Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
, 13 (2), 176-83

Short- And Medium-Term Outcome of Robot-Assisted and Traditional Laparoscopic Rectal Resection

Comparative Study

Short- And Medium-Term Outcome of Robot-Assisted and Traditional Laparoscopic Rectal Resection

Alberto Patriti et al. JSLS.


Background: Traditional laparoscopic anterior rectal resection (TLAR) has recently been used for rectal cancer, offering good functional results compared with open anterior resection and resulting in a better postoperative early outcome. However, laparoscopic rectal resection can be technically demanding, especially when a total mesorectal excision is required. The aim of this study was to verify whether robot-assisted anterior rectal resection (RLAR) could overcome limitations of the laparoscopic approach.

Methods: Sixty-six patients with rectal cancer were enrolled in the study. Twenty-nine patients underwent RLAR and 37 TLAR. Groups were matched for age, BMI, sex ratio, ASA status, and TNM stage, and were followed up for a mean time of 12 months.

Results: Robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal resection results in shorter operative time when a total mesorectal excision is performed (165.9+/-10 vs 210+/-37 minutes; P<0.05). The conversion rate is significantly lower for RLAR (P<0.05). Postoperative morbidity was comparable between groups. Overall survival and disease-free survival were comparable between groups, even though a trend towards better disease-free survival in the RLAR group was observed.

Conclusion: RLAR is a safe and feasible procedure that facilitates laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. Randomized clinical trials and longer follow-ups are needed to evaluate a possible influence of RLAR on patient survival.


Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Trocar position for robot-assisted anterior rectal resection and traditional laparoscopic anterior rectal resection. c: camera port; o1 and o2: operative trocars; a1 and a2: accessory trocars. Robotic trocars are inserted with the “trocar in trocar” technique through trocars o1 and o2. Trocar a2 is not always necessary.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Disease-free survival curves. Robot-assisted anterior rectal resection: continuous line. Traditional laparoscopic anterior rectal resection: interrupted line.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 69 PubMed Central articles

See all "Cited by" articles


    1. Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69(10):613–616 - PubMed
    1. Junginger T, Kneist W, Heintz A. Influence of identification and preservation of pelvic autonomic nerves in rectal cancer surgery on bladder dysfunction after total mesorectal excision. Dis Colon Rectum. 2003;46(5):621–628 - PubMed
    1. Morino M, Parini U, Giraudo G, et al. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: a consecutive series of 100 patients. Ann Surg. 2003;237(3):335–342 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leroy J, Jamali F, Forbes L, et al. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer surgery: long-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(2):281–289 - PubMed
    1. Gutt CN, Oniu T, Mehrabi A, et al. Robot-assisted abdominal surgery. Br J Surg. 2004;91(11):1390–1397 - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources