However, concerns remain about the applicability of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer (the last 15 cm of the bowel, within the pelvis) following a randomised control trial comparison of laparoscopic vs
conventional open surgery reporting that the laparoscopic group had a higher positive rate of involvement of the resection margin.
Not exact matches
The researchers found that there were no statistically significant differences in the rates of conversion to
open laparotomy for robotic - assisted laparoscopic
surgery compared with
conventional laparoscopic
surgery (8.1 percent vs 12.2 percent, respectively), and there were no statistically significant differences in complication rates or quality of life at six months.
Effect of robotic - assisted vs
conventional laparoscopic
surgery on risk of conversion to
open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial.
In this study, to our knowledge the largest randomized clinical trial of robotic - assisted laparoscopic
surgery for patients with rectal adenocarcinoma suitable for curative resection, there were no statistically significant differences in the rates of conversion to
open laparotomy for robotic - assisted laparoscopic
surgery compared with
conventional laparoscopic
surgery (8.1 % vs 12.2 %, respectively), and there were no statistically significant differences in CRM +, complication rates, or quality of life at 6 months.
There is insufficient evidence to conclude that robotic - assisted laparoscopic
surgery, compared with
conventional laparoscopic
surgery, reduces the risk of conversion to
open laparotomy when performed by surgeons of varying experience with robotic - assisted
surgery.