Outcomes comparison of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic and open surgery for patients undergoing rectal cancer resection with concurrent stoma creation

Background Despite widespread adoption of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in rectal cancer resection, there remains limited knowledge of its clinical advantage over laparoscopic (Lap) and open (OS) surgery. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of RAS with Lap and OS for rectal cancer. Methods We ide...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Surgical endoscopy 2024-08, Vol.38 (8), p.4550-4558
Hauptverfasser: Goldstone, Robert N., Francone, Todd, Milky, Gediwon, Shih, I-Fan, Bossie, Hannah, Li, Yanli, Ricciardi, Rocco
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Despite widespread adoption of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in rectal cancer resection, there remains limited knowledge of its clinical advantage over laparoscopic (Lap) and open (OS) surgery. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes of RAS with Lap and OS for rectal cancer. Methods We identified all patients aged ≥ 18 years who had elective rectal cancer resection requiring temporary or permanent stoma formation from 1/2013 to 12/2020 from the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database. We completed multivariable logistic regression analysis accounting for hospital clustering to compare ileostomy formation between surgical approaches. Next, we built inverse probability of treatment-weighted analyses to compare outcomes for ileostomy and permanent colostomy separately. Outcomes included postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, discharge to home, reoperation, and 30-day readmission. Results A total of 12,787 patients (OS: 5599 [43.8%]; Lap: 2872 [22.5%]; RAS: 4316 [33.7%]) underwent elective rectal cancer resection. Compared to OS, patients who had Lap (OR 1.29, p  
ISSN:0930-2794
1432-2218
1432-2218
DOI:10.1007/s00464-024-10996-4