Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment

View through CrossRef
BackgroundNatural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), as a new star of minimally invasive techniques, has been increasingly favored and promoted in the field of surgery around the world. Most previous studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic NOSES and conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, there is little research on comparing robotic colorectal cancer NOSES with conventional robotic-assisted colorectal cancer resection surgery.Participant and methodsThis study is a retrospective study of propensity score matching (PSM). This study included Ninety-one propensity score-matched pairs of the participant who had undergone robotic colorectal cancer resection surgery at our center between January 2017 and December 2020. The covariates used in the propensity score included gender, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumor diameter, the tumor's height from the anal verge, histological differentiation, AJCC stage, T stage, N stage, and history of previous abdominal surgery. The outcome measurement criteria included postoperative complications, inflammatory response, pelvic floor function, anal function, cosmetic outcome, quality of life, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).ResultsThe robotic NOSES group had faster recovery time from gastrointestinal function (P = 0.014), shorter abdominal incision length (P < 0.001), less pain (P < 0.001), less additional analgesia required (P < 0.001), and lower postoperative indicators of white blood cell count (P < 0.001) and C-reactive protein content compared to the robotic-assisted resection surgery (RARS) group (P = 0.035). Additionally, the robotic NOSES group had significantly better body imagery (P < 0.001), cosmetic scores (P < 0.001), somatic function (P = 0.003), role function (P = 0.039), emotional function (P = 0.001), social function (P = 0.004), and overall function (P < 0.001) than the RARS group. The two groups demonstrated no significant difference between DFS and OS.ConclusionRobotic colorectal cancer NOSES is a safe and feasible minimally invasive procedure and offers shorter abdominal incisions, less pain, less surgical stress response, and better postoperative quality of life. Therefore, this technique can be further promoted for colorectal cancer patients eligible for NOSES.
Title: Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
Description:
BackgroundNatural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), as a new star of minimally invasive techniques, has been increasingly favored and promoted in the field of surgery around the world.
Most previous studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic NOSES and conventional laparoscopic surgery.
However, there is little research on comparing robotic colorectal cancer NOSES with conventional robotic-assisted colorectal cancer resection surgery.
Participant and methodsThis study is a retrospective study of propensity score matching (PSM).
This study included Ninety-one propensity score-matched pairs of the participant who had undergone robotic colorectal cancer resection surgery at our center between January 2017 and December 2020.
The covariates used in the propensity score included gender, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumor diameter, the tumor's height from the anal verge, histological differentiation, AJCC stage, T stage, N stage, and history of previous abdominal surgery.
The outcome measurement criteria included postoperative complications, inflammatory response, pelvic floor function, anal function, cosmetic outcome, quality of life, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS).
ResultsThe robotic NOSES group had faster recovery time from gastrointestinal function (P = 0.
014), shorter abdominal incision length (P < 0.
001), less pain (P < 0.
001), less additional analgesia required (P < 0.
001), and lower postoperative indicators of white blood cell count (P < 0.
001) and C-reactive protein content compared to the robotic-assisted resection surgery (RARS) group (P = 0.
035).
Additionally, the robotic NOSES group had significantly better body imagery (P < 0.
001), cosmetic scores (P < 0.
001), somatic function (P = 0.
003), role function (P = 0.
039), emotional function (P = 0.
001), social function (P = 0.
004), and overall function (P < 0.
001) than the RARS group.
The two groups demonstrated no significant difference between DFS and OS.
ConclusionRobotic colorectal cancer NOSES is a safe and feasible minimally invasive procedure and offers shorter abdominal incisions, less pain, less surgical stress response, and better postoperative quality of life.
Therefore, this technique can be further promoted for colorectal cancer patients eligible for NOSES.

Related Results

Abstract A13: Applied the proteomics characteristics to detect the inherited colorectal adenomas
Abstract A13: Applied the proteomics characteristics to detect the inherited colorectal adenomas
Abstract Introduction: Current study found that about one-third of the incidence of colorectal cancer have genetic related. Hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer...
Edoxaban and Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Trials
Edoxaban and Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Trials
Abstract Introduction Cancer patients face a venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk that is up to 50 times higher compared to individuals without cancer. In 2010, direct oral anticoagul...
Interview: Timothy Clinton
Interview: Timothy Clinton
What has driven you to specialise in urologic oncology, in particular the management of advanced testicular and bladder malignancies? My interest in urology started in medical scho...
The Robotic Approach in Rectal Cancer
The Robotic Approach in Rectal Cancer
Since a robotic surgical system was developed in the early 1990s and the first robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy was reported in 2001, robotic surgery has spread in many surgi...
PROMs in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Comparison between Robotic Mako Assisted Versus Manual Technique
PROMs in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Comparison between Robotic Mako Assisted Versus Manual Technique
Study Purpose: The purpose of this observational study is to evaluate the degree of satisfaction and improvement in quality of life through PROMs (Patient Related Outcome Measures)...
Metastatic colorectal cancer from an epidemiological and immunological perspective
Metastatic colorectal cancer from an epidemiological and immunological perspective
<p dir="ltr">Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common type of cancer and around 8000 persons in Sweden get the diagnosis each year. One in five will have metastases a...

Back to Top