Background: Introduction of the da Vinci Xi system has facilitated the use of robotics in colorectal surgery. Nevertheless, data on the outcomes of robotic surgery for the treatment of colonic diverticulitis have remained scarce. Methods: Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, and perioperative outcomes of the patients undergoing totally robotic with the da Vinci Xi system or laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colonic diverticulitis (LCD) were compared. Results: Laparoscopic and robotic groups included 22 and 20 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of patient demographics, clinical characteristics, operative time, and postoperative complications. There were three conversions in the laparoscopy group and no conversion in the robotic group (P = 0.23). Conversion to open surgery was associated with postoperative morbidity (P = 0.02). Conclusion: Robotic surgery is an applicable alternative for the treatment of LCD. Robotic approach may potentially lower the risk of operative morbidity by reducing the requirement of conversion. K E Y W O R D S colectomy, laparoscopic surgery, left sided colonic diverticulitis, robotic surgery

In this study, perioperative and short-term postoperative results of totally robotic versus totally laparoscopic rectal resections for cancer were investigated in a comparative manner by considering risk factors including obesity, male sex, and neoadjuvant treatment. In addition to overall comparison, the impact of sex, obesity (body mass index ≥30 kg/m), and neoadjuvant treatment was assessed in patients who had a total mesorectal excision (TME). Operative time was longer in the robotic group (P<0.001). In obese patients who underwent TME, the mean length of hospital stay was shorter (7±2 vs. 9±4 d, P=0.01), and the mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was higher (30±19 vs. 23±10, P=0.02) in the robotic group. Totally robotic and totally laparoscopic surgery appears to be providing similar outcomes in patients undergoing rectal resections for cancer. Selective use of a robot may have a role for improving postoperative outcomes in some challenging cases including obese patients undergoing TME.

INTRODUCTION: Redo IPAA is a viable option to maintain intestinal continuity in patients with ileal pouch failure. Most patients with ileal pouch failure are physiologically and psychologically too deconditioned to undergo a 1- or 2-stage redo ileal pouch surgery, so a 3-staged redo ileal pouch surgery is needed. This consists of an initial proximal diverting loop ileostomy for 6 months, followed by redo ileal pouch construction with temporary stoma, and, lastly, stoma closure. The location of the initial diverting ileostomy is paramount, because 40% of cases will require pouch excision and construction of a de novo pouch, and a thoughtfully placed ileostomy will allow construction of a redo pouch without sacrificing any bowel length. In our report, we described our technique to create thoughtful ileostomy in patients who undergo redo IPAA. TECHNIQUE: We create a loop ileostomy ≈20 cm proximal to the existing ileal pouch, from the level of the tip of the J or the proximal inlet of an S-pouch. We call this a thoughtful ileostomy. By doing that, the thoughtful ileostomy site can be used as the apex of the new ileal pouch and become the ileal-anal anastomosis when a de novo ileal pouch needs to be constructed. RESULTS: We created a thoughtful ileostomy in 50 patients in the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center at New York University Langone Health who either subsequently underwent or will undergo a redo IPAA between September 2016 and March 2019 (laparoscopic, n = 37; open, n = 13). Ten of the laparoscopic cases were preemptively converted to open because of dense adhesions. CONCLUSION: A thoughtful ileostomy is important so as to not sacrifice bowel in patients being prepared for redo ileal pouch surgery. Initial diversion with thoughtful ileostomy 6 months before redo ileal pouch construction also allows patients to be prepared for a major operation both physiologically and psychologically.

Robotic CME for transverse colon cancer is feasible and can be a procedure of choice to achieve a good surgical quality.

Background Limited data exist regarding adoption of evolving robotic technology in surgery. This study evaluated trends and the current condition of robotic platforms in surgical specialties and general surgical subspecialties. Methods Between January 2013 and December 2017, all robotic operations performed in Turkey were included. Results In the study period, 13 760 robotic operations were performed at 32 hospitals. The median numbers of general surgical procedures were 43and eight cases per hospital and per general surgeon, respectively. The high‐volume general surgeons performed 1734 (81%) of the cases. Forty‐five percent and 55% of the general surgical operations were performed with the Xi and S/Si robots, respectively. Conclusion Use of the Xi platform seems to increase caseload in general surgery operations possibly by facilitating robotic colorectal surgery. Targeting the high‐volume centres and surgeons for further training and implantation of upcoming robotic technology can be more effective in terms of increasing case volume and improving outcomes.

Aim Approximately 20%–40% of the patients with re‐do ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) experience pouch failure. Salvage surgery can be attempted in this patient group with severe aversion to permanent ileostomy. The literature regarding secondary IPAA revision after re‐do IPAA failure is scarce. Methods All patients who underwent a secondary IPAA revision after re‐do IPAA failure between September 2016 and July 2021 in a single centre were included. Short‐ and long‐term outcomes and quality of life in this patient group are reported. Results Ten patients who had secondary IPAA revision for re‐do IPAA failure were included. All patients had ulcerative colitis. Nine of these patients had pelvic sepsis and one patient had a mechanical issue. Mucosectomy and handsewn anastomosis was performed in nine patients. The existing pouch was salvaged in six patients and four patients had pouch excision and re‐creation. Two patients had postoperative pelvic sepsis. Pouch retention rate was 78% in a median of 28 months. None of the patients had short‐gut syndrome. The procedure was associated with good quality of life (median Cleveland Global Quality of Life Index 0.8). All patients would undergo the same surgery if needed. Conclusion Secondary IPAA revision after a failed re‐do IPAA can be an option in patients with severe aversion to permanent ileostomy if re‐do IPAA fails and it is associated with good outcomes. This patient group should be carefully evaluated and referred to specialized centres if required.

In this study, we aimed to present our initial experience on totally robotic total restorative proctocolectomy in ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. Patients undergoing a totally robotic restorative total proctocolectomy with ileal J-pouch anal anastomosis for UC between January 2015 and November 2017 were included. The da Vinci Xi was used for the operations. Patient demographics, perioperative and short-term operative outcomes were evaluated. Ten patients were included. The median operative time was 380 minutes(range, 300 to 480 min). The median blood loss was 65 mL (range, 5 to 400 mL). No conversion to open surgery was needed. The median time to flatus was 1 day (range, 1 to 2) and length of stay was 6 (4 to 12) days. Short-term complications (≤30 d) were superficial wound infection (n=3), anal bleeding (n=1), pouchitis (n=1). No mortality was observed during the study period. Our study, which is the largest series so far, reveals that totally robotic restorative proctocolectomy is a safe and feasible option for the surgical treatment of UC.

No abstract