Cargando…

Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment

BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), as a new star of minimally invasive techniques, has been increasingly favored and promoted in the field of surgery around the world. Most previous studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic NOSES and conventional laparoscopic sur...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Houqiong, Ju, Ziwen, Wan, Chonghan, Zhong, Penghui, He, Hongxin, Yu, Weijie, Lu, Dongning, Liu, Taiyuan, Li
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9978825/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36874472
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1092128
_version_ 1784899603965935616
author Houqiong, Ju
Ziwen, Wan
Chonghan, Zhong
Penghui, He
Hongxin, Yu
Weijie, Lu
Dongning, Liu
Taiyuan, Li
author_facet Houqiong, Ju
Ziwen, Wan
Chonghan, Zhong
Penghui, He
Hongxin, Yu
Weijie, Lu
Dongning, Liu
Taiyuan, Li
author_sort Houqiong, Ju
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), as a new star of minimally invasive techniques, has been increasingly favored and promoted in the field of surgery around the world. Most previous studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic NOSES and conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, there is little research on comparing robotic colorectal cancer NOSES with conventional robotic-assisted colorectal cancer resection surgery. PARTICIPANT AND METHODS: This study is a retrospective study of propensity score matching (PSM). This study included Ninety-one propensity score-matched pairs of the participant who had undergone robotic colorectal cancer resection surgery at our center between January 2017 and December 2020. The covariates used in the propensity score included gender, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumor diameter, the tumor's height from the anal verge, histological differentiation, AJCC stage, T stage, N stage, and history of previous abdominal surgery. The outcome measurement criteria included postoperative complications, inflammatory response, pelvic floor function, anal function, cosmetic outcome, quality of life, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The robotic NOSES group had faster recovery time from gastrointestinal function (P = 0.014), shorter abdominal incision length (P < 0.001), less pain (P < 0.001), less additional analgesia required (P < 0.001), and lower postoperative indicators of white blood cell count (P < 0.001) and C-reactive protein content compared to the robotic-assisted resection surgery (RARS) group (P = 0.035). Additionally, the robotic NOSES group had significantly better body imagery (P < 0.001), cosmetic scores (P < 0.001), somatic function (P = 0.003), role function (P = 0.039), emotional function (P = 0.001), social function (P = 0.004), and overall function (P < 0.001) than the RARS group. The two groups demonstrated no significant difference between DFS and OS. CONCLUSION: Robotic colorectal cancer NOSES is a safe and feasible minimally invasive procedure and offers shorter abdominal incisions, less pain, less surgical stress response, and better postoperative quality of life. Therefore, this technique can be further promoted for colorectal cancer patients eligible for NOSES.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9978825
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99788252023-03-03 Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment Houqiong, Ju Ziwen, Wan Chonghan, Zhong Penghui, He Hongxin, Yu Weijie, Lu Dongning, Liu Taiyuan, Li Front Surg Surgery BACKGROUND: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), as a new star of minimally invasive techniques, has been increasingly favored and promoted in the field of surgery around the world. Most previous studies were comparative studies of laparoscopic NOSES and conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, there is little research on comparing robotic colorectal cancer NOSES with conventional robotic-assisted colorectal cancer resection surgery. PARTICIPANT AND METHODS: This study is a retrospective study of propensity score matching (PSM). This study included Ninety-one propensity score-matched pairs of the participant who had undergone robotic colorectal cancer resection surgery at our center between January 2017 and December 2020. The covariates used in the propensity score included gender, age, BMI, ASA score, maximum tumor diameter, the tumor's height from the anal verge, histological differentiation, AJCC stage, T stage, N stage, and history of previous abdominal surgery. The outcome measurement criteria included postoperative complications, inflammatory response, pelvic floor function, anal function, cosmetic outcome, quality of life, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The robotic NOSES group had faster recovery time from gastrointestinal function (P = 0.014), shorter abdominal incision length (P < 0.001), less pain (P < 0.001), less additional analgesia required (P < 0.001), and lower postoperative indicators of white blood cell count (P < 0.001) and C-reactive protein content compared to the robotic-assisted resection surgery (RARS) group (P = 0.035). Additionally, the robotic NOSES group had significantly better body imagery (P < 0.001), cosmetic scores (P < 0.001), somatic function (P = 0.003), role function (P = 0.039), emotional function (P = 0.001), social function (P = 0.004), and overall function (P < 0.001) than the RARS group. The two groups demonstrated no significant difference between DFS and OS. CONCLUSION: Robotic colorectal cancer NOSES is a safe and feasible minimally invasive procedure and offers shorter abdominal incisions, less pain, less surgical stress response, and better postoperative quality of life. Therefore, this technique can be further promoted for colorectal cancer patients eligible for NOSES. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-02-16 /pmc/articles/PMC9978825/ /pubmed/36874472 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1092128 Text en © 2023 Houqiong, Ziwen, Chonghan, Penghui, Hongxin, Weijie, Dongning and Taiyuan. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Houqiong, Ju
Ziwen, Wan
Chonghan, Zhong
Penghui, He
Hongxin, Yu
Weijie, Lu
Dongning, Liu
Taiyuan, Li
Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
title Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
title_full Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
title_fullStr Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
title_short Comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
title_sort comparison of transabdominal wall specimen retrieval and natural orifice specimen extraction robotic surgery in the outcome of colorectal cancer treatment
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9978825/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36874472
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1092128
work_keys_str_mv AT houqiongju comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment
AT ziwenwan comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment
AT chonghanzhong comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment
AT penghuihe comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment
AT hongxinyu comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment
AT weijielu comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment
AT dongningliu comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment
AT taiyuanli comparisonoftransabdominalwallspecimenretrievalandnaturalorificespecimenextractionroboticsurgeryintheoutcomeofcolorectalcancertreatment