Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population

Ramiro Fernandez, Daniel A. Anaya, Linda T. Li, Sonia T. Orcutt, Courtney J. Balentine, Samir A. Awad, David H. Berger, Daniel Albo, Avo Artinyan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

35 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Robotic rectal cancer resection remains controversial. We compared the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic vs robotic rectal cancer resection in a high-risk Veterans Health Administration population. Methods Patients who underwent minimally invasive rectal cancer resection were identified from an institutional colorectal cancer database. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between robotic and laparoscopic groups. Results The robotic group (n = 13) did not differ significantly from the laparoscopic group (n = 59) with respect to baseline characteristics except for a higher rate of previous abdominal surgery. Robotic patients had significantly lower tumors, more advanced disease, a higher rate of preoperative chemoradiation, and were more likely to undergo abdominoperineal resection. Robotic rectal resection was associated with longer operative time. There were no differences in blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative morbidity, lymph nodes harvested, margin positivity, or specimen quality between groups. Conclusions The robotic approach for rectal cancer resection is safe with similar postoperative and oncologic outcomes compared with laparoscopy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)509-517
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Volume206
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Robotics
Veterans
Rectal Neoplasms
Population
Veterans Health
United States Department of Veterans Affairs
Operative Time
Laparoscopy
Colorectal Neoplasms
Lymph Nodes
Databases
Morbidity
Safety
Neoplasms

Keywords

  • Rectal cancer
  • Rectal resection
  • Robotic surgery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Fernandez, R., Anaya, D. A., Li, L. T., Orcutt, S. T., Balentine, C. J., Awad, S. A., ... Artinyan, A. (2013). Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population. American Journal of Surgery, 206(4), 509-517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.01.036

Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population. / Fernandez, Ramiro; Anaya, Daniel A.; Li, Linda T.; Orcutt, Sonia T.; Balentine, Courtney J.; Awad, Samir A.; Berger, David H.; Albo, Daniel; Artinyan, Avo.

In: American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 206, No. 4, 01.10.2013, p. 509-517.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fernandez, R, Anaya, DA, Li, LT, Orcutt, ST, Balentine, CJ, Awad, SA, Berger, DH, Albo, D & Artinyan, A 2013, 'Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population', American Journal of Surgery, vol. 206, no. 4, pp. 509-517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.01.036
Fernandez, Ramiro ; Anaya, Daniel A. ; Li, Linda T. ; Orcutt, Sonia T. ; Balentine, Courtney J. ; Awad, Samir A. ; Berger, David H. ; Albo, Daniel ; Artinyan, Avo. / Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population. In: American Journal of Surgery. 2013 ; Vol. 206, No. 4. pp. 509-517.
@article{dce8b005976d4943b01616a94cdebe46,
title = "Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population",
abstract = "Background Robotic rectal cancer resection remains controversial. We compared the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic vs robotic rectal cancer resection in a high-risk Veterans Health Administration population. Methods Patients who underwent minimally invasive rectal cancer resection were identified from an institutional colorectal cancer database. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between robotic and laparoscopic groups. Results The robotic group (n = 13) did not differ significantly from the laparoscopic group (n = 59) with respect to baseline characteristics except for a higher rate of previous abdominal surgery. Robotic patients had significantly lower tumors, more advanced disease, a higher rate of preoperative chemoradiation, and were more likely to undergo abdominoperineal resection. Robotic rectal resection was associated with longer operative time. There were no differences in blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative morbidity, lymph nodes harvested, margin positivity, or specimen quality between groups. Conclusions The robotic approach for rectal cancer resection is safe with similar postoperative and oncologic outcomes compared with laparoscopy.",
keywords = "Rectal cancer, Rectal resection, Robotic surgery",
author = "Ramiro Fernandez and Anaya, {Daniel A.} and Li, {Linda T.} and Orcutt, {Sonia T.} and Balentine, {Courtney J.} and Awad, {Samir A.} and Berger, {David H.} and Daniel Albo and Avo Artinyan",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.01.036",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "206",
pages = "509--517",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laparoscopic versus robotic rectal resection for rectal cancer in a veteran population

AU - Fernandez, Ramiro

AU - Anaya, Daniel A.

AU - Li, Linda T.

AU - Orcutt, Sonia T.

AU - Balentine, Courtney J.

AU - Awad, Samir A.

AU - Berger, David H.

AU - Albo, Daniel

AU - Artinyan, Avo

PY - 2013/10/1

Y1 - 2013/10/1

N2 - Background Robotic rectal cancer resection remains controversial. We compared the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic vs robotic rectal cancer resection in a high-risk Veterans Health Administration population. Methods Patients who underwent minimally invasive rectal cancer resection were identified from an institutional colorectal cancer database. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between robotic and laparoscopic groups. Results The robotic group (n = 13) did not differ significantly from the laparoscopic group (n = 59) with respect to baseline characteristics except for a higher rate of previous abdominal surgery. Robotic patients had significantly lower tumors, more advanced disease, a higher rate of preoperative chemoradiation, and were more likely to undergo abdominoperineal resection. Robotic rectal resection was associated with longer operative time. There were no differences in blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative morbidity, lymph nodes harvested, margin positivity, or specimen quality between groups. Conclusions The robotic approach for rectal cancer resection is safe with similar postoperative and oncologic outcomes compared with laparoscopy.

AB - Background Robotic rectal cancer resection remains controversial. We compared the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic vs robotic rectal cancer resection in a high-risk Veterans Health Administration population. Methods Patients who underwent minimally invasive rectal cancer resection were identified from an institutional colorectal cancer database. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared between robotic and laparoscopic groups. Results The robotic group (n = 13) did not differ significantly from the laparoscopic group (n = 59) with respect to baseline characteristics except for a higher rate of previous abdominal surgery. Robotic patients had significantly lower tumors, more advanced disease, a higher rate of preoperative chemoradiation, and were more likely to undergo abdominoperineal resection. Robotic rectal resection was associated with longer operative time. There were no differences in blood loss, conversion rates, postoperative morbidity, lymph nodes harvested, margin positivity, or specimen quality between groups. Conclusions The robotic approach for rectal cancer resection is safe with similar postoperative and oncologic outcomes compared with laparoscopy.

KW - Rectal cancer

KW - Rectal resection

KW - Robotic surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885078314&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84885078314&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.01.036

DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.01.036

M3 - Article

C2 - 23809672

AN - SCOPUS:84885078314

VL - 206

SP - 509

EP - 517

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 4

ER -