1. bookVolume 10 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
08 Sep 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Copyright
© 2020 Sciendo
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
First Published
08 Sep 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Copyright
© 2020 Sciendo

Total mesorectal excision (TME) is a standard surgical procedure for rectal cancer. Robotic surgery has the potential to minimize the disadvantages of laparoscopic rectal resection. Circumferential margin and macroscopic quality assessment of the resected specimen are the major prognostic factors for local recurrence of the disease. The aim of this study was to research the macroscopic assessment of the quality of TME after robotic-assisted rectal resections for rectal cancer performed in a single center. Data was prospectively collected about macroscopic assessment of the quality of TME in thirteen patients after robotic-assisted rectal resections for rectal cancer between 09.04.2014 and 31.12.2016. After all robotic TMEs, a pathologist made macroscopic assessment of the completeness of the mesorectal excision. The quality of TME was complete in 12 cases and nearly complete in one case. The circumferential and distal resection margins were negative in all cases. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was nine. This study indicated that using robotic surgery for rectal cancer does not lead to worsening the quality of TME. Further studies in this field are necessary.

Keywords

1. MacFarlane JK, Ryall RD, Heald RJ. Mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet. 1993;341(8843):457-60.Search in Google Scholar

2. Carlsen E, Schlichting E, Guldvog I, Johnson E, Heald RJ. Effect of the introduction of total mesorectal excision for the treatment of rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 1998;85(4):526-9.Search in Google Scholar

3. Van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, Fürst A, Lacy AM, Hop WC, et al. Colorectal cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection II (COLOR II) Study Group. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(3):210-8.Search in Google Scholar

4. Anderson C, Uman G, Pigazzi A. Oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta- analysis of the literature. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34(10):1135-42.Search in Google Scholar

5. Romano G, Gagliardi G, Bianco F, Parker M C, Corcione F. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: why it is still not the gold standard and why it should be. Tech Coloproctol. 2008;12(2):185-8.Search in Google Scholar

6. Shin DW, Shin JY, Oh SJ, Park JK, Yu H, Ahn MS, et al. The prognostic value of circumferential resection margin involvement in patients with extraperitoneal rectal cancer. Am Surg. 2016;82(4):348-355.Search in Google Scholar

7. Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P. What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(2):303- 12.Search in Google Scholar

8. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshal H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, et al. Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to Open Laparotomy Among Patients Undergoing Resection for Rectal Cancer: The ROLARR Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017;318(16):1569-80.Search in Google Scholar

9. Campa-Thompson M, Weir R, Calcetera N, Quirke P, Carmack S. Pathologic processing of the total mesorectal excision. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2015;28(01):43-52.Search in Google Scholar

10. Langer D, Tučková I, Kalvach J, Ryska M. Can robotic rectal cancer surgery improve quality of total mesorectal excision? Rozhl Chir. 2017;96(2):69.Search in Google Scholar

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo