Robot-assisted TAMIS: a systematic review of feasibility and outcomes
Background In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum, robot-assisted surgery should, theoretically, be superior due to articulated utensils, video enhancement, and tremor reduction,...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical endoscopy 2023-05, Vol.37 (5), p.3398-3409 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 3409 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 3398 |
| container_title | Surgical endoscopy |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H. Krarup, Peter-Martin Jensen, Kristian K. Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas |
| description | Background
In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum, robot-assisted surgery should, theoretically, be superior due to articulated utensils, video enhancement, and tremor reduction, however, this has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to review the evidence reported to-date on experience of using robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery for treatment of rectal neoplasms.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search of Embase and PubMed from May to August 2021were performed. Studies including patients diagnosed with rectal neoplasia or benign polyps who underwent robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery were included. All studies were assessed for risk of bias through assessment tools. Main outcome measures were feasibility, excision quality, and complications.
Results
Twenty-five studies with a total of 322 local excisions were included. The studies included were all retrospective, primarily case-reports, -series, and cohort studies. The median distance from the anal verge ranged from 3.5 to 10 cm and the median size was between 2.5 and 5.3 cm. Overall, 4.6% of the resections had a positive resection margin. The overall complication rate was at 9.5% with severe complications (Clavien–Dindo score III) at 0.9%.
Conclusion
Based on limited, retrospective data, with a high risk of bias, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery seems feasible and safe for local excisions in the rectum. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00464-022-09853-z |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9882737</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2808753828</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-cb0a65c026e2c5e4b61f1a8b6552579ceefec21039493e65e034b089ba3258273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhoMo7bX2D7iQATduoidfk8SFUErVQkVo6zpkcs_UlJlJTWYqt7_eXG-tHwtXIZznfZPDQ8hzBq8ZgH5TAGQrKXBOwRol6N0jsmJScMo5M4_JCqwAyrWV--RpKddQecvUHtkXrQYtmV2Rk_PUpZn6UmKZcd1cHn06vXjb-KZs6n30cwxNxtuI35vUNz36Ers4xHnT-GndpGUOacTyjDzp_VDw8P48IF_en1wef6Rnnz-cHh-d0SC1nGnowLcqAG-RB4Wya1nPvOlapbjSNiD2GDgDYaUV2CoEITswtvOCK8O1OCDvdr03SzfiOuA0Zz-4mxxHnzcu-ej-nkzxq7tKt86abXxb8Oq-IKdvC5bZjbEEHAY_YVqK41qD1BYMr-jLf9DrtOSprue4AaOVMNxUiu-okFMpGfuHzzBwW0tuZ8lVS-6nJXdXQy_-XOMh8ktLBcQOKHU0XWH-_fZ_an8A4m-dkQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2808753828</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Robot-assisted TAMIS: a systematic review of feasibility and outcomes</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><creator>Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H. ; Krarup, Peter-Martin ; Jensen, Kristian K. ; Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas</creator><creatorcontrib>Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H. ; Krarup, Peter-Martin ; Jensen, Kristian K. ; Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><description>Background
In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum, robot-assisted surgery should, theoretically, be superior due to articulated utensils, video enhancement, and tremor reduction, however, this has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to review the evidence reported to-date on experience of using robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery for treatment of rectal neoplasms.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search of Embase and PubMed from May to August 2021were performed. Studies including patients diagnosed with rectal neoplasia or benign polyps who underwent robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery were included. All studies were assessed for risk of bias through assessment tools. Main outcome measures were feasibility, excision quality, and complications.
Results
Twenty-five studies with a total of 322 local excisions were included. The studies included were all retrospective, primarily case-reports, -series, and cohort studies. The median distance from the anal verge ranged from 3.5 to 10 cm and the median size was between 2.5 and 5.3 cm. Overall, 4.6% of the resections had a positive resection margin. The overall complication rate was at 9.5% with severe complications (Clavien–Dindo score III) at 0.9%.
Conclusion
Based on limited, retrospective data, with a high risk of bias, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery seems feasible and safe for local excisions in the rectum.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0930-2794</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-2218</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09853-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36707419</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Abdominal Surgery ; Anal Canal - surgery ; Cohort analysis ; Colorectal cancer ; Endoscopy ; Feasibility Studies ; Gastroenterology ; Gynecology ; Hepatology ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Margins of Excision ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Polyps ; Proctology ; Rectal Neoplasms - surgery ; Rectum ; Rectum - surgery ; Retrospective Studies ; Review ; Review Article ; Robotic surgery ; Robotics ; Surgery ; Systematic review ; Transanal Endoscopic Surgery ; Treatment Outcome ; Tumors</subject><ispartof>Surgical endoscopy, 2023-05, Vol.37 (5), p.3398-3409</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023. Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><rights>2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.</rights><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2023, Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-cb0a65c026e2c5e4b61f1a8b6552579ceefec21039493e65e034b089ba3258273</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-cb0a65c026e2c5e4b61f1a8b6552579ceefec21039493e65e034b089ba3258273</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7716-0705</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00464-022-09853-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00464-022-09853-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36707419$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krarup, Peter-Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Kristian K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><title>Robot-assisted TAMIS: a systematic review of feasibility and outcomes</title><title>Surgical endoscopy</title><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><description>Background
In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum, robot-assisted surgery should, theoretically, be superior due to articulated utensils, video enhancement, and tremor reduction, however, this has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to review the evidence reported to-date on experience of using robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery for treatment of rectal neoplasms.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search of Embase and PubMed from May to August 2021were performed. Studies including patients diagnosed with rectal neoplasia or benign polyps who underwent robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery were included. All studies were assessed for risk of bias through assessment tools. Main outcome measures were feasibility, excision quality, and complications.
Results
Twenty-five studies with a total of 322 local excisions were included. The studies included were all retrospective, primarily case-reports, -series, and cohort studies. The median distance from the anal verge ranged from 3.5 to 10 cm and the median size was between 2.5 and 5.3 cm. Overall, 4.6% of the resections had a positive resection margin. The overall complication rate was at 9.5% with severe complications (Clavien–Dindo score III) at 0.9%.
Conclusion
Based on limited, retrospective data, with a high risk of bias, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery seems feasible and safe for local excisions in the rectum.</description><subject>Abdominal Surgery</subject><subject>Anal Canal - surgery</subject><subject>Cohort analysis</subject><subject>Colorectal cancer</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Feasibility Studies</subject><subject>Gastroenterology</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Hepatology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Margins of Excision</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Polyps</subject><subject>Proctology</subject><subject>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Rectum</subject><subject>Rectum - surgery</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Review Article</subject><subject>Robotic surgery</subject><subject>Robotics</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Transanal Endoscopic Surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><issn>0930-2794</issn><issn>1432-2218</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1rFTEUhoMo7bX2D7iQATduoidfk8SFUErVQkVo6zpkcs_UlJlJTWYqt7_eXG-tHwtXIZznfZPDQ8hzBq8ZgH5TAGQrKXBOwRol6N0jsmJScMo5M4_JCqwAyrWV--RpKddQecvUHtkXrQYtmV2Rk_PUpZn6UmKZcd1cHn06vXjb-KZs6n30cwxNxtuI35vUNz36Ers4xHnT-GndpGUOacTyjDzp_VDw8P48IF_en1wef6Rnnz-cHh-d0SC1nGnowLcqAG-RB4Wya1nPvOlapbjSNiD2GDgDYaUV2CoEITswtvOCK8O1OCDvdr03SzfiOuA0Zz-4mxxHnzcu-ej-nkzxq7tKt86abXxb8Oq-IKdvC5bZjbEEHAY_YVqK41qD1BYMr-jLf9DrtOSprue4AaOVMNxUiu-okFMpGfuHzzBwW0tuZ8lVS-6nJXdXQy_-XOMh8ktLBcQOKHU0XWH-_fZ_an8A4m-dkQ</recordid><startdate>20230501</startdate><enddate>20230501</enddate><creator>Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H.</creator><creator>Krarup, Peter-Martin</creator><creator>Jensen, Kristian K.</creator><creator>Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7716-0705</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230501</creationdate><title>Robot-assisted TAMIS: a systematic review of feasibility and outcomes</title><author>Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H. ; Krarup, Peter-Martin ; Jensen, Kristian K. ; Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-cb0a65c026e2c5e4b61f1a8b6552579ceefec21039493e65e034b089ba3258273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Abdominal Surgery</topic><topic>Anal Canal - surgery</topic><topic>Cohort analysis</topic><topic>Colorectal cancer</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Feasibility Studies</topic><topic>Gastroenterology</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Hepatology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Margins of Excision</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Polyps</topic><topic>Proctology</topic><topic>Rectal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Rectum</topic><topic>Rectum - surgery</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Review Article</topic><topic>Robotic surgery</topic><topic>Robotics</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Transanal Endoscopic Surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krarup, Peter-Martin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jensen, Kristian K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Surgical endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jakobsen, P. Cornelius H.</au><au>Krarup, Peter-Martin</au><au>Jensen, Kristian K.</au><au>Nordholm-Carstensen, Andreas</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Robot-assisted TAMIS: a systematic review of feasibility and outcomes</atitle><jtitle>Surgical endoscopy</jtitle><stitle>Surg Endosc</stitle><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><date>2023-05-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>3398</spage><epage>3409</epage><pages>3398-3409</pages><issn>0930-2794</issn><eissn>1432-2218</eissn><abstract>Background
In the advancement of transanal local excision, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery is the newest development. In the confined area of the rectum, robot-assisted surgery should, theoretically, be superior due to articulated utensils, video enhancement, and tremor reduction, however, this has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to review the evidence reported to-date on experience of using robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery for treatment of rectal neoplasms.
Methods
A comprehensive literature search of Embase and PubMed from May to August 2021were performed. Studies including patients diagnosed with rectal neoplasia or benign polyps who underwent robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery were included. All studies were assessed for risk of bias through assessment tools. Main outcome measures were feasibility, excision quality, and complications.
Results
Twenty-five studies with a total of 322 local excisions were included. The studies included were all retrospective, primarily case-reports, -series, and cohort studies. The median distance from the anal verge ranged from 3.5 to 10 cm and the median size was between 2.5 and 5.3 cm. Overall, 4.6% of the resections had a positive resection margin. The overall complication rate was at 9.5% with severe complications (Clavien–Dindo score III) at 0.9%.
Conclusion
Based on limited, retrospective data, with a high risk of bias, robot-assisted transanal minimal invasive surgery seems feasible and safe for local excisions in the rectum.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>36707419</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00464-022-09853-z</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7716-0705</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0930-2794 |
| ispartof | Surgical endoscopy, 2023-05, Vol.37 (5), p.3398-3409 |
| issn | 0930-2794 1432-2218 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9882737 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals |
| subjects | Abdominal Surgery Anal Canal - surgery Cohort analysis Colorectal cancer Endoscopy Feasibility Studies Gastroenterology Gynecology Hepatology Humans Laparoscopy Margins of Excision Medicine Medicine & Public Health Polyps Proctology Rectal Neoplasms - surgery Rectum Rectum - surgery Retrospective Studies Review Review Article Robotic surgery Robotics Surgery Systematic review Transanal Endoscopic Surgery Treatment Outcome Tumors |
| title | Robot-assisted TAMIS: a systematic review of feasibility and outcomes |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T06%3A23%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Robot-assisted%20TAMIS:%20a%20systematic%20review%20of%20feasibility%20and%20outcomes&rft.jtitle=Surgical%20endoscopy&rft.au=Jakobsen,%20P.%20Cornelius%20H.&rft.date=2023-05-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=3398&rft.epage=3409&rft.pages=3398-3409&rft.issn=0930-2794&rft.eissn=1432-2218&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00464-022-09853-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2808753828%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2808753828&rft_id=info:pmid/36707419&rfr_iscdi=true |