery than open surgery. In contrast, trials like ACOSOG Z6051 and ALaCaRT suggested noninferiority could not be established. Variability in trial outcomes, focusing on either disease-free survival or pathological measures, initially hindered consensus. Long-term analyses have shown no significant difference in disease-free survival between laparoscopic and open approaches. Meta-analyses have reinforced the benefits of laparoscopic surgery, with reduced mortality and similar oncologic effectiveness to open surgery. However, new techniques like transanal TME (TaTME) and robotic approaches have introduced alternatives, though each presents unique challenges, from recurrence rates in TaTME to costs in robotics. While laparoscopy remains the preferred method due to accessibility and outcomes, robotic surgery is expected to gain traction in high-volume centers.