Evaluation of an established colorectal robotic programme at an NHS district general hospital: audit of outcomes and systematic review of published data

Introduction Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) offers potential advantages over traditional surgical approaches. This study aimed to assess outcomes from a district general hospital (DGH) robotic colorectal programme against published data. Materials and methods The robotic programme was established following simulator, dry/wet lab training, and proctoring. We performed a case series analysing technical, patient, and oncological outcomes extracted from a prospective database of colorectal RAS cases (2015–2022). A registered systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42022300773; PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE) of single-centre colorectal series from established robotic centres ( n >200 cases) was completed and compared to local data using descriptive summary statistics. Risk of bias assessment was performed using an adapted version of the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool. Results Two hundred thirty-two RAS cases were performed including 122 anterior resections, 56 APERs, 19 rectopexies, and 15 Hartmann’s procedures. The median duration was 325 (IQR 265–400) min. Blood loss was < 100 ml in 97% of cases with 2 (0.9%) cases converted to open. Complications (Clavien-Dindo 3–5) occurred in 19 (8%) patients, with 3 (1.3%) deaths in < 30 days. Length of stay was 7 (IQR 5–11) days. In 169 rectal cancer cases, there were 9 (5.3%) cases with a positive circumferential or distal margin and lymph node yield of 17 (IQR 13–24). A systematic review of 1648 abstracts identified 13 studies from established robotic centres, totaling 4930 cases, with technical, patient, and oncological outcomes comparable to our own case series. Conclusions Outcomes from our robotic colorectal programme at a UK DGH are comparable with the largest published case series from world-renowned centres. Training and proctoring together with rolling audit must accompany the expansion of robotic surgery to safeguard outcomes.