Qing Yao

Purpose Scarce research has reported the comparison between robotic and laparoscopic surgery in mid–low rectal cancer. Therefore, this meta-analysis is aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of the two surgical approaches. Methods A comprehensive search of the databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science) was performed for studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic surgery. The outcomes of interest acquired from eight articles included three aspects: intraoperative conditions, postoperative status of patients, and complications. All data (robotic = 1350 patients, laparoscopic = 1330 patients) enrolled were analyzed using Rev Man 5.4. Results Compared to the laparoscopic group, the robotic group indicated a noticeable superiority in estimated blood loss (P < 0.0001), number of lymph nodes dissected (P = 0.004), time to first flatus (P = 0.001), time to first fluid diet (P = 0.001), hospital stay (P < 0.0001), conversion (P = 0.009), and urinary retention (P = 0.0006), but devoted much more operation time (P = 0.0004). Conclusion Robotic surgery was associated with superiority over laparoscopic surgery in increasing surgical safety, accelerating postoperative recovery, and reducing complications, which suggested that robotic surgery could be a safe and effective method for treating mid–low rectal cancer.

Background The feasibility and effectiveness of selecting an intracorporeal or extracorporeal technique in left hemicolectomy remain poorly understood. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the difference between the two approaches regarding intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Methods A thorough exploration of online databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science) was executed to identify randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and case control studies. The outcomes contained four aspects: intraoperative outcomes, postoperative complications, postoperative patient conditions, and postoperative outcomes. All of these data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4. Seven retrospective control trials (intracorporeal, 396 patients; extracorporeal, 426 patients) were evaluated. Results Compared to the extracorporeal group, the intracorporeal group demonstrated superiority in incision length (P = 0.005), overall complications (P = 0.01), time to first flatus (P < 0.001), time to first stool (P = 0.005), time to first diet (P < 0.001) and hospital stay duration (P = 0.001). Conclusions The intracorporeal technique is associated with superiority over the extracorporeal technique in reducing postoperative complications, promoting postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function, and reducing hospital stay duration.

Scarce research has been performed to assess the safety and efficacy of anastomosis technique on robotic-assisted sigmoidectomy. This study was designed to evaluate the difference between intracorporeal and extracorporeal techniques during robotic-assisted sigmoidectomy. Clinical data of 193 cases who received robotic-assisted sigmoidectomy were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Only 116 cases were available for analysis (intracorporeal group = 58 and extracorporeal group = 58) after propensity score matching. Independent sample t test was conducted to evaluate the continuous variables. Moreover, the statistical significance of categorical variables was tested using Chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests. Statistical analysis showed that the intracorporeal group demonstrated greater superiorities in pain scale on the first and second postoperative day (P < 0.05), time of catheter indwelling (P = 0.009), and length of hospital stay (P = 0.019). Additionally, the intracorporeal technique contributed to fewer complications including urinary retention (P = 0.027) and hernia (P = 0.037) than the extracorporeal group. Our analysis revealed that intracorporeal technique was safe and feasible due to the shorter time of catheter indwelling and length of hospital stay and fewer post-operation complications.

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the four most common cancers in the world. At present, human beings have stepped into an aging society, and the number of over eighties colorectal cancer patients has increased year by year. However, few high-quality studies focused on the post-operation complications and long-term outcomes of octogenarian patients with colorectal cancer. This meta-analysis, based on published studies, aims to assess the safety of treating octogenarian CRC patients with surgery. Methods Databases, including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched until July 2022. The incidence of preoperative comorbidities, postoperative complications, and mortality was assessed using odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Furthermore, the hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were applied for survival outcomes. Results A total of 13,790 patients with CRC in 21 studies were included. Our results demonstrated that octogenarian patients were associated with a higher burden of comorbidities (OR = 3.03; 95% CI: 2.03, 4.53; P = .000), high incidences of overall postoperative complications (OR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.29, 2.06; P = .000), high internal medicine postoperative complications (OR = 2.38; 95% CI: 1.76, 3.21; P = .000), high in-hospital mortality (OR = 4.01; 95% CI: 3.06, 5.27; P = .000) and poor overall survival (OR = 2.13; 95% CI: 1.78, 2.55; P = .000). But there is no statistical difference in surgery-related postoperative complications(OR = 1.16; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.43; P = .16) and DFS (OR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.83, 1.29; P = .775). Conclusions Extremely elderly patients with colorectal cancer have the high burden of comorbidities, high postoperative complications and mortality. However, survival outcomes (DFS) in patients 80 years and older are similar to younger patients. Clinicians should administer individualized treatment for such patients. Physiologic age rather than chronological age should determine cancer management for each individual.