Textbook Oncological Outcomes for Robotic Colorectal Cancer Resections: An Observational Study of Five Robotic Colorectal Units

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The quality of care of patients receiving colorectal resections has conventionally relied on individual metrics. When discussing with patients what these outcomes mean, they often find them confusing or overwhelming. Textbook outcomes are a composite measure that summarises all the ‘desirable’ clinical and oncological outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the incidence of textbook outcomes in patients receiving robotic colorectal cancer surgery. We present a retrospective, multicentric study with data from a prospectively collected database. A textbook outcome was achieved when all components were realized: no conversion to open, no complication with a Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3, length of hospital stay ≤ 14, no 30-day readmission, no 30-day mortality, and R0 resection. Nearly 80% of patients achieved a textbook outcome, and abdominoperineal resection was a risk factor for failure. The rate of a textbook outcome may be used in future audits and to inform patients clearly on the success of treatment. ABSTRACT: Background: The quality of care of patients receiving colorectal resections has conventionally relied on individual metrics. When discussing with patients what these outcomes mean, they often find them confusing or overwhelming. Textbook oncological outcome (TOO) is a composite measure that summarises all the ‘desirable’ or ‘ideal’ postoperative clinical and oncological outcomes from both a patient’s and doctor’s point of view. This study aims to evaluate the incidence of TOO in patients receiving robotic colorectal cancer surgery in five robotic colorectal units and understand the risk factors associated with failure to achieve a TOO in these patients. Methods: We present a retrospective, multicentric study with data from a prospectively collected database. All consecutive patients receiving robotic colorectal cancer resections from five centres between 2013 and 2022 were included. Patient characteristics and short-term clinical and oncological data were collected. A TOO was achieved when all components were realized—no conversion to open, no complication with a Clavien–Dindo (CD) ≥ 3, length of hospital stay ≤ 14, no 30-day readmission, no 30-day mortality, and R0 resection. The main outcome measure was a composite measure of “ideal” practice called textbook oncological outcomes. Results: A total of 501 patients submitted to robotic colorectal cancer resection were included. Of the 501 patients included, 388 (77.4%) achieved a TOO. Four patients were converted to open (0.8%); 55 (11%) had LOS > 14 days; 46 (9.2%) had a CD ≥ 3 complication; 30-day readmission rate was 6% (30); 30-day mortality was 0.2% (1); and 480 (95.8%) had an R0 resection. Abdominoperineal resection was a risk factor for not achieving a TOO. Conclusions: Robotic colorectal cancer surgery in robotic centres achieves a high TOO rate. Abdominoperineal resection is a risk factor for failure to achieve a TOO. This measure may be used in future audits and to inform patients clearly on success of treatment.