This multicentre cohort analysis compares oncological outcomes in rectal cancer patients, indicating robot-assisted methods may ensure quality in excision.
Aims Total mesorectal excision is the standard surgical treatment for rectal cancer surgery, with both laparoscopic and robot-assisted approaches frequently utilised. Although robot-assisted surgery may offer technical advantages, data comparing the long-term outcomes of these techniques is limited, especially in Western populations. This study aimed to compare the long-term oncological outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Methods This retrospective, multicentre, international cohort study included 1077 rectal cancer patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robot-assisted total mesorectal excision between 2014 and 2021, with at least three years of follow-up. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was applied to minimize confounding. The primary outcomes were three-year oncological endpoints, including disease-free survival, overall survival, local recurrence, and systemic recurrence. Results After weighting, 435.8 laparoscopic and 637.4 robot-assisted cases were analysed. Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision was associated with improved mesorectal excision quality (76.5% vs. 87.5%, p<0.001), but no significant differences were observed in circumferential resection margin positivity, conversion rates, or postoperative complications. Additionally, there were no significant differences in three-year disease-free survival (75.1% vs 75.2%, HR 1.04, CI 0.80-1.34), overall survival (81.6% vs 81.7%, HR 1.14, CI 0.80-1.61), local recurrence (3.7% vs 3.0%, HR 0.89, CI 0.45-1.80), or systemic recurrence (15.1% vs 15.3%, HR 0.97, CI 0.69-1.34). Conclusion Robot-assisted surgery offers a safe, minimally invasive alternative to laparoscopic surgery, providing comparable three-year oncological outcomes. These findings support its continued use as a viable option for rectal cancer surgery, especially in centres with expertise in robotic techniques.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geitenbeek et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: