Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision

[Objectives] To compare the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (RoTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) in the treatment of low rectal cancer. [Methods] A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 58 patients with low rectal cancer admitted...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zhang Cheng, Duan Fuxiao, Li Da, Gao Guangrong, Ma Rui
Format: Article
Language:zho
Published: Editorial Office of Journal of Colorectal & Anal Surgery 2024-06-01
Series:结直肠肛门外科
Subjects:
Online Access:https://jcas.gxmuyfy.cn/cn/wqll/paper.html?id=271&cateName=2024%E5%B9%B4%20%E7%AC%AC30%E5%8D%B7%20%E7%AC%AC3%E6%9C%9F
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849322717554147328
author Zhang Cheng
Duan Fuxiao
Li Da
Gao Guangrong
Ma Rui
author_facet Zhang Cheng
Duan Fuxiao
Li Da
Gao Guangrong
Ma Rui
author_sort Zhang Cheng
collection DOAJ
description [Objectives] To compare the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (RoTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) in the treatment of low rectal cancer. [Methods] A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 58 patients with low rectal cancer admitted to the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army from January 2021 to June 2023. Based on the surgical approach, patients were divided into the RoTME group (n=27) and the taTME group (n=31). Oncologic indicators, safety indicators, and anal and urinary function indicators were compared between the two groups. [Results] The distance of the distal resection margin was significantly closer in the taTME group compared to the RoTME group (P<0.001). High-quality mesorectal excision was achieved in 29 cases (93.5%) in the taTME group and all 27 cases in the RoTME group, with no statistically significant difference (P=0.494). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of maximum tumor diameter, number of lymph nodes dissected, and pathological tumor node metastasis stage (P>0.05). All surgeries were completed without conversion to open surgery or intraoperative blood transfusion. Postoperative complications occurred in 6 patients, with 4 Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅱ complications in the taTME group and 2 in the RoTME group, showing no statistically significant difference in complication rates (P>0.05). Ten patients (37.0%) in the RoTME group underwent prophylactic end ileostomy. No significant differences were found in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital stay between the two groups (P>0.05). The postoperative Wexner incontinence score, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) scores, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) in the RoTME group were higher than those in the taTME group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The score of the International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire on Male/Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Scale (ICIQ-MLUTS/FLUTS) for males in the RoTME group was higher than that in the taTME group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference (P>0.05) in the scores of the ICIQ Scale between the two groups of women after surgery. [Conclusion] Both RoTME and taTME are safe and effective surgical options for low rectal cancer. taTME provides a more precise determination of the distal resection margin and may better preserve male urinary function, but it has a greater impact on postoperative anal function.
format Article
id doaj-art-7bac42edd6fa4451828cf1104e7356df
institution Kabale University
issn 1674-0491
language zho
publishDate 2024-06-01
publisher Editorial Office of Journal of Colorectal & Anal Surgery
record_format Article
series 结直肠肛门外科
spelling doaj-art-7bac42edd6fa4451828cf1104e7356df2025-08-20T03:49:17ZzhoEditorial Office of Journal of Colorectal & Anal Surgery结直肠肛门外科1674-04912024-06-0130329229710.19668/j.cnki.issn1674-0491.2024.03.009Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excisionZhang Cheng0Duan Fuxiao1Li Da2Gao Guangrong3Ma Rui4Department of General Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, Shenyang 110016, Liaoning, ChinaDepartment of General Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, Shenyang 110016, Liaoning, ChinaDepartment of General Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, Shenyang 110016, Liaoning, ChinaDepartment of General Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, Shenyang 110016, Liaoning, ChinaDepartment of General Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command of the Chinese People's Liberation Army, Shenyang 110016, Liaoning, China[Objectives] To compare the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (RoTME) and transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) in the treatment of low rectal cancer. [Methods] A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 58 patients with low rectal cancer admitted to the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army from January 2021 to June 2023. Based on the surgical approach, patients were divided into the RoTME group (n=27) and the taTME group (n=31). Oncologic indicators, safety indicators, and anal and urinary function indicators were compared between the two groups. [Results] The distance of the distal resection margin was significantly closer in the taTME group compared to the RoTME group (P<0.001). High-quality mesorectal excision was achieved in 29 cases (93.5%) in the taTME group and all 27 cases in the RoTME group, with no statistically significant difference (P=0.494). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of maximum tumor diameter, number of lymph nodes dissected, and pathological tumor node metastasis stage (P>0.05). All surgeries were completed without conversion to open surgery or intraoperative blood transfusion. Postoperative complications occurred in 6 patients, with 4 Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅱ complications in the taTME group and 2 in the RoTME group, showing no statistically significant difference in complication rates (P>0.05). Ten patients (37.0%) in the RoTME group underwent prophylactic end ileostomy. No significant differences were found in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital stay between the two groups (P>0.05). The postoperative Wexner incontinence score, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) scores, and International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) in the RoTME group were higher than those in the taTME group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The score of the International Consultation on Incontinence Modular Questionnaire on Male/Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Scale (ICIQ-MLUTS/FLUTS) for males in the RoTME group was higher than that in the taTME group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference (P>0.05) in the scores of the ICIQ Scale between the two groups of women after surgery. [Conclusion] Both RoTME and taTME are safe and effective surgical options for low rectal cancer. taTME provides a more precise determination of the distal resection margin and may better preserve male urinary function, but it has a greater impact on postoperative anal function.https://jcas.gxmuyfy.cn/cn/wqll/paper.html?id=271&cateName=2024%E5%B9%B4%20%E7%AC%AC30%E5%8D%B7%20%E7%AC%AC3%E6%9C%9Frectal cancerrobot-assisted total mesorectal excisiontransanal total mesorectal excision
spellingShingle Zhang Cheng
Duan Fuxiao
Li Da
Gao Guangrong
Ma Rui
Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision
结直肠肛门外科
rectal cancer
robot-assisted total mesorectal excision
transanal total mesorectal excision
title Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision
title_full Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision
title_fullStr Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision
title_short Comparison of the clinical effects of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision
title_sort comparison of the clinical effects of robot assisted total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision
topic rectal cancer
robot-assisted total mesorectal excision
transanal total mesorectal excision
url https://jcas.gxmuyfy.cn/cn/wqll/paper.html?id=271&cateName=2024%E5%B9%B4%20%E7%AC%AC30%E5%8D%B7%20%E7%AC%AC3%E6%9C%9F
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangcheng comparisonoftheclinicaleffectsofrobotassistedtotalmesorectalexcisionandtransanaltotalmesorectalexcision
AT duanfuxiao comparisonoftheclinicaleffectsofrobotassistedtotalmesorectalexcisionandtransanaltotalmesorectalexcision
AT lida comparisonoftheclinicaleffectsofrobotassistedtotalmesorectalexcisionandtransanaltotalmesorectalexcision
AT gaoguangrong comparisonoftheclinicaleffectsofrobotassistedtotalmesorectalexcisionandtransanaltotalmesorectalexcision
AT marui comparisonoftheclinicaleffectsofrobotassistedtotalmesorectalexcisionandtransanaltotalmesorectalexcision