What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate and compare 3-year locoregional recurrence rates following robotic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in patients with middle and low rectal cancer.

June 2, 2025JAMAOpen Access

Robotic vs Laparoscopic Surgery for Middle and Low Rectal Cancer

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

QFQingyang FengSun Yat-sen University WYWeitang YuanCentral South University TLTaiyuan LiNanchang University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Randomized superiority trial shows reduced 3-year recurrence with robotic surgery in rectal cancer, indicating improved long-term oncological outcomes.

Key Points

To evaluate and compare 3-year locoregional recurrence rates following robotic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in patients with middle and low rectal cancer.
Multicenter, superiority, randomized clinical trial (NCT02817126) conducted across 11 centers in China between July 2016 and December 2020.
A total of 1,240 eligible patients with middle or low rectal adenocarcinoma (cT1-T3, N0-N1, or ycT1-T3 Nx) were randomized 1:1 to robotic or laparoscopic resection.
Primary analysis included 1,171 patients (586 robotic, 585 laparoscopic) with a median follow-up of 43.0 months (IQR, 36.7-60.0 months).
The 3-year locoregional recurrence rate was 1.6% (95% CI, 0.6%-2.6%) in the robotic group versus 4.0% (95% CI, 2.4%-5.6%) in the laparoscopic group (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.22-0.92; log-rank P = .03; adjusted HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.19-0.80).
The 3-year disease-free survival rate was higher with robotic surgery at 87.2% versus 83.4% for laparoscopy (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.98; log-rank P = .04; adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.89), while 3-year overall survival did not differ significantly (94.7% vs 93.0%).
Patients receiving robotic surgery showed superior recovery of urinary, defecation, and sexual functions during early postoperative follow-up intervals.

Cite This Study

Feng et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a841f2b25efb1e71e83db71 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.8123

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

June 2, 2025JAMAOpen Access

Robotic vs Laparoscopic Surgery for Middle and Low Rectal Cancer

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

QFQingyang FengSun Yat-sen University WYWeitang YuanCentral South University TLTaiyuan LiNanchang University

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Randomized superiority trial shows reduced 3-year recurrence with robotic surgery in rectal cancer, indicating improved long-term oncological outcomes.

Key Points

To evaluate and compare 3-year locoregional recurrence rates following robotic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in patients with middle and low rectal cancer.
Multicenter, superiority, randomized clinical trial (NCT02817126) conducted across 11 centers in China between July 2016 and December 2020.
A total of 1,240 eligible patients with middle or low rectal adenocarcinoma (cT1-T3, N0-N1, or ycT1-T3 Nx) were randomized 1:1 to robotic or laparoscopic resection.
Primary analysis included 1,171 patients (586 robotic, 585 laparoscopic) with a median follow-up of 43.0 months (IQR, 36.7-60.0 months).
The 3-year locoregional recurrence rate was 1.6% (95% CI, 0.6%-2.6%) in the robotic group versus 4.0% (95% CI, 2.4%-5.6%) in the laparoscopic group (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.22-0.92; log-rank P = .03; adjusted HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.19-0.80).
The 3-year disease-free survival rate was higher with robotic surgery at 87.2% versus 83.4% for laparoscopy (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56-0.98; log-rank P = .04; adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.89), while 3-year overall survival did not differ significantly (94.7% vs 93.0%).
Patients receiving robotic surgery showed superior recovery of urinary, defecation, and sexual functions during early postoperative follow-up intervals.

Cite This Study

Feng et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a841f2b25efb1e71e83db71 https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.8123

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark