Evaluating minimally invasive surgery for patients with rectal cancer

This study investigated the effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery in rectal cancer. Researchers suggested that less invasive surgery methods can result in better short-term outcomes in appropriately selected patients.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the US. Rectal cancer comprises around 20% of these cases. The standard treatment for this condition is conventional surgery. However, it is a challenging procedure since surgeons perform in a narrow space with limited eyesight.

Laparoscopic surgery (LS) is a less invasive option that gained popularity and is being regularly performed. It consists of inserting a tube with a camera through a small body opening to remove the tumor. It is associated with faster recovery and fewer side effects. However, it presents limitations to the surgeon such as loss of 3-dimensional vision.

The robotic surgery (RS) was introduced to overcome the limitations associated with the LS method. It consists in the use of robotic hands to perform the surgery. It is associated with increased precision in removing the tumor from the narrow pelvic area.

Prior studies have reported the improved outcomes associated with less invasive surgery methods. However, the evidence is mixed, with some studies reporting contradictory results.

This study included information about patients with rectal cancer. 4471 procedures were performed. These patients received either open surgery (42.72%), LS (20.99%), or RS (16.79%). 19.51% of patients had a combination of open and LS.

RS was associated with the shortest length of hospital stay. LS and RS were associated with a decreased risk of overall complications when compared to open surgery. No difference in the risk of serious complications was observed in the lower anterior surgery.

This study concluded that less invasive surgery methods can result in better short-term outcomes in patients with rectal cancer.

This study was based on medical records. Some information might have been incomplete. This might affect the results.