Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, No. 17, YongWaiZheng Street, Nanchang, 330000, China.
Medical College of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330000, China.
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 30;10(1):12848. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-69830-1.
Robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction is a recently developed minimally invasive surgery used in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. However, its safety and feasibility remain undiscussed and controversial. This study reported the clinical outcomes and prognostic factors pertaining to traditional robotic assisted rectal cancer resection alone against that of robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction to provide a discussion on this issue. 49 patients who underwent robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction and 49 matched patients who underwent conventional robotic assisted rectal cancer resection were systematically analyzed in this study. Regarding the baseline characteristics, after matching, no significant differences were observed between the natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) group and the robotic assisted rectal cancer resection (RARC) group. Patients in the NOSE group had a reduced visual analog scale (p < 0.001), passed flatus more quickly (p = 0.002) and suffered less surgical stress than those in the RARC group. Moreover, 4 complications were observed in the NOSE group and 7 complications in the RARC group with no significant difference (p = 0.337) in terms of complications. The two groups had a similar survival outcomes, where the 3-year overall survival (p = 0.738) and 3-year progression-free survival (p = 0.986) were all comparable between the two groups. Histological differentiation and T stage could be regarded as independent prognostic factors for 3-year overall survival and 3-year progression-free survival. Robotic rectal cancer resection with natural orifice extraction is a safe and feasible minimally invasive surgery for patients suffering from rectal cancer as it encompasses considerable several advantages. Histological differentiation and T stage may serve as independent prognostic factors for 3-year overall survival and 3-year progression-free survival.
经自然腔道取标本的机器人直肠癌切除术是一种最近发展起来的微创治疗直肠癌的方法。然而,其安全性和可行性仍存在争议。本研究报道了单纯传统机器人辅助直肠癌切除术与经自然腔道取标本的机器人直肠癌切除术的临床结果和预后因素,以期对此问题进行讨论。本研究系统分析了 49 例行经自然腔道取标本的机器人直肠癌切除术和 49 例匹配的接受传统机器人辅助直肠癌切除术的患者。在基线特征方面,匹配后,经自然腔道取标本组(NOSE 组)与机器人辅助直肠癌切除术组(RARC 组)之间无显著差异。NOSE 组患者的视觉模拟评分(VAS)降低(p<0.001),排气时间更早(p=0.002),手术应激更小。此外,NOSE 组有 4 例并发症,RARC 组有 7 例并发症,两组并发症发生率无显著差异(p=0.337)。两组患者的生存结果相似,3 年总生存率(p=0.738)和 3 年无进展生存率(p=0.986)均无显著差异。组织学分化和 T 分期可视为 3 年总生存率和 3 年无进展生存率的独立预后因素。经自然腔道取标本的机器人直肠癌切除术是一种安全可行的微创治疗直肠癌的方法,具有许多优势。组织学分化和 T 分期可能是 3 年总生存率和 3 年无进展生存率的独立预后因素。