In this study, we analyze the oncological and functional outcomes after minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic and robotic) for mid and low rectal adenocarcinoma. This is a narrative review of articles published from January 2019 to December 2024 in which we analyzed the rate of short-term oncological outcomes (quality of surgical samples), long-term oncological outcomes (recurrence rate, overall survival, and disease-free survival), and functional disorders (urinary, sexual, and bowel function) after minimally invasive surgery. The rates of complete mesorectum are 67.7%-92.8%, the rate of free circumferential resection margin is 94%-98.2%, and the rate of free distal resection margin is 99.4%-100%. The local recurrence rate is 2.3%-7.3%, the overall survival rate is 80%-95.6%, and the disease-free survival rate is 70%-86.4%. The rate of urinary disorders is 25%-26.5%, sexual disorders are 35%-80%, and bowel disorders are 17%-44.6%. This review demonstrates that minimally invasive surgery yields favorable oncological and functional outcomes. The continuous evolution in robotic surgery will increasingly lead to interesting implications for rectal surgery, thanks to less surgical trauma and better intraoperative visualization of nerves.

Over the past two decades, minimally invasive approaches in rectal surgery have changed the landscape of surgical interventions, impacting both malignant and benign pathologies. The dynamic nature of rectal cancer treatment owes much to innovations in surgical techniques, reflected in the expanding literature on available treatment modalities. Local excision, facilitated by minimally invasive surgery, offers curative potential for patients with early T1 rectal cancers and favorable pathologic features. For more complex cases, laparoscopic and robotic surgery have demonstrated significant efficacy and provided precise, durable outcomes while reducing perioperative morbidity and enhancing postoperative recovery. Additionally, advancements in imaging, surgical instrumentation, and enhanced recovery protocols have further optimized patient care. The integration of multidisciplinary care has also emerged as a cornerstone of treatment, emphasizing collaboration among surgeons, oncologists, and radiologists to deliver personalized, evidence-based care. This narrative review aims to elucidate current minimally invasive surgical techniques and approaches for rectal pathologies, spanning benign and malignant conditions, while also exploring future directions in the field, including the potential role of artificial intelligence and next-generation robotic platforms.

Lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) is getting global attention as an a surgical option to reduce local recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer. As the transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is gaining popularity worldwide, a novel LLND approach was established adopting a two-team approach that combines the transabdominal and transanal approaches using the TaTME technique. This narrative review describes the advantages, anatomical landmarks, surgical techniques, and pitfalls of transanal LLND (TaLLND). The advantages of TaLLND include a magnified view and enhanced maneuverability of the laparoscopic instruments in the deep pelvis. TaLLND is also beneficial for LLND in patients with a history of pelvic surgery because surgeons can have access to the areas unaffected by previous surgery. To master the TaLLND technique, the procedure should be understood according to the following steps: S4 nerve identification, lateral space entry, lateral dissection, obturator vein, artery, and nerve identification, dissection along the external iliac vein, medial dissection, median and bottom dissection, dissection along the internal iliac artery, and dissection along the obturator nerve. TaLLND can be applied to highly advanced disease that requires combined resection of the major internal iliac vessels, pelvic nerves, or adjacent organs. In such cases, simultaneous transanal and transabdomiinal LLND utilizing a two team approach has advantages as these approaches can provide mutual complementary roles. TaLLND is expected to overcome the difficulty of transabdominal LLND and improve the quality of LLND.

Radical surgery following neoadjuvant therapy is the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer. A contact x-ray brachytherapy (CXB) boost can alternatively be used to treat residual disease postneoadjuvant (chemo)radiation, especially in patients who are not suitable for or do not wish to have surgery. Its role has mostly been studied to date in low- to intermediate-risk patients. We have now evaluated the utility of CXB boost in high-risk rectal cancers after their tumors have been significantly downstaged by neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation.

Oncological outcomes and treatment tolerability were evaluated in 328 patients based on rectal cancer treatment risk stratification: low-/intermediate-risk (cT1-3ab, N0-1, M0, no extramural venous invasion, mesorectal fascia involvement >1 mm) and high-risk (cT3cd-4/N2, M0, mesorectal fascia ≤1 mm, and/or extramural venous invasion positive).

With a median follow-up of 33 (IQR, 15-54) months and a median age of 73 (IQR, 62-80) years, no significant differences were found between low/intermediate and high-risk groups in clinical complete response (78% vs. 73%, P = .32), local regrowth (16.6% vs. 22.4%, P = .41), nodal (1.8% vs. 5.8%, P = .051) or regional (1.3% vs. 2.9%, P = .33) relapse, or postradiation toxicities (P = .16). However, the high-risk group had a higher distant relapse rate (21.2% vs. 10.7%, P = .01), with no significant differences in 3-year organ preservation (80% vs. 87%, P = .25), 5-year disease-free survival (62% vs. 64%, P = .46), or overall survival (67% vs. 64%, P = .88). Longer treatment time, treatment gap >24 weeks between therapies, and administration of a higher than standard CXB dose were newly identified factors that negatively impacted outcomes.

High-risk patients with rectal cancer treated with CXB boost had more distant relapses, but comparable locoregional tumor control, organ preservation, disease-free survival, and overall survival to lower risk patients, with acceptable toxicities. CXB boost is, therefore, a viable option for selected high-risk patients with rectal cancer. Timely reassessment, prompt referral, and CXB dose optimization are crucial for improving outcomes.

To investigate whether robotic surgery (RS) decreases the risk of circumferential resection margin (CRM) positivity compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS) in patients with rectal cancer (RC) undergoing mesorectal excision (ME).

Although it is well known that CRM positivity affects postoperative outcomes in patients with RC undergoing ME, few studies have investigated whether RS is superior to conventional LS for the risk of CRM positivity.

We performed a comprehensive electronic search of the literature up to December 2022 to identify studies that compared the risk of CRM positivity between patients with RC undergoing robotic and conventional laparoscopic surgery. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs), and heterogeneity was analyzed using I2 statistics.

Eighteen studies, consisting of 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 propensity score matching (PSM) studies, involved a total of 9203 patients with RC who underwent ME were included in this meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that RS decreased the overall risk of CRM positivity (RR, 0.82; 95 % CI, 0.73-0.92; P = 0.001; I2 = 0 %) compared with conventional LS. Results of a meta-analysis of the 4 selected RCTs also showed that RS decreased the risk of CRM positivity (RR, 0.62; 95 % CI, 0.43-0.91; P = 0.01; I2 = 0 %) compared with conventional LS.

This meta-analysis revealed that RS is associated with a decreased risk of CRM positivity compared with conventional LS in patients with RC undergoing ME.

The anatomical dimensions and the shape of the pelvis influence surgical difficulty for rectal cancer. Compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, robot-assisted surgery is expected to improve surgical outcomes due to the multi-joint movement of its surgical instruments. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of pelvic anatomical indicators on short-term outcomes of patients with rectal cancer. A retrospective analysis was conducted using data from 129 patients with rectal cancer who underwent conventional laparoscopic low anterior resection (L-LAR) or robot-assisted low anterior resection (R-LAR) with total mesorectal excision or tumor-specific mesorectal excision between January 2014 and December 2022. The transverse diameter of the lesser pelvis and the sacral promontory angle were used as indicators of pelvic anatomy. The sacral promontory angle was not associated with age and sex while the pelvic width was smaller in male than in female. The pelvic width did not affect postoperative complications in both L-LAR and R-LAR. In contrast, postoperative urinary dysfunction occurred more frequently in patients with a small sacral promontory angle (p = 0.005) in L-LAR although there was no impact on short-term outcomes in R-LAR. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that a small sacral promontory angle was an independent predictive factor for urinary dysfunction (p = 0.032). Sharp angulation of the sacral promontory was a risk factor for UD after L-LAR. Robot-assisted surgery could overcome anatomical difficulties and reduce the incidence of UD.

Robotic-assisted rectal surgery (RARS) and Laparoscopic-assisted rectal surgery are the two techniques that are increasingly used for rectal cancer, and both have their advantages and disadvantages. This meta-analysis will analyze the outcomes of both techniques to determine their relative performance and suitability.

An extensive search was carried out on PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar, followed by a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess both approaches for rectal cancer.

This meta-analysis is comprised of fifteen RCTs. The conversion to open surgery (RR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.38-0.74, P = 0.0002) was significantly lower in the RARS group. The outcomes like anastomotic leak, postoperative ileus, postoperative urinary retention (POUR), surgical site infection (SSI), and intra-abdominal abscess showed no significant difference between the two groups. The reoperation rate (RR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.34-0.95, P = 0.03) was lower in the robotic group. High heterogeneity was obtained when pooling data on operative time, length of hospital stay, and blood loss. Oncological outcomes, including local recurrence, the number of harvested lymph nodes (LN) and distal resection margin showed no significant distinction among both groups, while the positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.49-0.91, P = 0.01) was lower in the RARS group. RARS demonstrated a significantly higher rate of total mesorectal excision (TME) (RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 1.01-1.14, P = 0.03).

RARS is safe and feasible for rectal cancer patients and may be superior or equivalent to Laparoscopic-assisted rectal surgery, but high-standard, large-scale trials are required to determine the best approach.

The standard surgical treatment for rectal cancer is total mesorectal excision (TME), which may negatively affect patients' functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL). However, it is unclear how different TME techniques may impact patients' functional outcomes and QoL. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated functional outcomes of urinary, sexual, and fecal functioning as well as QoL after open, laparoscopic (L-TME), robot-assisted (R-TME), and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME).

A systematic review and meta-analysis, based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis statement, were conducted (PROSPERO: CRD42021240851). A literature review was performed (sources: PubMed, Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases; end-of-search date: September 1, 2023), and a quality assessment was performed using the Methodological index for non-randomized studies. A random-effects model was used to pool the data for the meta-analyses.

Nineteen studies were included, reporting on 2495 patients (88 open, 1171 L-TME, 995 R-TME, and 241 TaTME). Quantitative analyses comparing L-TME vs. R-TME showed no significant differences regarding urinary and sexual functioning, except for urinary function at three months post-surgery, which favoured R-TME (SMD [CI] -0 .15 [- 0.24 to - 0.06], p = 0.02; n = 401). Qualitative analyses identified most studies did not find significant differences in urinary, sexual, and fecal functioning and QoL between different techniques.

This systematic review and meta-analysis highlight a significant gap in the literature concerning the evaluation of functional outcomes and QoL after TME for rectal cancer treatment. This study emphasizes the need for high-quality, randomized-controlled, and prospective cohort studies evaluating these outcomes. Based on the limited available evidence, this systematic review and meta-analysis suggests no significant differences in patients' urinary, sexual, and fecal functioning and their QoL across various TME techniques.

It is assumed that robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) may facilitate complex pelvic dissection for rectal cancer compared to the laparoscopic-assisted resection (LAR). The aim of this study was to compare perioperative morbidity, short- and long-term oncologic, and functional outcomes between the RAS and LAR approaches.

Between 2015 and 2021, all rectal cancers operated on by (LAR) or (RAS) were retrospectively reviewed in two colorectal surgery centers.

A total of 197 patients were included in the study, with 70% in the LAR group and 30% in the RAS group. The tumor location and stage were identical in both groups (not significant = NS). The overall postoperative mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups. (0% LAR; 0.5% RAS; NS). The postoperative morbidity was similar between the two groups (60% LAR vs 57% RAS; NS). The number of early surgical re-interventions within the first 30 days was similar (10% for the LAR group and 3% for the RAS group; NS). The rate of complete TME was similar (88% for the LAR group and 94% for the RAS group; NS). However, the rate of circumferential R1 was significantly higher in the LAR group (13%) compared to the RAS group (2%) (p = 0.009). The 3-year recurrence rate did not differ between the two groups (77% for both groups; NS). After a mean follow-up of three years, the incidence of anterior resection syndrome was significantly lower in the LAR group compared to the RAS group (54 vs 76%; p = 0.030).

The use of a RAS was found to be reliable for oncologic outcomes and morbidity. However, the expected benefits for functional outcomes were not observed. Therefore, the added value of RAS for rectal cancer needs to be reassessed in light of new laparoscopic technologies and patient management options.

The purpose of the study was to compare the protective effects of robotic rectal cancer surgery (RRCS) and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery (LRCS) on urinary and sexual function of patients. We conducted a systematic search in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase for studies comparing the impact of RRCS and LRCS on urinary function and sexual function. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), the five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) and the Female Sexual Function Index(FSFI) were used to evaluate the urinary function and sexual function of patients. A total of 13 studies comprising 1964 patients were included in this meta-analysis, including 3 randomized controlled trials, 5 retrospective cohort studies, 3 prospective cohort studies, and 2 propensity score-matched studies. Nine hundred and fifty-nine patients underwent RRCS and 1005 patients underwent LRCS. Statistical analysis of the IPSS scores indicated urinary function was significantly better in the RRCS group than in the LRCS group at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively [mean difference (MD), - 1.06, 95% CI - 1.85 to - 0.28; and MD, - 0.96, 95% CI - 1.60 to - 0.32; and MD, - 1.09, 95% CI - 1.72 to - 0.46]. Statistical analysis of the IIEF-5 scores indicated male sexual function was significantly better in the RRCS group than in the LRCS group at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively (MD, 1.76, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.72; and MD, 1.83, 95% CI 0.34 to 3.33; and MD, 1.05, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.01). Statistical analysis of the FSFI scores indicated female sexual function was significantly better in the RRCS group than in the LRCS group at 6 and 12 months postoperatively (MD, 2.86; 95% CI 1.38 to 4.35; and MD, 4.19; 95% CI 1.85 to 6.54). RRCS is more favorable than LRCS in preserving the urinary and sexual function of patients with rectal cancer.

Robot-assisted surgery has a multi-joint function, which improves manipulation of the deep pelvic region and contributes significantly to perioperative safety. However, the superiority of robot-assisted surgery to laparoscopic surgery remains controversial. This study compared the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery for rectal tumors.

This single-center, retrospective study included 273 patients with rectal tumors who underwent surgery with anastomosis between 2017 and 2021. In total, 169 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery (Lap group), and 104 underwent robot-assisted surgery (Robot group). Postoperative complications were compared via propensity score matching based on inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).

The postoperative complication rates based on the Clavien-Dindo classification (Lap vs. Robot group) were as follows: grade ≥ II, 29.0% vs. 19.2%; grade ≥ III, 10.7% vs. 5.8%; anastomotic leakage (AL), 6.5% vs. 4.8%; and urinary dysfunction (UD), 12.1% vs. 3.8%. After adjusting for the IPTW method, although AL rates did not differ significantly between groups, postoperative complications of both grade ≥ II (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.87, p < 0.01) and grade ≥ III (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16-0.53, p < 0.01) were significantly less frequent in the Robot group than in the Lap group. Furthermore, urinary dysfunction also tended to be less frequent in the Robot group than in the Lap group (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38-1.00; p = 0.05).

Robot-assisted surgery for rectal tumors provides better short-term outcomes than laparoscopic surgery, supporting its use as a safer approach.

To compare the urinary and sexual outcomes between robot-assisted rectal cancer (RC) surgery (RRCS) and laparoscopic RC surgery (LRCS) using a meta-analysis, searches were conducted of the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang databases. The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was the primary outcome. Eleven studies (790 patients with RRCS and 888 with LRCS) were included. The IPSS scores were significantly lower for RRCS than LRCS from baseline to 3 months (weighted mean difference [WMD] =  - 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: - 1.8,-0.62, I2 = 89.9%), to 6 months (WMD =  - 1.13, 95% CI: - 1.74, - 0.52, I2 = 93.3%), and to 12 months (WMD =  - 0.93, 95% CI: - 1.59, - 0.26, I2 = 93.8%). The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) scores were significantly higher for RRCS than LRCS from baseline to 3 months (WMD = 3.36, 95% CI: 1.28, 5.44, I2 = 92.7%). The female sexual function index (FSFI) scores were significantly higher for RRCS than LRCS from baseline to 3 months (WMD = 1.31, 95% CI: 0.87, 1.76, I2 = 0), to 6 months (WMD = 2.36, 95% CI: 1.93, 2.79, I2 = 24.3%), and to 12 months (WMD = 1.67, 95% CI: 0.41, 2.93, I2 = 90.9%). RRCS also achieved a better recovery of the urological and sexual function than LRCS for patients with RC. Larger-scale prospective randomized control trials are needed to verify these results.

Optimizing postoperative quality of life (QoL) is an essential aspect of surgical oncology. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) decreases surgical morbidity and improves QoL outcomes. This meta-analysis aimed to compare post-operative QoL after oncologic resections using different MIS modalities. The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched for articles that compared post-operative QoL in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) or laparoscopic surgery (LS) versus robotic surgery (RS) for malignancy. Quality assessment was performed using the ROBINS-I and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB-2) tools. Meta-analysis was performed using an inverse-variance random effects model. 27 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 5 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). 15 studies had a low risk of bias, while 11 had a moderate risk of bias and 1 had serious risk of bias. 8330 patients (RS: 5090, LS/VATS: 3240) from across 25 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Global QoL was significantly better after robotic surgery in the pooled analysis overall (SMD: - 0.28 [95% CI: - 0.49, - 0.08]), as well as in the prostatectomy and gastrectomy subgroups. GRADE certainty of evidence was low. Analysis of EPIC-26 subdomains also suggested greater sexual function after robotic versus laparoscopic prostatectomy. Robotic and conventional MIS approaches produce similar postoperative QoL after oncologic surgery for various tumor types, although advantages may emerge in some patient populations. Our results may assist surgeons in counseling patients who are undergoing oncologic surgery.

The territory of D3-D4 lymphadenectomy for upper rectal and sigmoid colon cancer varies, and its oncological efficacy is unclear. This prospective study aimed to standardize the surgical technique of robotic D3-D4 lymphadenectomy and clarify its oncologic significance.

Patients with upper rectal or sigmoid colon cancer with clinically suspected more than N2 lymph node metastasis were prospectively recruited to undergo standardized robotic D3-D4 lymphadenectomy. Immediately postsurgery, the retrieved lymph nodes were mapped to five N3-N4 nodal stations: the inferior mesenteric artery, para-aorta, inferior vena cava, infra-renal vein, and common iliac vessels. Patients were stratified according to their nodal metastasis status to compare their clinicopathological data and overall survival. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine the relative prognostic significance of the five specific nodal stations. Surgical outcomes and functional recovery of the patients were assessed using the appropriate variables.

A total of 104 patients who successfully completed the treatment protocol were assessed. The standardized D3-D4 lymph node dissection harvested sufficient lymph nodes (34.4±7.2) for a precise pathologic staging. Based on histopathological analysis, 28 patients were included in the N3-N4 nodal metastasis-negative group and 33, 34, and nine patients in the single-station, double-station, and triple-station nodal metastasis-positive groups, respectively. Survival analysis indicated no significant difference between the single-station nodal metastasis-positive and N3-N4 nodal metastasis-negative groups in the estimated 5-year survival rate [53.6% (95% CI: 0.3353-0.7000) vs. 71.18% (95% CI: 0.4863-0.8518), P=0.563], whereas patients with double-station or triple-station nodal metastatic disease had poor 5-year survival rates (24.76 and 22.22%), which were comparable to those of AJCC/UICC stage IV disease than those with single-station metastasis-positive disease. Univariate analysis showed that the metastatic status of the five nodal stations was comparable in predicting the overall survival; in contrast, multivariate analysis indicated that common iliac vessels and infra-renal vein were the only two statistically significant predictors (P<0.05) for overall survival.

Using a robotic approach, D3-D4 lymph node dissection could be safely performed in a standardized manner to remove the relevant N3-N4 lymphatic basin en bloc, thereby providing significant survival benefits and precise pathological staging for patients. This study encourages further international prospective clinical trials to provide more solid evidence that would facilitate the optimization of surgery and revision of the current treatment guidelines for such a clinical conundrum.

Patients with rectal cancer who underwent lateral pelvic node dissection might be at a higher risk of postoperative complications derived from technical complexity. However, little is known regarding the long-term complications after lateral pelvic node dissection.

The study aimed to investigate the long-term complications of preoperative chemoradiotherapy, followed by total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic node dissection for locally advanced rectal cancers.

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database.

This study was conducted in a tertiary cancer center.

Patients with rectal cancer who underwent total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic node dissection after preoperative chemoradiotherapy between 2011 and 2019 were analyzed. All operations were performed via a laparoscopic or robotic approach.

Long-term complications were defined as adverse events that persisted or newly appeared ≥90 days after surgery and could be related to the surgery.

A total of 164 patients underwent total mesorectal excision with lateral pelvic node dissection after preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Short-term and long-term complication rates were 36.0% and 36.6%, respectively. Lymphocele was the most common long-term complication (17.7% of patients), and 11.6% had anastomotic leakage with chronic sinus. Of the patients with long-term complications, 20.7% of patients needed readmission for treatment. Of the 29 patients with lymphocele, 13 (41.0%) experienced spontaneous absorption and 11 (37.9%) required surgical or percutaneous catheter drainage or antibiotics use. Multivariate analysis showed pathologic pelvic node metastases ( p = 0.008), and a higher number of unilateral harvested pelvic nodes ( p = 0.001) were significantly associated with long-term complications. At the last follow-up (median duration of 43 months), 15.9% of patients had unresolved complications.

The retrospective design.

Patients undergoing lateral pelvic node dissection experienced a higher frequency of long-term complications, but half of them had asymptomatic lymphoceles, most of which resolved spontaneously. However, further efforts should be paid to reduce anticipated complications related to lateral pelvic node dissection. See Video Abstract .

ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes con cáncer del recto sometidos a disección ganglionar linfática pélvica lateral podrían tener mayor riesgo de complicaciones postoperatorias derivadas de la complejidad técnica. Sin embargo, se sabe poco sobre las complicaciones a largo plazo después de la disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales.OBJETIVOS:Investigar las complicaciones a largo plazo de la quimiorradioterapia preoperatoria, seguida de escisión mesorrectal total con disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales contra el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado.DISEÑO:Un análisis retrospectivo de una base de datos recopilada prospectivamente.AJUSTES:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un centro oncológico terciario.PACIENTES:Se analizaron pacientes con cáncer de recto que se sometieron a escisión mesorrectal total con disección de ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales después de quimiorradioterapia preoperatoria entre 2011 y 2019. Todas las operaciones se realizaron mediante abordaje laparoscópico o robótico.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las complicaciones a largo plazo se definieron como eventos adversos que persistieron o aparecieron recientemente ≥ 90 días después de la cirugía y podrían estar relacionados con la cirugía.RESULTADOS:Un total de 164 pacientes se sometieron a escisión mesorrectal total con disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales después de quimiorradioterapia preoperatoria. Las tasas de complicaciones a corto y largo plazo fueron del 36,0% y 36,6%, respectivamente. El linfocele fue la complicación a largo plazo más común (17,7% de los pacientes) y el 11,6% tuvo fuga anastomótica con seno crónico. De los pacientes con complicaciones a largo plazo, el 20,7% de los pacientes necesitaron reingreso para recibir tratamiento. De 29 pacientes con linfocele, 13 (41,0%) experimentaron absorción espontánea y 11 (37,9%) requirieron drenaje quirúrgico o percutáneo con catéter o uso de antibióticos. El análisis multivariado mostró metástasis patológicas en los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos ( p = 0,008) y un mayor número de ganglios pélvicos extraídos unilateralmente ( p = 0,001) se asociaron significativamente con complicaciones a largo plazo. En el último seguimiento (mediana de 43 meses), el 15,9% de los pacientes tuvieron complicaciones no resueltas.LIMITACIÓN:El diseño retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes sometidos a disección de ganglios pélvicos linfáticos laterales experimentaron una mayor frecuencia de complicaciones a largo plazo, pero la mitad de ellos tuvieron linfoceles asintomáticos, la mayoría de los cuales se resolvieron espontáneamente. Sin embargo, se deben realizar mayores esfuerzos para reducir las complicaciones previstas relacionadas con la disección de los ganglios linfáticos pélvicos laterales. (Traducción-Dr. Aurian Garcia Gonzalez ).

This study aimed to investigate the impact of bowel dysfunction and lower urinary tract symptoms on the quality of patients with rectal cancer who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery.

This cross-sectional study included patients who were followed up after sphincter-preserving surgery in Korea. Data were collected from May 2022 to February 2023. The participants (n = 110) responded to self-reported questionnaires assessing the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score, International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-C29 questionnaires.

Among the participants, 66.4% had major low anterior resection syndrome, and 39.1% had moderate-to-severe lower urinary tract symptoms. Patients with higher severity of low anterior resection syndrome and lower urinary tract symptoms had a lower quality of life. The IPSS, performance status, duration since the end of the surgery, comorbidities, LARS scores, and tumor location on the anal verge negatively affected the quality of life.

Patients with more severe bowel dysfunction or lower urinary tract symptoms have a poorer quality of life. Nurses should be made aware of the factors that can reduce the quality of life of patients who have undergone sphincter-preserving surgery. Accordingly, they should plan to address the various nursing problems.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical experiences and cost-effectiveness by comparing robot-assisted surgery with laparoscopic- or open surgery for pelvic and renal operations.

A narrative review was carried out.

When using robotic-assisted surgery, oncological and functional results are similar to after laparoscopic or open surgery. One exception may be a shorter survival in cancer of the cervix uteri. In addition, postoperative complications after robotic-assisted surgery are similar, bleeding and transfusion needs are less, and the hospital stay is shorter but the preparation of the operating theater before and after surgery and the operation times are longer. Finally, robot-assisted surgery has, in several studies, been reported to be not cost-effective primarily due to high investment costs. However, more recent studies provide improved cost-effectiveness estimates due to more effective preparation of the operating theater before surgery, improved surgeon experience, and decreased investment costs.

Complications and functional and oncological outcomes after robot-assisted surgery are similar to open surgery and laparoscopic surgery. The cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted surgery is likely to equal or surpass the alternatives.

Survival rates in early-stage rectal cancer patients have increased over the past few decades. Societies such as the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), American Cancer Society (ACS), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) have proposed guidelines related to cancer survivorship care including formal recommendations to address the needs in early-stage rectal cancer survivors. These guidelines, in addition to new clinical research findings in survivorship will be reviewed, specifically looking at physical, psychosocial, and financial concerns in rectal cancer survivorship.

Rectal cancer surgery presents challenges in achieving good oncological results and preserving functional outcomes. Different surgical approaches, including open, laparoscopic, robotic and transanal techniques, have been employed, but there is a lack of consensus on the optimal approach, particularly in terms of functional results. This study aims to assess bowel function and to compare outcomes of patients that had undergone surgery for mid-low rectal cancer across different surgical approaches.

This is an international, multicentre, prospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria are patients diagnosed with rectal cancer below the peritoneal reflection, eligible for different surgical approaches for total mesorectal excision (TME). Data will be collected using validated questionnaires assessing bowel, sexual and urinary function, and quality of life (QOL). Secondary outcomes include short-term postoperative results. Data will be collected at baseline and 6, 12 and 24 months after index surgery or stoma reversal surgery.

This study will provide insights into the impact of different approaches for TME on bowel, sexual and urinary function, and overall QOL of patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery. The findings will provide important information to optimise the surgical strategy and to improve patient care in this population.

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04936581 (registered 23 June 2021).

The application of robotic surgery technologies in neurological surgeries resulted in some advantages compared to traditional surgeries, including higher accuracy and dexterity enhancement. Its success in various surgical fields, especially in urology, cardiology, and gynecology surgeries was reported in previous studies, and similar advantages in neurological surgeries are expected. Surgeries in the central nervous system with the pathology of millimeters through small working channels around vital tissue need especially high precision. Applying robotic surgery is therefore an interesting dilemma for these situations. This article reviews various studies published on the application of brain and spine robotic surgery and discusses the current application of robotic technology in neurological cases.

It is largely unclear whether robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) is cost-effective for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG), and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for patients with LAGC.

Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics. A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, LDG, and ODG.

RDG, LDG, and ODG.

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

This pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials included 449 patients: 117, 254, and 78 patients in the RDG, LDG, and ODG groups, respectively. After IPTW, RDG demonstrated its priority in terms of less blood loss, postoperative length, and complication rate (all P < 0.05). RDG also showed higher QOL with more cost, representing an ICER of $85,739.73 per QALY and $42,189.53 per QALY compared to LDG and ODG, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, RDG achieved the best cost-effectiveness for patients with LAGC only when the willingness-to-pay threshold was > $85,739.73 per QALY, which significantly exceeded 3 times Chinese per capita GDP. Furthermore, one of the most important factors was the indirect costs of robotic surgery in terms of the cost-effectiveness of RDG compared to that of LDG or ODG.

Although improved short-term outcomes and QOL were seen in patients underwent RDG, the economic burden should be considered in the clinical decision-making regarding robotic surgery use for patients with LAGC. Our findings may vary in different health care settings and affordability. Trial registration CLASS-01 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, CT01609309) and FUGES-011 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03313700).

Colorectal surgery has witnessed a transformative shift with the advent of minimally invasive techniques, offering patients reduced postoperative discomfort, shorter hospital stays, and accelerated recovery compared to conventional open surgery. This comprehensive review aims to assess the current state of minimally invasive approaches in colorectal surgery, encompassing various techniques such as single-incision laparoscopic surgery, robot-assisted surgery, and conventional laparoscopic surgery. The article meticulously explores the benefits and drawbacks of each technique, delves into the established criteria for their application, delineates cautious circumstances, and analyzes the outcomes of minimally invasive colorectal surgery. Additionally, the integration of virtual reality and augmented reality for surgical planning and training is discussed, shedding light on the future trajectory of this field. Surgeons and researchers striving to enhance patient care and surgical outcomes in colorectal surgery will find this review article an invaluable resource, presenting crucial components of minimally invasive colorectal surgery and paving the way for continued advancements in the field.

To evaluate whether robotic for middle or low rectal cancer produces an improvement in surgical outcomes compared with laparoscopic surgery in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).

There is a lack of proven clinical benefit of robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) compared with a laparoscopic approach in the setting of multicenter RCTs.

Between July 2011 and February 2016, patients diagnosed with an adenocarcinoma located <10 cm from the anal verge and clinically rated T1-4aNxM0 were enrolled. The primary outcome was the completeness of TME assessed by a surgeon and a pathologist.

The RCT was terminated prematurely because of poor accrual of data. In all, 295 patients were assigned randomly to a robot-assisted TME group (151 in R-TME) or a laparoscopy-assisted TME group (144 in L-TME). The rates of complete TME were not different between groups (80.7% in R-TME, 77.1% in L-TME). Pathologic outcomes including the circumferential resection margin and the numbers of retrieved lymph nodes were not different between groups. In a subanalysis, the positive circumferential resection margin rate was lower in the R-TME group (0% vs 6.1% for L-TME; P =0.031). Among the recovery parameters, the length of opioid use was shorter in the R-TME group ( P =0.028). There was no difference in the postoperative complication rate between the groups (12.0% for R-TME vs 8.3% for L-TME).

In patients with middle or low rectal cancer, robotic-assisted surgery did not significantly improve the TME quality compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery (ClinicalTrial.gov ID: NCT01042743).

Robotic surgery is widely utilized for rectal cancer. Older patients are associated with comorbidity and diminished cardiopulmonary reserve, resulting in uncertainty and reluctance to perform robotic surgery in older patients. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and feasibility of robotic surgery in older rectal cancer patients. We collected the data of patients diagnosed with rectal cancer and operated at our hospital from May 2015 to January 2021. All patients undergoing robotic surgery were classified into two groups: the old group (≥ 70 years) and young group (< 70 years). Perioperative outcomes were analyzed and compared between the two groups. Risk factors related to postoperative complications were also explored. A total of old N = 114 and young N = 324 rectal patients were enrolled in our study. Older patients were prone to exhibit comorbidity than the young and had lower body mass index and higher scores of American Society of Anesthesiologists than the young. No statistical difference was found in operative time, estimated blood loss, lymph nodes retrieved, tumor size, pathological TNM stage, hospital stay after surgery and total hospital cost between the two groups. The incidence of postoperative complications did not show difference between the two groups. On multivariate analyses, male sex and longer operative time could predict postoperative complications, whereas old age was not an independent factor for postoperative complications. After careful preoperative evaluation, robotic surgery is a technically feasible and safe procedure for older rectal cancer patients.

Some studies have suggested disparities in access to robotic colorectal surgery, however, it is unclear which factors are most meaningful in the determination of approach relative to laparoscopic or open surgery. This study aimed to identify the most influential factors contributing to robotic colorectal surgery utilization.

We conducted a systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of published studies that compared the utilization of robotic colorectal surgery versus laparoscopic or open surgery. Eligible studies were identified through PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Dissertations in September 2021.

Twenty-nine studies were included in the analysis. Patients were less likely to undergo robotic versus laparoscopic surgery if they were female (OR = 0.91, 0.84-0.98), older (OR = 1.61, 1.38-1.88), had Medicare (OR = 0.84, 0.71-0.99), or had comorbidities (OR = 0.83, 0.77-0.91). Non-academic hospitals had lower odds of conducting robotic versus laparoscopic surgery (OR = 0.73, 0.62-0.86). Additional disparities were observed when comparing robotic with open surgery for patients who were Black (OR = 0.78, 0.71-0.86), had lower income (OR = 0.67, 0.62-0.74), had Medicaid (OR = 0.58, 0.43-0.80), or were uninsured (OR = 0.29, 0.21-0.39).

When determining who undergoes robotic surgery, consideration of factors such as age and comorbid conditions may be clinically justified, while other factors seem less justifiable. Black patients and the underinsured were less likely to undergo robotic surgery. This study identifies nonclinical disparities in access to robotics that should be addressed to provide more equitable access to innovations in colorectal surgery.

An optimal surgical approach to lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) remains controversial. With the recent popularity of transanal total mesorectal excision, a two-team procedure combining the transabdominal and transanal approaches was established as a novel approach to LLND. This study aimed to clarify the safety and feasibility of two-team LLND (2team-LLND) and compare its short-term outcomes with those of conventional transabdominal LLND (Conv-LLND).

Between April 2013 and March 2020, 463 patients diagnosed with primary locally advanced rectal cancer underwent a transanal total mesorectal excision; among them, 93 patients who underwent bilateral prophylactic LLND were included in this single-center, retrospective study. Among these patients, 50 and 43 patients underwent Conv-LLND (the Conv-LLND group) and 2team-LLND (the 2team-LLND group), respectively. The short-term outcomes, including the operation time, blood loss volume, number of complications, and number of harvested lymph nodes, were compared between the two groups.

The intraoperative and postoperative complications in the 2team-LLND group were equivalent to those in the Conv-LLND group; furthermore, the incidence of postoperative urinary retention in the 2team-LLND group was acceptably low (9%). Compared with the Conv-LLND group, the 2team-LLND group had a significantly shorter operation time (P = 0.003), lower median blood loss (P = 0.02), and higher number of harvested lateral lymph nodes (P = 0.0005).

The intraoperative and postoperative complications of 2team-LLND were comparable with those of Conv-LLND. Thus, 2team-LLND was safe and feasible for advanced lower rectal cancer. Moreover, it was superior to Conv-LLND in terms of the operation time, blood loss volume, and number of harvested lateral lymph nodes. Therefore, it can be a promising LLND approach.

Maximizing patients' quality of life (QoL) is a central goal in surgical oncology. Currently, both laparoscopic and robotic surgery are viable options in rectal cancer (RC) resections. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze the differences in postoperative QoL between the two operative modalities.

This review was conducted in adherence to the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases were searched for articles comparing QoL in patients undergoing laparoscopic versus robotic surgery for RC. Seven studies were included (two randomized controlled trials, four prospective cohorts, and one retrospective cohort) out of which six reported data suitable for meta-analysis. Global QoL and QoL subdomains, such as physical and social functioning, were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I and Cochrane RoB-2 tools.

Data on 869 patients (440 laparoscopic and 429 robotic surgery) across six studies were meta-analyzed. There was no significant difference in global QoL (Mean Difference:-0.43 [95% Confidence Interval:-3.49-2.62]). Physical functioning was superior after robotic surgery (1.92 [0.97-2.87]). However, nausea/vomiting, pain, and fatigue did not differ between groups. Perception of body image was worse after laparoscopic surgery (-5.06 [-9.05- -1.07]). Other psychosocial subdomains (emotional, cognitive, role, and social functioning) were comparable between groups.

Laparoscopic and robotic surgery for RC have comparable QoL overall, for both physical and psychological dimensions. Our results may assist the management-related decision-making in surgical treatment of RC.

Outline learning phases of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer and compare surgical and clinical outcomes between each phase of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery and the mastery phase of conventional laparoscopic surgery.

From 2015 to 2020, 210 patients underwent rectal cancer surgery at Sendai Medical Center. We performed conventional laparoscopic surgery in 110 patients and, laparoscopic surgery in 100 patients. The learning curve was evaluated using the cumulative summation method, risk-adjusted cumulative summation method, and logistic regression analysis.

The risk-adjusted cumulative summation learning curve was divided into three phases: phase 1 (cases 1-48), phase 2 (cases 49-80), and phase 3 (cases 81-100). Duration of hospital stay (13.1 days vs. 18.0 days, respectively; p = 0.016) and surgery (209.1 min vs. 249.5 min, respectively; p = 0.045) were significantly shorter in phase 3 of the robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery group than in the conventional laparoscopic surgery group. Blood loss volume was significantly lower in phase 1 of the robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery group than in the conventional laparoscopic surgery group (17.7 ml vs. 79.7 ml, respectively; p = 0.036). The International Prostate Symptom Score was significantly lower in the robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery group (p = 0.0131).

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer was safe and demonstrated better surgical and clinical outcomes, including a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and a shorter surgical duration, than conventional laparoscopic surgery. After experience with at least 80 cases, tactile familiarity can be acquired from visual information only (visual haptic feedback).

UMIN reference no. UMIN000019857.

The aim of this work was to investigate the risk factors associated with the incidence of sexual dysfunction in patients who underwent robot-assisted surgery with several treatment options, such as neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and lateral lymph node dissection, and clarify the longitudinal course of erectile function in risk groups.

A total of 203 male patients who underwent robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer between 2013 and 2019 were included. The risk factors for erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction as well as the longitudinal course of erectile function were retrospectively investigated in all cohorts and several risk groups, including those who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, lateral lymph node dissection and adjuvant chemotherapy. Erectile dysfunction was assessed using the International Index of Erectile Function and ejaculatory dysfunction was assessed using original questions. The survey was performed preoperatively and at 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

Erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction occurred in 46.8% and 15.7% of the patients, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was an independent risk factor for erectile dysfunction. Erectile function recovered longitudinally to the preoperative level overall, as well as in lateral lymph node dissection and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy subgroups; however, recovery was poor in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group, even at 12 months postoperatively.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was found to be a risk factor for erectile dysfunction after robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer. Erectile function recovered postoperatively in patients undergoing lateral lymph node dissection; however, those receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy showed poor recovery, even at 12 months postoperatively.

With increasing trends for the adoption of robotic surgery, many centers are considering changing their practices from open or laparoscopic to robot-assisted surgery for rectal cancer. We compared the outcomes of robot-assisted rectal resection with those of open and laparoscopic surgery. We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases until October 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing robotic surgery with open or laparoscopic rectal resection were included. Fifteen RCTs and 11 prospective studies involving 6922 patients were included. The meta-analysis revealed that robotic surgery has lower blood loss, less surgical site infection, shorter hospital stays, and higher negative resection margins than open resection. Robotic surgery also has lower conversion rates, lower blood loss, lower rates of reoperation, and higher negative circumferential margins than laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery had longer operation times and higher costs than open and laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences in other complications, mortality, and survival between robotic surgery and the open or laparoscopic approach. However, heterogeneity between studies was moderate to high in some analyses. The robotic approach can be the method of choice for centers planning to change from open to minimally invasive rectal surgery. The higher costs of robotic surgery should be considered as a substitute for laparoscopic surgery (PROSPERO: CRD42022381468).

A considerable number of recent research have used artificial intelligence (AI) in the area of colorectal cancer (CRC). Surgical treatment of CRC still remains the most important curative component. Artificial intelligence in CRC surgery is not nearly as advanced as it is in screening (colonoscopy), diagnosis and prognosis, especially due to the increased complexity and variability of structures and elements in all fields of view, as well as a general shortage of annotated video banks for utilization.

A literature search was made and relevant studies were included in the minireview.

The intraoperative steps which, at this moment, can benefit from AI in CRC are: phase and action recognition, excision plane navigation, endoscopy control, real-time circulation analysis, knot tying, automatic optical biopsy and hyperspectral imaging. This minireview also analyses the current advances in robotic treatment of CRC as well as the present possibility of automated CRC robotic surgery.

The use of AI in CRC surgery is still at its beginnings. The development of AI models capable of reproducing a colorectal expert surgeon's skill, the creation of large and complex datasets and the standardization of surgical colorectal procedures will contribute to the widespread use of AI in CRC surgical treatment.

Patients undergoing colorectal surgery (CRS) have an increased risk of developing sexual disorders, attributed to different mechanisms. In this context, sexual function (SF) assessment of patients before and after surgery is essential: to identify risk factors for sexual disorders as well as to minimize their impact on overall quality of life (QoL), allowing them a satisfying relationship and sexual life.

Patients over 18 years of age who underwent a CRS in the University Hospital of Geneva, Switzerland, between June 2014 and February 2016 were included. Our main objective was to compare and analyze the evolution of SF, QoL, and marital satisfaction (MS) before and after CRS. Specific and standardized tests were used.

A cohort of 72 patients with a median age of 58.73 was analyzed. The majority of CRS was elective (91.5%). A percentage of 52.8% of patients underwent surgery for oncological reasons. There was no statistical difference in SF, sexual QoL, and MS before and after elective or emergency CRS for men. Interestingly, a significant decrease in women's SF (FSFI) as well as their satisfaction within their couple (Locke-Wallace) until 12 months after surgery was found (p = 0.021). However, they showed a steady SF (GRISS) within their couple until 12 months after surgery.

Regarding knowledge about difficulties to talk about this intimate topic and gender differences, this general overview raises the question of the necessity to introduce in a long-course follow-up different methods of sexual health assessment with specific stakeholders.

Whether rectal cancer surgery by robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery provides beneficial advantages remains controversial. Although favorable outcomes in terms of the safety and technical feasibility of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery have been demonstrated for rectal cancer, long-term oncological outcomes for robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery have only been examined in a few studies. This retrospective study of subjects who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery evaluated short- and long-term outcomes of consecutive rectal cancer patients.

Between November 2016 and January 2020, we analyzed the records of 62 consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma without distant metastasis to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes.

Tumors were located in the lower or mid-rectum (88.7%) in most patients. The median operative time was 357 min. No patient received transfusions, and the median blood loss was 10.5 ml. Open laparotomy was not required in any patient. A Clavien-Dindo classification of all grades was observed in 12 patients (19.4%). Positive radial margin was not observed in any patient. Duration of median follow-up was 40.5 mo, while 3-y overall survival and 3-y relapse-free survival rates were 96.8% and 85.0%, respectively. The local recurrence rate was 3.4%.

Favorable short- and long-term outcomes demonstrated robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery was safe and technically feasible for rectal cancer.

Robotic surgery has gained significant momentum in rectal cancer surgery. Most studies focus on short-term and oncological outcomes, showing similar outcomes to laparoscopic surgery. Increasing survivorship mandates greater emphasis on quality of life and long-term function.

This study aimed to compare quality of life and urinary, sexual, and lower GI functions between robotic and laparoscopic rectal surgeries.

A systematic search of Medline, PubMed, Embase, Clinical Trials Register, and Cochrane Library-identified articles comparing robotic with laparoscopic rectal resections was performed.

The outcome measures were quality of life and urinary, sexual, and GI functions between robotic and laparoscopic rectal resection patient groups. Where comparable data were available, results were pooled for analysis.

The initial search revealed 1777 papers; 101 were reviewed in full, and 14 studies were included for review. Eleven assessed male sexual function; 7 favored robotic surgery, and the remaining studies showed no significant difference. Pooled analysis of 5 studies reporting rates of male sexual dysfunction at 12 months showed significantly lower rates after robotic surgery (OR, 0.51; p = 0.043). Twelve studies compared urinary function. Six favored robotic surgery, but in 2 studies, a difference was seen at 6 months but not sustained at 12 months. Pooled analysis of 4 studies demonstrated significantly better urinary function scores at 12 months after robotic surgery (OR, 0.26; p = 0.016). Quality of life and GI function were equivalent, but very little data exist for these parameters.

A small number of studies compare outcomes between these groups; only 2 are randomized. Different scoring systems limit comparisons and pooling of data.

The limited available data suggest that robotic rectal cancer resection improves male sexual and urinary functions when compared with laparoscopy, but there is no difference in quality of life or GI function. Future studies should report all facets of functional outcomes using standardized scoring systems.

The advantages of robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) for rectal cancer remain controversial. This study clarified and compared the short-term outcomes of RALS for rectal cancer with those of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS).

The records of 303 consecutive patients who underwent RALS or CLS for rectal adenocarcinoma between November 2016 and November 2021 were analyzed using propensity score-matched analysis. After matching, 188 patients were enrolled in our study to compare short-term outcomes, such as operative results, postoperative complications, and pathological findings, in each group.

After matching, baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Although operative time in the RALS group was significantly longer than in the CLS group (p < 0.0001), the conversion rate to open laparotomy and the postoperative complication rate in the RALS group were significantly lower than in the CLS group (p = 0.0240 and p = 0.0109, respectively). Blood loss was comparable between groups. In the RALS group, postoperative hospital stay and days to soft diet were significantly shorter than those in the CLS group (p = 0.0464 and p < 0.0001, respectively). No postoperative mortality was observed in either group and significant differences were observed in resection margins and number of lymph nodes harvested.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer was safe, technically feasible, and had acceptable short-term outcomes. Further studies are required to validate long-term oncological outcomes.

Because the recovery of genitourinary function after total mesorectal excision (TME) is affected by multiple factors, the role of robot-assisted TME technology in postoperative function in previous studies is still controversial. Our study aimed to evaluate the impact of robotic technology on the recovery of genitourinary function after TME for rectal cancer by analysing the correlations between influencing factors of genitourinary function and robotic surgery.

Between January 2017 and January 2020, patients with rectal cancer (cT1-3NxM0) were registered. Genitourinary function was assessed by the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) test, Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) and urodynamic examination before surgery and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Genitourinary function was compared between the laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (L-TME) and robotic total mesorectal excision (R-TME) groups, and the correlative factors associated with postoperative genitourinary function were analysed using the generalized estimated equation (GEE).

Compared with L-TME, R-TME showed a superior IPSS, voiding volume, residual urine volume and IIEF score during the early postoperative period. According to the GEE analysis, postoperative genitourinary function was positively correlated with laparoscopic anterior resection/abdomen perineal resection (LAR/APR) but negatively correlated with tumour size, tumour distance to anus, TNM, adjuvant chemotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy, complete TME, circumferential resection margin (CRM), blood loss, diverting stoma, conversion, and anastomotic leakage.

Due to the important role of robotic surgical technology on the influential factors of postoperative genitourinary function and the superiority of identifying and preserving autonomic nerves, robotic technology is conducive to the early recovery of postoperative urogenital function while adhering to oncological dissection principles. No significant difference was found between the da Vinci R-TME and MicroHand R-TME groups.

Impairment of bowel, urogenital and fertility-related function in patients treated for rectal cancer is common. While the rate of rectal cancer in the young (<50 years) is rising, there is little data on functional outcomes in this group.

The REACCT international collaborative database was reviewed and data on eligible patients analysed. Inclusion criteria comprised patients with a histologically confirmed rectal cancer, <50 years of age at time of diagnosis and with documented follow-up including functional outcomes.

A total of 1428 (n=1428) patients met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. Metastatic disease was present at diagnosis in 13%. Of these, 40% received neoadjuvant therapy and 50% adjuvant chemotherapy. The incidence of post-operative major morbidity was 10%. A defunctioning stoma was placed for 621 patients (43%); 534 of these proceeded to elective restoration of bowel continuity. The median follow-up time was 42 months. Of this cohort, a total of 415 (29%) reported persistent impairment of functional outcomes, the most frequent of which was bowel dysfunction (16%), followed by bladder dysfunction (7%), sexual dysfunction (4.5%) and infertility (1%).

A substantial proportion of patients with early-onset rectal cancer who undergo surgery report persistent impairment of functional status. Patients should be involved in the discussion regarding their treatment options and potential impact on quality of life. Functional outcomes should be routinely recorded as part of follow up alongside oncological parameters.

Determine whether robotic surgery is more effective than transanal and conventional laparoscopic surgery in preserving bowel and urinary function after total mesorectal excision (TME).

Of 79 lower rectal cancer patients who underwent function-preserving TME between 2016 and 2020, 64 patients consented to a prospective questionnaire-based functional observation study (52 responded). At 6 months post-resection or ileostomy closure, Wexner, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), modified fecal incontinence quality of life, and international prostate symptom scores were used to evaluate bowel and urinary function, comparing robotic surgery (RTME) with transanal (taTME) or conventional laparoscopic surgery (LTME).

RTME was performed in 35 patients (54.7%), taTME in 15 (23.4%), and LTME in 14 (21.9%). While preoperative bowel/urinary functions were similar in all three procedures, and the distance from the anal verge to tumor was almost the same, more hand-sewn anastomoses were performed and the anastomotic height from the anal verge was shorter in taTME than RTME. At 2 years post-resection, 8 patients (12.5%) had a permanent stoma; RTME showed a significantly lower rate of permanent stoma than taTME (2.9% vs. 40%, p < 0.01). Despite no significant difference, all bowel function assessments were better in RTME than in taTME or LTME. Major LARS was observed in all taTME and LTME cases, but only 78.8% of RTME. No clear difference arose between RTME and taTME in urinary function; urinary dysfunction was more severe in LTME than RTME (36.4% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.02).

In function-preserving TME for lower rectal cancer, robotic surgery was suggested to be more effective than transanal and conventional laparoscopic surgery in terms of bowel and urinary functions.