Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: Comparison of oncologic outcomes

Avanish P. Saklani, Dae Ro Lim, Hyuk Hur, Byung Soh Min, Seung Hyuk Baik, Kang Young Lee, Namkyu Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

35 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Minimal invasive surgery for mid and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) can be challenging. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic resections in mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT. Methods: Between Jan 2006 and Dec 2010, all patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic resections for mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT were identified from a prospective database. These patients received treatment (5FU-based chemotherapy, 50.4 Gy radiotherapy), as they were T3 or T4 and/or node + ve. Patients in the two groups were compared with respect to demographics, clinical safety, and oncological outcomes. Results: One hundred thirty-eight patients underwent rectal cancer resection after LCRT, either robotic (n = 74) or laparoscopic (n = 64). The patients in both groups were comparable in terms of demographics, distance of tumor from anal verge, and type of procedures. There were four (6.3 %) conversions in laparoscopic group and one (1.4 %) in the robotic group (p = 0.183). The morbidity rates in the laparoscopic and robotic group were 26.6 % and 16.2 %, respectively (p = 0.137). With a median follow up of 3 years, the local recurrence in the laparoscopic and robotic group was four (6.3 %) and two (2.7 %), respectively (p = 0.420). The 3-year overall survival rate for laparoscopic and robotic group was 92.1 and 90.0 %, respectively (p = 0.803). The 3-year disease-free survival was also comparable, 78.8 % (laparoscopic) versus 77.7 % (robotic) (p = 0.390). Conclusion: With a median follow up of 3 years, robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer was associated with oncological outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1689-1698
Number of pages10
JournalInternational Journal of Colorectal Disease
Volume28
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Dec 1

Fingerprint

Neoadjuvant Therapy
Robotics
Rectal Neoplasms
Laparoscopy
Chemoradiotherapy
Demography
Fluorouracil
Disease-Free Survival
Radiotherapy
Survival Rate
Databases
Morbidity
Safety
Recurrence
Drug Therapy

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Saklani, Avanish P. ; Lim, Dae Ro ; Hur, Hyuk ; Min, Byung Soh ; Baik, Seung Hyuk ; Lee, Kang Young ; Kim, Namkyu. / Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy : Comparison of oncologic outcomes. In: International Journal of Colorectal Disease. 2013 ; Vol. 28, No. 12. pp. 1689-1698.
@article{b4481464e1944d0b8f1130f2d89be7bf,
title = "Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy: Comparison of oncologic outcomes",
abstract = "Purpose: Minimal invasive surgery for mid and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) can be challenging. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic resections in mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT. Methods: Between Jan 2006 and Dec 2010, all patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic resections for mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT were identified from a prospective database. These patients received treatment (5FU-based chemotherapy, 50.4 Gy radiotherapy), as they were T3 or T4 and/or node + ve. Patients in the two groups were compared with respect to demographics, clinical safety, and oncological outcomes. Results: One hundred thirty-eight patients underwent rectal cancer resection after LCRT, either robotic (n = 74) or laparoscopic (n = 64). The patients in both groups were comparable in terms of demographics, distance of tumor from anal verge, and type of procedures. There were four (6.3 {\%}) conversions in laparoscopic group and one (1.4 {\%}) in the robotic group (p = 0.183). The morbidity rates in the laparoscopic and robotic group were 26.6 {\%} and 16.2 {\%}, respectively (p = 0.137). With a median follow up of 3 years, the local recurrence in the laparoscopic and robotic group was four (6.3 {\%}) and two (2.7 {\%}), respectively (p = 0.420). The 3-year overall survival rate for laparoscopic and robotic group was 92.1 and 90.0 {\%}, respectively (p = 0.803). The 3-year disease-free survival was also comparable, 78.8 {\%} (laparoscopic) versus 77.7 {\%} (robotic) (p = 0.390). Conclusion: With a median follow up of 3 years, robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer was associated with oncological outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery.",
author = "Saklani, {Avanish P.} and Lim, {Dae Ro} and Hyuk Hur and Min, {Byung Soh} and Baik, {Seung Hyuk} and Lee, {Kang Young} and Namkyu Kim",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00384-013-1756-z",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "1689--1698",
journal = "International Journal of Colorectal Disease",
issn = "0179-1958",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "12",

}

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy : Comparison of oncologic outcomes. / Saklani, Avanish P.; Lim, Dae Ro; Hur, Hyuk; Min, Byung Soh; Baik, Seung Hyuk; Lee, Kang Young; Kim, Namkyu.

In: International Journal of Colorectal Disease, Vol. 28, No. 12, 01.12.2013, p. 1689-1698.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy

T2 - Comparison of oncologic outcomes

AU - Saklani, Avanish P.

AU - Lim, Dae Ro

AU - Hur, Hyuk

AU - Min, Byung Soh

AU - Baik, Seung Hyuk

AU - Lee, Kang Young

AU - Kim, Namkyu

PY - 2013/12/1

Y1 - 2013/12/1

N2 - Purpose: Minimal invasive surgery for mid and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) can be challenging. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic resections in mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT. Methods: Between Jan 2006 and Dec 2010, all patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic resections for mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT were identified from a prospective database. These patients received treatment (5FU-based chemotherapy, 50.4 Gy radiotherapy), as they were T3 or T4 and/or node + ve. Patients in the two groups were compared with respect to demographics, clinical safety, and oncological outcomes. Results: One hundred thirty-eight patients underwent rectal cancer resection after LCRT, either robotic (n = 74) or laparoscopic (n = 64). The patients in both groups were comparable in terms of demographics, distance of tumor from anal verge, and type of procedures. There were four (6.3 %) conversions in laparoscopic group and one (1.4 %) in the robotic group (p = 0.183). The morbidity rates in the laparoscopic and robotic group were 26.6 % and 16.2 %, respectively (p = 0.137). With a median follow up of 3 years, the local recurrence in the laparoscopic and robotic group was four (6.3 %) and two (2.7 %), respectively (p = 0.420). The 3-year overall survival rate for laparoscopic and robotic group was 92.1 and 90.0 %, respectively (p = 0.803). The 3-year disease-free survival was also comparable, 78.8 % (laparoscopic) versus 77.7 % (robotic) (p = 0.390). Conclusion: With a median follow up of 3 years, robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer was associated with oncological outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery.

AB - Purpose: Minimal invasive surgery for mid and low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) can be challenging. The aim of our study was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic resections in mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT. Methods: Between Jan 2006 and Dec 2010, all patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic resections for mid and low rectal cancers after LCRT were identified from a prospective database. These patients received treatment (5FU-based chemotherapy, 50.4 Gy radiotherapy), as they were T3 or T4 and/or node + ve. Patients in the two groups were compared with respect to demographics, clinical safety, and oncological outcomes. Results: One hundred thirty-eight patients underwent rectal cancer resection after LCRT, either robotic (n = 74) or laparoscopic (n = 64). The patients in both groups were comparable in terms of demographics, distance of tumor from anal verge, and type of procedures. There were four (6.3 %) conversions in laparoscopic group and one (1.4 %) in the robotic group (p = 0.183). The morbidity rates in the laparoscopic and robotic group were 26.6 % and 16.2 %, respectively (p = 0.137). With a median follow up of 3 years, the local recurrence in the laparoscopic and robotic group was four (6.3 %) and two (2.7 %), respectively (p = 0.420). The 3-year overall survival rate for laparoscopic and robotic group was 92.1 and 90.0 %, respectively (p = 0.803). The 3-year disease-free survival was also comparable, 78.8 % (laparoscopic) versus 77.7 % (robotic) (p = 0.390). Conclusion: With a median follow up of 3 years, robotic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer was associated with oncological outcomes comparable to laparoscopic surgery.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84889886089&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84889886089&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00384-013-1756-z

DO - 10.1007/s00384-013-1756-z

M3 - Article

C2 - 23948968

AN - SCOPUS:84889886089

VL - 28

SP - 1689

EP - 1698

JO - International Journal of Colorectal Disease

JF - International Journal of Colorectal Disease

SN - 0179-1958

IS - 12

ER -