ArtiSential versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: a multicenter retrospective matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare outcomes of colorectal cancer surgeries performed using the newly developed articulating laparoscopic instrument, ArtiSential, with those using conventional non-articulating or rigid laparoscopic instruments.

METHODS

This multicenter, retrospective, matched cohort study enrolled patients with colorectal cancer undergoing laparoscopic surgery in seven tertiary referral hospitals from January 2021 to October 2022. A 1:1 propensity score matching was performed between the articulating (Arti-LAP) and conventional (Rigid-LAP) laparoscopic groups. The primary outcome was the overall incidence of short-term complications.

RESULTS

The study initially comprised 694 and 2008 patients in the Arti-LAP and Rigid-LAP groups, respectively. After matching, each group consisted of 694 patients, with no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics. The mean operation time was 161±32 min in Arti-LAP and 152±25 min in Rigid-LAP groups (P=0.105). Open conversion rates were 0% (0/694) in Arti-LAP and 1.0% (7/694) in Rigid-LAP groups (P=0.024). Overall morbidity rates were 9.5% (66/694) in Arti-LAP and 12.8% (89/694) in Rigid-LAP (P=0.061), with similar rates of severe morbidities. Specimen quality was acceptable in both groups. Multivariable regression analysis showed that the choice of instrument type (articulating or rigid) was not associated with perioperative morbidity. Despite a short median follow-up period of 19.5 months, no significant difference in disease-free survival was observed between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery using ArtiSential was performed safely and effectively for patients with colorectal cancer. Articulating laparoscopic instruments may offer an advantage in reducing open conversion rates.