» Articles » PMID: 36976475

Lower Need for Allogeneic Blood Transfusion After Robotic Low Anterior Resection Compared with Open Low Anterior Resection: a Propensity Score-matched Analysis

Overview
Journal J Robot Surg
Publisher Springer
Date 2023 Mar 28
PMID 36976475
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Robotic low anterior resection (R-LAR) for rectal cancer may decrease estimated blood loss compared with open low anterior resection (O-LAR). The aim of this study was to compare estimated blood loss and blood transfusion within 30 days after O-LAR and R-LAR. This was a retrospective matched cohort study based on prospectively registered data from Västmanland Hospital, Sweden. The first 52 patients operated on using R-LAR for rectal cancer at Västmanland Hospital were propensity score-matched 1:2 with patients who underwent O-LAR for age, sex, ASA (American Society of Anesthesiology physical classification system), and tumor distance from the anal verge. In total, 52 patients in the R-LAR group and 104 patients in the O-LAR group were included. Estimated blood loss was significantly higher in the O-LAR group compared with R-LAR: 582.7 ml (SD ± 489.2) vs. 86.1 ml (SD ± 67.7); p < 0.001. Within 30 days after surgery, 43.3% of patients who received O-LAR and 11.5% who received R-LAR were treated with blood transfusion (p < 0.001). As a secondary post hoc finding, multivariable analysis identified O-LAR and lower pre-operative hemoglobin level as risk factors for the need of blood transfusion within 30 days after surgery. Patients who underwent R-LAR had significantly lower estimated blood loss and a need for peri- and post-operative blood transfusion compared with O-LAR. Open surgery was shown to be associated with an increased need for blood transfusion within 30 days after low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

Citing Articles

Robotic-assisted surgery for left-sided colon and rectal resections is associated with reduction in the postoperative surgical stress response and improved short-term outcomes: a cohort study.

Ingham A, Kong C, Wong T, McSorley S, McMillan D, Nicholson G Surg Endosc. 2024; 38(5):2577-2592.

PMID: 38498212 PMC: 11078791. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-10749-3.

References
1.
Simillis C, Lal N, Thoukididou S, Kontovounisios C, Smith J, Hompes R . Open Versus Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Versus Transanal Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2019; 270(1):59-68. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003227. View

2.
Huang Y, Huang Y, Wei P . Colorectal Cancer Surgery Using the Da Vinci Xi and Si Systems: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes. Surg Innov. 2018; 26(2):192-200. DOI: 10.1177/1553350618816788. View

3.
Sheng S, Zhao T, Wang X . Comparison of robot-assisted surgery, laparoscopic-assisted surgery, and open surgery for the treatment of colorectal cancer: A network meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97(34):e11817. PMC: 6112974. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011817. View

4.
Liao G, Li Y, Zhao Z, Li X, Deng H, Li G . Robotic-assisted surgery versus open surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer: the current evidence. Sci Rep. 2016; 6:26981. PMC: 4882598. DOI: 10.1038/srep26981. View

5.
Nishikawa T, Nozawa H, Kawai K, Sasaki K, Otani K, Tanaka T . Short- and Long-term Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Multivisceral Resection for Locally Advanced Colorectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018; 62(1):40-46. DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001255. View