General Surgery & Transoral Robotic Surgery- Clinical Evidence

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robotic total mesorectal excision (RTME), a novel approach for the treatment of rectal cancer, has been shown in previous studies to be safe and effective. However, the results of this approach compared with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LTME) have not been reported in terms of clinical outcome and oncologic data. This study compared early outcomes for rectal cancer between two groups.

METHODS: Between April 2003 and March 2009, 82 patients from a prospectively maintained database were enrolled in a case-matched study. The patients were matched for gender, age, body mass index (BMI), and type of operative procedure.

RESULTS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was performed for 33 RTME patients (80.5%) and 18 LTME patients (43.9%) (p=0.001). The mean operative time was 296 min for RTME and 315 min for LTME (p=0.357). The number of conversions were 3 (7.3%) for RTME and 9 (22%) for LTME (p=0.12). The anastomotic leak rate after surgery did not differ between RTME (n=3, 8.6%) and LTME (n=1, 2.9%) (p=0.62). The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 13.1 with RTME and 16.2 with LTME (p=0.07), and negative distal resection margins (DRMs) were noted in all surgical specimens. Positive circumferential resections (CRMs) were identified in 2.4% of the RTME cases and 4.9% of the LTME cases. No difference was noted in lengths of the DRMs, times until a liquid diet, or postoperative hospital stays. The total hospitalization costs were higher in the RTME group, although the difference did not reach statistical significance. There was no operative mortality or port-site recurrence in either group.

CONCLUSIONS: For rectal cancer, RTME may be as feasible and safe as LTME in terms of technical and oncologic issues. Further prospective randomized trials are necessary for conclusions to be drawn concerning definite oncologic outcomes of robotic procedures for rectal cancer.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery is a complex technology offering technical advantages over conventional methods. Still, clinical outcomes and financial issues have been subjects of debate. Several studies have demonstrated higher costs for robotic surgery when compared to laparoscopy or open surgery. However, other studies showed fewer costly anastomotic complications after robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) when compared to laparoscopy.

METHODS: We collected data for our gastric bypass patients who underwent open, laparoscopic, or robotic surgery from June 1997 to July 2010. Demographic data, BMI, complications, mortality, intensive care unit stay, hospitalization, and operating room (OR) costs were analyzed and a cost projection completed. Sensitivity analyses were performed for varied leak rates during laparoscopy, number of robotic cases per month, number of additional staplers during robotic surgery, and varied OR times for robotic cases.

RESULTS: Nine-hundred ninety patients underwent gastric bypass surgery at the University Hospital Geneva from June 1997 to July 2010. There were 524 open, 323 laparoscopic, and 143 robotic cases. Significantly fewer anastomotic complications occurred after open and robotic RYGBP when compared to laparoscopy. OR material costs were slightly less for robotic surgery (USD 5,427) than for laparoscopy (USD 5,494), but more than for the open procedure (USD 2,251). Overall, robotic gastric bypass (USD 19,363) was cheaper when compared to laparoscopy (USD 21,697) and open surgery (USD 23,000).

CONCLUSIONS: Robotic RYGBP can be cost effective due to balancing greater robotic overhead costs with the savings associated with avoiding stapler use and costly anastomotic complications.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) remains one of the most challenging abdominal procedures, and its application is poorly reported in the literature so far. To date, few data are available comparing a minimally invasive approach to open PD. The aim of the present study is to compare the robotic and open approaches for PD at a single institution.

METHODS: Data from 83 consecutive PD procedures performed between January 2002 and May 2010 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were stratified into two groups: the open group (n = 39; 47%) and the robotic group (n = 44; 53%).

RESULTS: Patients in the robotic group were statistically older (63 years of age versus 56 years; p = 0.04) and heavier (body mass index: 27.7 vs. 24.8; p = 0.01); and had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (2.5 vs. 2.15; p = 0.01) when compared to the open group. Indications for surgery were the same in both groups. The robotic group had a significantly shorter operative time (444 vs. 559 min; p = 0.0001), reduced blood loss (387 vs. 827 ml; p = 0.0001), and a higher number of lymph nodes harvested (16.8 vs. 11; p = 0.02) compared to the open group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of complication rates, mortality rates, and hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS: The authors present one of the first studies comparing open and robotic PD. While it is too early to draw definitive conclusions concerning the long-term outcomes, short-term results show a positive trend in favor of the robotic approach without compromising the oncological principles associated with the open approach.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To report 2-year survival outcomes for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma using transoral robotic-assisted resection.

DESIGN: Prospective case study.

SETTING: Two tertiary care centers.

PATIENTS: Eighty-nine patients from 2 tertiary care centers (University of Alabama at Birmingham and the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota) with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma of all stages and subsites, who underwent transoral robotic-assisted resection between March 2007 and December 2008, with a median follow-up time of 26 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disease-free survival, cancer recurrence, and gastrostomy tube dependence

RESULTS: Seventy-one patients had T1 (n = 29) or T2 (n = 42) tumors while 18 patients had T3 (n = 8) or T4 (n = 10) tumors. There were 24 patients with overall stage I or II disease and 65 with stage III or IV disease. At the time of the last follow-up visit (median, 26 months), there had been a total of 11 patients with recurrent cancer: 3 with local; 7, regional (2 of whom also had distant metastases); and 1, distant. Seven patients were treated for recurrent disease. Eighty-two patients had no evidence of disease, 1 patient died of the disease, 2 died of other disease, and 4 were alive with disease at the last follow-up visit. Results of Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the 2-year recurrence-free survival rate for the cohort was 86.5%. None of the patients were gastrostomy tube dependent at the last follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS: The 2-year functional and oncologic results justify the continued treatment of select patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with robotic-assisted surgical resection.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to determine the regional recurrence rate of node-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) in patients undergoing transoral robotic surgery (TORS) and selective neck dissection (SND) followed by observation, radiation, or concurrent chemoradiation.

STUDY DESIGN: The purpose of this study was to determine the regional recurrence rate of node-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) in patients undergoing transoral robotic surgery (TORS) and selective neck dissection (SND) followed by observation, radiation, or concurrent chemoradiation.

METHODS: Thirty-one patients with previously untreated OPSCC undergoing TORS and SND (29 unilateral and two bilateral) were included. There were 29 males and two females, with ages ranging from 36 to 76 years (median = 55 years) with one palate, one lateral wall, 17 tonsil, 11 base of tongue, and one vallecula primary tumor classified as follows: T1 (n = 9, 29%), T2 (n = 15, 48.4%), T3 (n = 7, 22.6%), N0 (n = 6, 19.4%), N1 (n = 15, 48.4%), N2b (n = 10, 32.3%), and N2c (n = 1, 3.2%). There were three stage I (9.7%), two stage II (6.5%), 15 stage III (48.4%) and 11 stage IVa (35.5%) patients. Twenty-two patients were treated postoperatively with adjuvant therapy (12 radiation alone and 12 combined radiation and chemotherapy). Primary outcome measured was regional recurrence rate.

RESULTS: There was one regional recurrence on the contralateral, non-operated neck and one distant recurrence among the 31 patients who underwent SND.

CONCLUSIONS: SND after TORS resection of primary OPSCC enables the use of selective and deintensified adjuvant therapy to reduce regional recurrence rates.