Short-term outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for full-thickness rectal prolapse. Is robotic superior?

Abstract

Both LVMR and RVMR are similar in terms of safety and efficacy. Although not randomized, this data may suggest a better functional outcome and quality of life in patients having RVMR for ERP.

Robot‐assisted vs laparoscopic ventral rectopexy for external or internal rectal prolapse and enterocele: a randomized controlled trial

“…This randomized trial provides new information on the anatomical results after mini-invasive rectopexy operations based on MR defaecography. The results of this study are generally consistent with previous reports showing that robot-assisted rectopexy can be performed safely, effectively and with short-term outcomes similar to laparoscopic procedures [9,[13][14][15][16][17].…”

“…Previous studies compared the results of RMVR and LMVR with heterogeneous indications, techniques and mesh types [9,[13][14][15][16][17]. A longer duration of surgery has been reported with robotic compared with laparoscopic surgery, the difference being about 30 min (range 22-59 min) [13][14][15]17]. This randomized series included consecutive patients undergoing the operation using robotics after the initial learning curve of 20 rectopexies.…”

“…Current evidence on the benefits of RVMR is provided by small nonrandomized, comparative studies [9,[13][14][15][16][17] and a recent meta-analysis did not show any difference in recurrence or function [18]. The drawbacks of robotic use include longer operating time and increased costs compared with laparoscopy [9,13,14,17]. The potential benefits of RVMR over LVMR in restoring the anatomy have been assessed in this prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial.…”

“…Robot-assisted technology (robot-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy, RVMR) is an alternative to conventional laparoscopy in rectopexy due to its technical advantages for the surgeon and potential benefits to the patient [9][10][11][12][13]. Current evidence on the benefits of RVMR is provided by small nonrandomized, comparative studies [9,[13][14][15][16][17] and a recent meta-analysis did not show any difference in recurrence or function [18]. The drawbacks of robotic use include longer operating time and increased costs compared with laparoscopy [9,13,14,17].…”

A novel hybrid 3D endoscope zooming and repositioning system: Design and feasibility study

“…Furthermore, the instant control over the angle of the endoscope by single‐handedly actuating a lever reduces the complexity of the human‐machine interface. The mean surgery time during the rectopexy was 118 (range 105–132) minutes, compared with an average (SD) surgery time of 115 (36), 119 (31), 153 (33), and 163 (39) minutes during conventional minimal invasive rectopexy as reported by several authors . All procedures were performed using a 3D endoscopic system.…”