Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Ten years of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer (short-term RESOLUTION)

  • Rauand Duhoky
  • , Ritch T. J. Geitenbeek
  • , Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi
  • , Thijs A. Burghgraef
  • , Christina A. Fleming
  • , Shamsul Masum
  • , Adrian Hopgood
  • , Timothy Rockall
  • , Quentin Denost
  • , Christophe Taoum
  • , Roel Hompes
  • , Jim Briggs
  • , Esther C. J. Consten
  • , Jim S. Khan*
  • *Corresponding author for this work
  • Portsmouth Hospitals University NHS Trust
  • University of Portsmouth
  • University of Groningen
  • Meander Medical Center
  • Bordeaux Colorectal Institute
  • Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
  • Université de Montpellier
  • University of Amsterdam
  • Amsterdam UMC

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

22 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background Total mesorectal excision is the gold standard for rectal cancer surgery, with laparoscopic and robot-assisted approaches commonly employed. While robot-assisted surgery may offer technical advantages, there is limited evidence comparing short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques, particularly in Western European populations. This study aimed to assess the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic vs robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Methods This multicenter, international, retrospective cohort study included 1749 patients who underwent laparoscopic or robot-assisted total mesorectal excision from January 2014 to January 2024. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was applied to minimize confounding. Primary outcomes were length of stay, operative time, and conversion rates. Secondary outcomes included complications and pathological outcomes within 90 days, and readmissions and reinterventions within 30 days. Results The final cohort included 680.9 laparoscopic and 1057.5 robot-assisted cases after weighting. Robot-assisted surgery showed lower conversion rates (6.1% vs 3.5%, P =. 025), higher rates of primary anastomosis (80.1% vs 92.1%, P <. 001), and fewer stoma formations (78.4% vs 63.7%, P <. 001). Pathological outcomes indicated a higher rate of complete mesorectal excision in the robot-assisted group (77.2% vs 86.0%, P <. 001), though these data were not available for all centers. Operative time was longer in the robot-assisted cohort (181.0 vs 220.0 minutes, P <. 001), but no significant differences were observed in postoperative complications, length of stay, anastomotic leakage, or 30-day reintervention rates. Conclusion Robot-assisted surgery low anterior resection demonstrated improved short-term outcomes with lower conversion rates, higher rates of complete mesorectal excision, and higher restorative procedure rates, which may influence longer term oncological and patient quality of life outcomes. Trial registration https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN75281193

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1614-1626
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of the National Cancer Institute
Volume117
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2025

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Ten years of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer (short-term RESOLUTION)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this