{"title":"机器人辅助腹腔镜直肠癌手术的临床意义:回顾性倾向评分匹配分析。","authors":"Masayuki Ando, Takeru Matsuda, Kimihiro Yamashita, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Ryuichiro Sawada, Yasufumi Koterazawa, Naoki Urakawa, Hironobu Goto, Shingo Kanaji, Yoshihiro Kakeji","doi":"10.1007/s00423-025-03734-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for rectal cancer may sometimes be difficult. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) is expected to overcome these technical challenges of CLS and provide better short-term outcomes. However, previous randomized controlled trials indicated that the safety and feasibility of RALS compared to CLS remain controversial; therefore, we assessed the safety and feasibility of RALS for rectal cancer compared with CLS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study retrospectively reviewed 702 patients who had undergone anterior resection by CLS or RALS for rectal malignancies from January 2009 to December 2023. Among the patients, 313 and 75 were included in the CLS and RALS groups, respectively. Short- and midterm outcomes of the two groups were compared after performing propensity score matching analysis (PSM) to adjust for patient and tumor characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 140 and 70 patients in the CLS and RALS groups, respectively, were matched using PSM. The bleeding amount and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower, the operation time was longer, and the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the RALS group than in the CLS group. The Kaplan-Meier curves for cause-specific survival, relapse-free survival, and the cumulative incidence of local recurrence demonstrated no difference between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RALS for rectal cancer provided superior outcomes to CLS in terms of the bleeding amount, postoperative CRP levels, and postoperative hospital stay. The midterm oncological outcomes in RALS were comparable to those in CLS.</p>","PeriodicalId":17983,"journal":{"name":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","volume":"410 1","pages":"165"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12095325/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical significance of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a retrospective propensity score matching analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Masayuki Ando, Takeru Matsuda, Kimihiro Yamashita, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Ryuichiro Sawada, Yasufumi Koterazawa, Naoki Urakawa, Hironobu Goto, Shingo Kanaji, Yoshihiro Kakeji\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00423-025-03734-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for rectal cancer may sometimes be difficult. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) is expected to overcome these technical challenges of CLS and provide better short-term outcomes. However, previous randomized controlled trials indicated that the safety and feasibility of RALS compared to CLS remain controversial; therefore, we assessed the safety and feasibility of RALS for rectal cancer compared with CLS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study retrospectively reviewed 702 patients who had undergone anterior resection by CLS or RALS for rectal malignancies from January 2009 to December 2023. Among the patients, 313 and 75 were included in the CLS and RALS groups, respectively. Short- and midterm outcomes of the two groups were compared after performing propensity score matching analysis (PSM) to adjust for patient and tumor characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 140 and 70 patients in the CLS and RALS groups, respectively, were matched using PSM. The bleeding amount and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower, the operation time was longer, and the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the RALS group than in the CLS group. The Kaplan-Meier curves for cause-specific survival, relapse-free survival, and the cumulative incidence of local recurrence demonstrated no difference between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RALS for rectal cancer provided superior outcomes to CLS in terms of the bleeding amount, postoperative CRP levels, and postoperative hospital stay. The midterm oncological outcomes in RALS were comparable to those in CLS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"410 1\",\"pages\":\"165\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12095325/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-025-03734-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-025-03734-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical significance of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a retrospective propensity score matching analysis.
Purpose: Conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for rectal cancer may sometimes be difficult. Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) is expected to overcome these technical challenges of CLS and provide better short-term outcomes. However, previous randomized controlled trials indicated that the safety and feasibility of RALS compared to CLS remain controversial; therefore, we assessed the safety and feasibility of RALS for rectal cancer compared with CLS.
Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed 702 patients who had undergone anterior resection by CLS or RALS for rectal malignancies from January 2009 to December 2023. Among the patients, 313 and 75 were included in the CLS and RALS groups, respectively. Short- and midterm outcomes of the two groups were compared after performing propensity score matching analysis (PSM) to adjust for patient and tumor characteristics.
Results: A total of 140 and 70 patients in the CLS and RALS groups, respectively, were matched using PSM. The bleeding amount and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower, the operation time was longer, and the postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the RALS group than in the CLS group. The Kaplan-Meier curves for cause-specific survival, relapse-free survival, and the cumulative incidence of local recurrence demonstrated no difference between the two groups.
Conclusion: RALS for rectal cancer provided superior outcomes to CLS in terms of the bleeding amount, postoperative CRP levels, and postoperative hospital stay. The midterm oncological outcomes in RALS were comparable to those in CLS.
期刊介绍:
Langenbeck''s Archives of Surgery aims to publish the best results in the field of clinical surgery and basic surgical research. The main focus is on providing the highest level of clinical research and clinically relevant basic research. The journal, published exclusively in English, will provide an international discussion forum for the controlled results of clinical surgery. The majority of published contributions will be original articles reporting on clinical data from general and visceral surgery, while endocrine surgery will also be covered. Papers on basic surgical principles from the fields of traumatology, vascular and thoracic surgery are also welcome. Evidence-based medicine is an important criterion for the acceptance of papers.