Search

Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Purpose: Improved long-term survival after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer highlights the importance of functional outcome. Urogenital and anorectal dysfunction is frequently reported after conventional LAR. Advanced minimally invasive techniques such as robotic (RoTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) might improve functional results by precisely dissecting and preserving autonomic nerves. We compared functional outcomes after RoTME or TaTME in a multicenter study., Methods: One hundred twenty patients (55 RoTME/65 TaTME) were prospectively included in four participating centers. Anorectal (Wexner and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) Score), urinary (International Consultation on Incontinence-Male/Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Score (ICIQ-MLUTS/ICIQ-FLUTS) and International Prostate Symptom Scale (IPSS)), and sexual (International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI)) outcomes at 12 months after surgery were compared to preoperative scores. The response rate to the 1-year postoperative functional assessment by questionnaire was 79.5%., Results: RoTME enabled better anorectal function compared to TaTME (LARS score 4.3 ± 2.2 vs. 9.8 ± 1.5, p = 0.038, respectively). TaTME proved superior at preserving male urinary function, while female urinary function was comparable in both groups, with only mild postoperative impairment (RoTME vs. TaTME, respectively: ICIQ-MLUTS 13.8 ± 4.9 vs. 1.8 ± 5.8, p = 0.038; ICIQ-FLUTS Incontinence Score - 0.3 ± 1.0 vs. - 0.2 ± 0.9, p = 0.844). Both techniques demonstrated comparable male (RoTME - 13.4 ± 2.7 vs. TaTME - 11.7 ± 3.4, p = 0.615) and female (RoTME 5.2 ± 4.6 vs. TaTME 10.5 ± 6.4, p = 0.254) sexual function., Conclusion: After adjustment for risk factors, RoTME provided better anorectal functional results, whereas TaTME was better at preserving male urinary function. Overall, both techniques demonstrated only mild postoperative functional impairment., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Improving survival rates in rectal cancer patients has generated a growing interest in functional outcomes after total mesorectal excision (TME). The well-established low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score assesses postoperative anorectal impairment after TME. Our meta-analysis is the first to compare bowel function after open, laparoscopic, transanal, and robotic TME., Methods: All studies reporting functional outcomes after rectal cancer surgery (LARS score) were included, and were compared with a consecutive series of robotic TME (n = 48)., Results: Thirty-two publications were identified, including 5 565 patients. Anorectal function recovered significantly better within one year after robotic TME (3.8 [95%CI -9.709-17.309]) versus laparoscopic TME (26.4 [95%CI 19.524-33.286]), p = 0.006), open TME (26.0 [95%CI 24.338-29.702], p = 0.002) and transanal TME (27.9 [95%CI 22.127-33.669], p = 0.003)., Conclusions: Robotic TME enables better recovery of anorectal function compared to other techniques. Further prospective, high-quality studies are needed to confirm the benefits of robotic surgery., (© 2021 The Authors. The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Several patients' and pathological characteristics in rectal surgery can significantly complicate surgical loco regional tumor clearance. The main factors are obesity, short tumor distance from anal verge, bulky tumors, and narrow pelvis, which have been shown to be associated to poor surgical results in open and laparoscopic approaches. Minimally invasive surgery has the potential to reduce perioperative morbidity with equivalent short- and long-term oncological outcomes compared to conventional open approach. Achilles' heel of laparoscopic approaches is conversion to open surgery. High risk for conversion is evident for patients with bulky and low tumors as well as male gender and narrow pelvis. Hence, patient's characteristics represent challenges in rectal cancer surgery especially in minimally invasive approaches. The available surgical techniques increased remarkably with recently developed and implemented improvements of minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery. The controversial discussions about sense and purpose of these novel approaches are still ongoing in the literature. Herein, we evaluate, if latest technical advances like transanal approach or robotic assisted surgery have the potential to overcome known challenges and pitfalls in rectal cancer surgery in demanding surgical cases and highlight the role of current minimally invasive approaches in rectal cancer surgery., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)