Quality of laparoscopic camera navigation in robot‐assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: An analysis of surgical videos through a video processing computer software

Kim, Jinhyun; Piozzi, Guglielmo Niccolò; Kwak, Jung‐Myun; Kim, Jinhee; Kim, Taesung; Choo, Jaegul; Yang, Guang; Lee, Tae Hoon; Baek, Se Jin; Kim, Jin; Kim, Seon Hahn

doi:10.1002/rcs.2393

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(39 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, compared to laparoscopy, robotic RC surgery provided lower conversion rates, better preservation of sexual function, and oncological outcomes [31,32]. Also, the robotic approach has a shorter learning curve [33] and provides higher camera navigation quality than laparoscopy [34]. If the robotic approach could be theoretically advantageous for male patients with midlow RC, for female patients both robotic and laparoscopic approach could provide similar results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic male and laparoscopic female sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer share similar specimen quality, complication rates and long-term oncological outcomes

Aliyev¹,

Piozzi

Huseynov

et al. 2023

J Robotic Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes between laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision in female patients (F-Lap-TME) and robotic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision in male patients (M-Rob-TME) with mid-low rectal cancer (RC).Methods: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. 170 cases (F-Lap-TME: 60 patients; M-Rob-TME: 110 patients) were performed by a single surgeon (January 2011 -January 2020).Results: Clinical characteristics did not differ signi cantly between the two groups. Operating time was longer in M-Rob-TME than in F-Lap-TME group (185.3±28.4 vs 124.5±35.8 minutes, p<0.001). There was no conversion to open surgery in both groups. Quality of mesorectum was complete/near-complete in 58 (96.7%) and 107 (97.3%) patients of F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME (p=0.508), respectively. Circumferential radial margin involvement was observed in 2 (3.3%) and 3 (2.9%) in F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME patients (p=0.210), respectively. Median length of follow-up was 62 (24-108) months in the F-Lap-TME and 64 (24-108) months in the M-Rob-TME group. Five-year overall survival rates were 90.5% in the F-Lap-TME and 89.6% in the M-Rob-TME groups (p=0.120). Disease-free survival rates in F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME groups were 87.5% and 86.5% (p=0.145), respectively. Local recurrence rates were 5% (n=3) and 5.5% (n=6) (p=0.210), in the F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME groups, respectively. Conclusion:The robotic technique can potentially overcome some technical challenges related to the pelvic anatomical difference between sex compared to laparoscopy. Laparoscopic and robotic approach, respectively in female and male patients provide similar surgical specimen quality, perioperative outcomes, and long-term oncological results.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic male and laparoscopic female sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer share similar specimen quality, complication rates and long-term oncological outcomes

Aliyev¹,

Piozzi

Huseynov

et al. 2023

J Robotic Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic Male and Laparoscopic Female Sphincter-Preserving Total Mesorectal Excision of Mid-Low Rectal Cancer Share Similar Specimen Quality, Complication Rates and Long-Term Oncological Outcomes

Aliyev¹,

Piozzi

Huseynov³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes between laparoscopic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision in female patients (F-Lap-TME) and robotic sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision in male patients (M-Rob-TME) with mid-low rectal cancer (RC). Methods: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was performed. 170 cases (F-Lap-TME: 60 patients; M-Rob-TME: 110 patients) were performed by a single surgeon (January 2011 - January 2020). Results: Clinical characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. Operating time was longer in M-Rob-TME than in F-Lap-TME group (185.3±28.4 vs 124.5±35.8 minutes, p<0.001). There was no conversion to open surgery in both groups. Quality of mesorectum was complete/near-complete in 58 (96.7%) and 107 (97.3%) patients of F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME (p=0.508), respectively. Circumferential radial margin involvement was observed in 2 (3.3%) and 3 (2.9%) in F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME patients (p=0.210), respectively. Median length of follow-up was 62 (24-108) months in the F-Lap-TME and 64 (24-108) months in the M-Rob-TME group. Five-year overall survival rates were 90.5% in the F-Lap-TME and 89.6% in the M-Rob-TME groups (p=0.120). Disease-free survival rates in F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME groups were 87.5% and 86.5% (p=0.145), respectively. Local recurrence rates were 5% (n=3) and 5.5% (n=6) (p=0.210), in the F-Lap-TME and M-Rob-TME groups, respectively. Conclusion: The robotic technique can potentially overcome some technical challenges related to the pelvic anatomical difference between sex compared to laparoscopy. Laparoscopic and robotic approach, respectively in female and male patients provide similar surgical specimen quality, perioperative outcomes, and long-term oncological results.

show abstract

“…The use of robotic laparoscopic holder has been shown to provide consistent control of the view of the operative field [ 13 ]. The quality of camera navigation has been shown to be better with robotic versus conventional laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery [ 14 ].…”

Section: Surgeon Camera Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visualisation ergonomics and robotic surgery

Wong

Crowe

2023

J Robotic Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stereopsis may be an advantage of robotic surgery. Perceived robotic ergonomic advantages in visualisation include better exposure, three-dimensional vision, surgeon camera control, and line of sight screen location. Other ergonomic factors relating to visualisation include stereo-acuity, vergence–accommodation mismatch, visual–perception mismatch, visual–vestibular mismatch, visuospatial ability, visual fatigue, and visual feedback to compensate for lack of haptic feedback. Visual fatigue symptoms may be related to dry eye or accommodative/binocular vision stress. Digital eye strain can be measured by questionnaires and objective tests. Management options include treatment of dry eye, correction of refractive error, and management of accommodation and vergence anomalies. Experienced robotic surgeons can use visual cues like tissue deformation and surgical tool information as surrogates for haptic feedback.

show abstract

Quality of laparoscopic camera navigation in robot‐assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: An analysis of surgical videos through a video processing computer software

Cited by 5 publications

References 21 publications

Robotic male and laparoscopic female sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer share similar specimen quality, complication rates and long-term oncological outcomes

Robotic male and laparoscopic female sphincter-preserving total mesorectal excision of mid-low rectal cancer share similar specimen quality, complication rates and long-term oncological outcomes

Robotic Male and Laparoscopic Female Sphincter-Preserving Total Mesorectal Excision of Mid-Low Rectal Cancer Share Similar Specimen Quality, Complication Rates and Long-Term Oncological Outcomes

Visualisation ergonomics and robotic surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About