Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (17)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = robotic TME

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
20 pages, 580 KiB  
Systematic Review
Guidance on the Surgical Management of Rectal Cancer: An Umbrella Review
by Ionut Negoi
Life 2025, 15(6), 955; https://doi.org/10.3390/life15060955 - 13 Jun 2025
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 777
Abstract
This umbrella review synthesizes international guidelines on the surgical management of rectal cancer to provide unified recommendations tailored to local healthcare organizations. This review emphasizes the importance of surgical centralization in high-volume centers, which maximizes outcomes, reduces morbidity, and increases survival rates. Minimally [...] Read more.
This umbrella review synthesizes international guidelines on the surgical management of rectal cancer to provide unified recommendations tailored to local healthcare organizations. This review emphasizes the importance of surgical centralization in high-volume centers, which maximizes outcomes, reduces morbidity, and increases survival rates. Minimally invasive approaches, such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery, are highlighted for their perioperative benefits, although careful patient selection and surgical expertise are required. Mechanical bowel preparation combined with oral antibiotics is recommended to effectively reduce complications, including surgical site infections and anastomotic leakage. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocols have been shown to significantly improve postoperative recovery and reduce hospital stay duration. Comprehensive perioperative care, including venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and infection control, is essential for optimal patient outcomes. This review underscores the need for structured training, certification, and regular audits for advanced techniques such as robotic surgery and transanal total mesorectal excision. Implementation of a national database is recommended to support ongoing improvements in rectal cancer surgery. This review centralizes evidence-based recommendations to guide surgical decision-making and harmonize the multidisciplinary care for patients with rectal cancer. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 2723 KiB  
Article
Combined TaTME with SP Robot for Low Anterior Resection in Rectal Cancer: rSPa TaTME
by Nouran O. Keshk, Mauricio E. Perez-Pachon, Ibrahim Gomaa, Sara Aboelmaaty, David W. Larson, Kristen K. Rumer and Sherief F. Shawki
Cancers 2025, 17(8), 1328; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17081328 - 15 Apr 2025
Viewed by 591
Abstract
Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) remains the gold standard for the resection of rectal cancer regardless of the modality: open, laparoscopic, or robotic. The transanal TME (TaTME) approach has been utilized to overcome the difficulties encountered with the dissection of tumors in [...] Read more.
Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) remains the gold standard for the resection of rectal cancer regardless of the modality: open, laparoscopic, or robotic. The transanal TME (TaTME) approach has been utilized to overcome the difficulties encountered with the dissection of tumors in the distal pelvis. Recently, a single-port robotic approach (rSPa) was introduced, where three arms and a camera emanate from a 2.5 cm diameter port. This report presents the first experience in the United States combining those two approaches (rSPa TaTME) in rectal cancer, evaluating its safety and oncologic outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective review of our prospectively maintained rectal cancer database. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, neoadjuvant treatment, and oncologic and surgical outcomes were recorded. Results: Between May 2022 and August 2024, ten patients (six females, four males) with a median age at surgery of 53 years (range: 38–85) and a mean BMI of 26 (±5) kg/m2 were included for analysis. The median distance of tumors from the anorectal junction was 3.2 cm (range: 2–5.3 cm). All patients had negative margins, with eight complete TME specimens, one near complete, and one incomplete. The mean number of lymph nodes harvested was 24 (±11). The average operative time was 351 (243–411) min. The average length of stay was four days. The ileostomy was reversed in nine out of ten patients. Six patients experienced complications within 30 days of surgery. There were no local or distal recurrences, with a mean follow-up of 20 months (range: 4–30). Conclusions: rSPa TaTME is a unique and innovative method of combining two minimally advanced approaches for the resection of distal rectal cancers, with acceptable surgical and oncologic outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotic Surgery for Gastrointestinal (GI) Malignancies)
Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 1222 KiB  
Article
An International Multicentre Retrospective Cohort Study Evaluating Robot-Assisted Total Mesorectal Excision in Experienced Dutch, French, and United Kingdom Centres—The EUREKA Collaborative
by Ritch T. J. Geitenbeek, Charlotte M. S. Genders, Christophe Taoum, Rauand Duhoky, Thijs A. Burghgraef, Christina A. Fleming, Eddy Cotte, Anne Dubois, Eric Rullier, Quentin Denost, Jim S. Khan, Roel Hompes, Philippe Rouanet and Esther C. J. Consten
Cancers 2025, 17(8), 1268; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17081268 - 9 Apr 2025
Viewed by 573
Abstract
Background: Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision has been proposed as an alternative to laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer. However, its short-term outcomes and long-term oncological efficacy remain debated, especially in Western populations. This study evaluates the short-term clinical and long-term oncological outcomes of robot-assisted [...] Read more.
Background: Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision has been proposed as an alternative to laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer. However, its short-term outcomes and long-term oncological efficacy remain debated, especially in Western populations. This study evaluates the short-term clinical and long-term oncological outcomes of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume European centres. Methods: This multicentre, international, retrospective cohort study included 1390 patients from the EUREKA collaborative dataset who underwent robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer between January 2013 and January 2022. All surgeries were performed by expert surgeons beyond the learning curve. Data were analysed for patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, pathological findings, and three-year survival metrics. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to evaluate overall and disease-free survival. Results: Of 1390 patients, 60.6% underwent restorative low anterior resection. Conversion to open surgery occurred in 3.7%, and postoperative complications were reported in 28.7%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 14.7% of patients who underwent restorative low anterior resection. The median operative time was 223 min. R0 resection was achieved in 94.7%, and circumferential resection margin positivity was 5.5%. Three-year overall survival was 90.1%, disease-free survival was 88.6%, and local recurrence was 2.9%. Conclusions: Robot-assisted total mesorectal excision performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume European centres is safe, with low conversion rates, acceptable complication rates, and favourable oncological outcomes. These findings underscore the potential of robot-assisted total mesorectal excision as a standard approach for rectal cancer in specialised settings. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Cancer Therapy)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 236 KiB  
Article
Colorectal Cancer Outcomes of Robotic Surgery Using the Hugo™ RAS System: The First Worldwide Comparative Study of Robotic Surgery and Laparoscopy
by Giacomo Calini, Stefano Cardelli, Ioana Diana Alexa, Francesca Andreotti, Michele Giorgini, Nicola Maria Greco, Fiorella Agama, Alice Gori, Dajana Cuicchi, Gilberto Poggioli and Matteo Rottoli
Cancers 2025, 17(7), 1164; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17071164 - 30 Mar 2025
Viewed by 1143
Abstract
Background/Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) performed using laparoscopy or using the Medtronic Hugo™ Robotic-Assisted Surgery (RAS) system. Methods: This is a retrospective comparative single-center [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) performed using laparoscopy or using the Medtronic Hugo™ Robotic-Assisted Surgery (RAS) system. Methods: This is a retrospective comparative single-center study of consecutive minimally invasive surgeries for CRC performed by two colorectal surgeons with extensive laparoscopic experience at the beginning of their robotic expertise. Patients were not selected for the surgical approach, but waiting lists and operating room availability determined whether the patients were in the robotic group or the laparoscopic group. The primary outcome was to compare 30-day postoperative complications according to the Clavien–Dindo classification and the Complication Comprehensive Index (CCI). The secondary outcomes included operating times, conversion rates, intraoperative complications, length of hospital stays (LOS), readmission rates, and short-term oncologic outcomes, such as the R0 resection, the number of lymph nodes harvested, the total mesorectal excision (TME) quality, and the circumferential resection margin (CRM). Results: Of the 109 patients, 52 underwent robotic and 57 laparoscopic CRC surgery. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were similar in the two groups. There was no significant difference between the robotic and the laparoscopic groups regarding postoperative complications, the Clavien–Dindo classification, and the CCI. They also had similar operating times, conversion rates, intraoperative complications, LOSs, readmission rates, and short-term oncologic outcomes (the lymph nodes harvested, the R0 resection, TME quality, and CRM status). Conclusions: This study reports the largest cohort of CRC surgery performed using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS system and is the first comparative study with laparoscopy. The perioperative and oncologic outcomes were similar, demonstrating that the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS system is safe and feasible for CRC as compared to laparoscopic surgery, even at the beginning of the robotic experience. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotic Surgery for Gastrointestinal (GI) Malignancies)
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

19 pages, 1300 KiB  
Article
Analysis of Local Recurrence After Robotic-Assisted Total Mesorectal Excision (ALRITE): An International, Multicentre, Retrospective Cohort
by Ritch T. J. Geitenbeek, Rauand Duhoky, Thijs A. Burghgraef, Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Shamsul Masum, Adrian A. Hopgood, Quentin Denost, Ellen van Eetvelde, Paolo Bianchi, Philippe Rouanet, Roel Hompes, Marcos Gómez Ruiz, Jim Briggs, Jim S. Khan, Esther C. J. Consten and on behalf of the ALRITE Study Group
Cancers 2025, 17(6), 992; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17060992 - 15 Mar 2025
Viewed by 1139
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Rectal cancer is a major global health issue with high morbidity and mortality rates. Local recurrence (LR) significantly impacts patient outcomes, decreasing survival rates and often necessitating extensive secondary treatments. While robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (R-TME) is becoming a preferred method for [...] Read more.
Background/Objectives: Rectal cancer is a major global health issue with high morbidity and mortality rates. Local recurrence (LR) significantly impacts patient outcomes, decreasing survival rates and often necessitating extensive secondary treatments. While robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (R-TME) is becoming a preferred method for rectal cancer surgery due to its improved precision and visualisation, long-term data on LR and predictors of recurrence remain limited. This study aims to determine the 3-year LR rate following R-TME and to identify predictors of recurrence to enhance patient selection and the personalisation of treatment. Methods: This retrospective international multicentre cohort study included 1039 consecutive rectal cancer patients who underwent R-TME between 2013 and 2020, with a minimum of 3 years of follow-up. Data from tertiary colorectal centres in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Spain, France, Italy, and Belgium were analysed. Potential predictors of LR were identified using backward elimination, and four machine learning models were evaluated for predicting LR. Results: The 3-year LR rate was 3.8%. Significant predictors of LR included advanced clinical M-staging, length of the hospital stay, postoperative ileus, postoperative complications, pathological N-staging, the completeness of resection, and the resection margin distance. The eXtreme Gradient Boosting model performed best for LR prediction, with a final accuracy of 77.1% and an AUC of 0.76. Conclusions: R-TME in high-volume centres achieves low 3-year LR rates, suggesting that robot-assisted surgery offers oncological safety and advantages in rectal cancer management. This study underscores the importance of surgical precision, patient selection, and standardised perioperative care, supporting further investment in robotic training to improve long-term patient outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Surgery for Colorectal Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 3645 KiB  
Review
Cutting Edge: A Comprehensive Guide to Colorectal Cancer Surgery in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases
by Ionut Eduard Iordache, Lucian-Flavius Herlo, Razvan Popescu, Daniel Ovidiu Costea, Luana Alexandrescu, Adrian Paul Suceveanu, Sorin Deacu, Gabriela Isabela Baltatescu, Alina Doina Nicoara, Nicoleta Leopa, Andreea Nelson Twakor, Andrei Octavian Iordache and Liliana Steriu
J. Mind Med. Sci. 2025, 12(1), 6; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmms12010006 - 11 Mar 2025
Viewed by 767
Abstract
Over the past two decades, surgical techniques in colorectal cancer (CRC) have improved patient outcomes through precision and reduced invasiveness. Open colectomy, laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted procedures, and advanced rectal cancer treatments such as total mesorectal excision (TME) and transanal TME are discussed in [...] Read more.
Over the past two decades, surgical techniques in colorectal cancer (CRC) have improved patient outcomes through precision and reduced invasiveness. Open colectomy, laparoscopic surgery, robotic-assisted procedures, and advanced rectal cancer treatments such as total mesorectal excision (TME) and transanal TME are discussed in this article. Traditional open colectomy offers reliable resection but takes longer to recover. Laparoscopic surgery transformed CRC care by improving oncological outcomes, postoperative pain, and recovery. Automated surgery improves laparoscopy’s dexterity, precision, and 3D visualisation, making it ideal for rectal cancer pelvic dissections. TME is the gold standard treatment for rectal cancer, minimising local recurrence, while TaTME improves access for low-lying tumours, preserving the sphincter. In metastatic CRC, palliative procedures help manage blockage, perforation, and bleeding. Clinical examples and landmark trials show each technique’s efficacy in personalised care. Advanced surgical techniques and multidisciplinary approaches have improved CRC survival and quality of life. Advances in CRC treatment require creativity and customised surgery. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 1447 KiB  
Review
Potential Probes for Targeted Intraoperative Fluorescence Imaging in Gastric Cancer
by Serena Martinelli, Laura Fortuna, Francesco Coratti, Federico Passagnoli, Amedeo Amedei and Fabio Cianchi
Cancers 2024, 16(24), 4141; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16244141 - 12 Dec 2024
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1433
Abstract
Gastric cancer (GC) is a malignant tumor of the gastrointestinal tract associated with high mortality rates and accounting for approximately 1 million new cases diagnosed annually. Surgery, particularly radical gastrectomy, remains the primary treatment; however, there are currently no specific approaches to better [...] Read more.
Gastric cancer (GC) is a malignant tumor of the gastrointestinal tract associated with high mortality rates and accounting for approximately 1 million new cases diagnosed annually. Surgery, particularly radical gastrectomy, remains the primary treatment; however, there are currently no specific approaches to better distinguish malignant from healthy tissue or to differentiate between metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes. As a result, surgeons have to remove all lymph nodes indiscriminately, increasing intraoperative risks for patients and prolonging hospital stay. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) can provide real-time visualization of the surgical field using both conventional laparoscopy and robotic mini-invasive precision surgery platforms. However, its application shows some limits, as ICG is a non-targeted contrast agent. Several studies are now investigating the potential efficacy of fluorescent targeted agents that could selectively bind to the tumor tissue, offering a valuable tool for metastatic mapping during robotic gastrectomy. This review aims to summarize the key fluorescent agents that have been developed to recognize GC markers, as well as those targeting the tumor microenvironment (TME) and metabolic features. These agents hold great potential as valuable tools for enhancing precision surgery in robotic gastrectomy procedures improving the clinical recovery of GC patients. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Application of Fluorescence Imaging in Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 713 KiB  
Review
Total Mesorectal Excision with New Robotic Platforms: A Scoping Review
by Francesco Marchegiani, Carlo Alberto Schena, Gaia Santambrogio, Emilio Paolo Emma, Ivan Tsimailo and Nicola de’Angelis
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(21), 6403; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13216403 - 25 Oct 2024
Viewed by 1510
Abstract
Colorectal surgery is one of the specialties that have significantly benefited from the adoption of robotic technology. Over 20 years since the first robotic rectal resection, the Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci system remains the predominant platform. The introduction of new robotic systems into [...] Read more.
Colorectal surgery is one of the specialties that have significantly benefited from the adoption of robotic technology. Over 20 years since the first robotic rectal resection, the Intuitive Surgical Da Vinci system remains the predominant platform. The introduction of new robotic systems into the market has enabled the first documented total mesorectal excision (TME) using alternative platforms. This scoping review aimed to assess the role and adoption of these emerging robotic systems in performing TME for rectal cancer surgery. Methods: A comprehensive search of the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted up to August 2024, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Results: Thirty-six studies were included in the review. The majority of rectal surgical procedures were performed using eight different robotic platforms. Intraoperative, short-term, and functional outcomes were generally favorable. However, pathological results were frequently incomplete. Several studies identified the lack of advanced robotic instruments as a significant limitation. Conclusions: The quality of the resected specimen is critical in rectal cancer surgery. Although TME performed with new robotic platforms appears to be feasible and safe, the current body of literature is limited, particularly in the assessment of pathological and long-term survival outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Comprehensive Treatment of Rectal Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 438 KiB  
Article
An Institutional Shift from Routine to Selective Diversion of Low Anastomosis in Robotic TME Surgery for Rectal Cancer Patients Using the KHANS Technique: A Single-Centre Cohort Study
by Rauand Duhoky, Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Marieke L. W. Rutgers, Ioannis Mykoniatis, Najaf Siddiqi, Syed Naqvi and Jim S. Khan
J. Pers. Med. 2024, 14(7), 725; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14070725 - 4 Jul 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1288
Abstract
(1) Background: In recent years, there has been a change in practice for diverting stomas in rectal cancer surgery, shifting from routine diverting stomas to a more selective approach. Studies suggest that the benefits of temporary ileostomies do not live up to their [...] Read more.
(1) Background: In recent years, there has been a change in practice for diverting stomas in rectal cancer surgery, shifting from routine diverting stomas to a more selective approach. Studies suggest that the benefits of temporary ileostomies do not live up to their risks, such as high-output stomas, stoma dysfunction, and reoperation. (2) Methods: All rectal cancer patients treated with a robotic resection in a single tertiary colorectal centre in the UK from 2013 to 2021 were analysed. In 2015, our unit made a shift to a more selective approach to temporary diverting ileostomies. The cohort was divided into a routine diversion group treated before 2015 and a selective diversion group treated after 2015. Both groups were analysed and compared for short-term outcomes and morbidities. (3) Results: In group A, 63/70 patients (90%) had a diverting stoma compared to 98/135 patients (72.6%) in group B (p = 0.004). There were no significant differences between the groups in anastomotic leakages (11.8% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.312) or other complications (p = 0.117). There were also no significant differences in readmission (3.8% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.312) or reoperation (3.8% vs. 2.6%, p = 1.000) after stoma closure. After 1 year, 71.6% and 71.9% (p = 1.000) of patients were stoma-free. One major reason for the delay in stoma reversal was the COVID-19 pandemic, which only occurred in group B (0% vs. 22%, p = 0.054). (4) Conclusions: A more selective approach to diverting stomas for robotic rectal cancer patients does not lead to more complications or leaks and can be considered in the treatment of rectal cancer tumours. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Updates and Challenges in Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 4319 KiB  
Article
Robotic Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Rectal Cancer: A Feasibility Study from a European Centre
by Tou Pin Chang, Oroog Ali, Kostas Tsimogiannis, Giuseppe S. Sica and Jim S. Khan
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(1), 90; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13010090 - 23 Dec 2023
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 3472
Abstract
Introduction: The role of robotic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) for lateral pelvic nodal disease (LPND) in rectal cancer has yet to be investigated in the Western hemisphere. This study aims to investigate the safety and feasibility of robotic LPLND by utilising [...] Read more.
Introduction: The role of robotic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) for lateral pelvic nodal disease (LPND) in rectal cancer has yet to be investigated in the Western hemisphere. This study aims to investigate the safety and feasibility of robotic LPLND by utilising a well-established totally robotic TME protocol. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on 17 consecutive patients who underwent robotic LPLND for LPND ± TME for rectal cancer between 2015 and 2021. A single docking totally robotic approach from the left hip with full splenic mobilisation was performed using the X/Xi da Vinci platform. All patients underwent a tri-compartmental robotic en bloc excision of LPND with preservation of the obturator nerve and pelvic nerve plexus, leaving a well-skeletonised internal iliac vessel and its branches. Results: The median operative time was 280 min, which was 40 min longer than our standard robotic TME. The median BMI was 26, and there were no conversions. The median inpatient stay was 7 days with no Clavien-Dindo > 3 complications. One patient (6%) developed local recurrence and metastatic disease within 5 months. The proportion of histologically confirmed LPND was 41%, of which 94% were well to moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma. Median pre-operative lateral pelvic node size was significantly higher in positive nodes (14 mm vs. 8 mm (p = 0.01)). All patients had clear resection margins on histology. Discussion: Robotic LPLND is safe and feasible with good peri-operative and short-term outcomes, with the ergonomic advantages of a robotic TME docking protocol readily transferrable in LPLND. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Colorectal Surgery: Latest Advances and Prospects)
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 879 KiB  
Article
Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review and Description of the Technique
by Giampaolo Formisano, Luca Ferraro, Adelona Salaj, Simona Giuratrabocchetta, Gaetano Piccolo, Giulia Di Raimondo and Paolo Pietro Bianchi
J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12(14), 4859; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12144859 - 24 Jul 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2596
Abstract
Robotic surgery may offer significant advantages for treating extraperitoneal rectal cancer. Although laparoscopy has been shown to be safe and effective, laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) remains technically challenging and is still performed in selected centers. Robotic anterior resection (RAR) may overcome the [...] Read more.
Robotic surgery may offer significant advantages for treating extraperitoneal rectal cancer. Although laparoscopy has been shown to be safe and effective, laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) remains technically challenging and is still performed in selected centers. Robotic anterior resection (RAR) may overcome the drawback of conventional laparoscopy, providing high-quality surgery with favorable oncological outcomes. Moreover, recent data show how RAR offers clinical and oncological benefits when affording difficult TMEs, such as low and advanced rectal tumors, in terms of complication rate, specimen quality, recurrence rate, and survival. This series aims to review the most recent and relevant literature, reporting mid- and long-term oncological outcomes and focusing on minimally invasive RAR for low rectal cancer. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Colorectal Surgery: Current Challenges and Future Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1524 KiB  
Article
Challenges and Learning Curves in Adopting TaTME and Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Cusum Analysis
by Pere Planellas, Lídia Cornejo, Anna Pigem, Núria Gómez-Romeu, David Julià-Bergkvist, Nuria Ortega, José Ignacio Rodríguez-Hermosa and Ramon Farrés
Cancers 2022, 14(20), 5089; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14205089 - 18 Oct 2022
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 2630
Abstract
New techniques are being developed to improve the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. This paper analyzes the learning curves for transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and robot-assisted surgery in our colorectal surgery department. We analyzed retrospectively data from patients undergoing curative [...] Read more.
New techniques are being developed to improve the results of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. This paper analyzes the learning curves for transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) and robot-assisted surgery in our colorectal surgery department. We analyzed retrospectively data from patients undergoing curative and elective surgery for rectal cancer ≤12 cm from the anal verge. We excluded extended surgeries. We used cumulative sum (CUSUM) curve analysis to identify inflection points. Between 2015 and 2021, 588 patients underwent surgery for rectal cancer at our center: 67 taTME and 79 robot-assisted surgeries. To overcome the operative time learning curve, 14 cases were needed for taTME and 53 for robot-assisted surgery. The morbidity rate started to decrease after the 17th case in taTME and after the 49th case in robot-assisted surgery, but it is much less abrupt in robot-assisted group. During the initial learning phase, the rate of anastomotic leakage was higher in taTME (35.7% vs. 5.7%). Two Urological lesions occurred in taTME but not in robot-assisted surgery. The conversion rate was higher in robot-assisted surgery (1.5% vs. 10.1%). Incorporating new techniques is complex and entails a transition period. In our experience, taTME involved a higher rate of serious complications than robot-assisted surgery during initial learning period but required a shorter learning curve. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Robotic Cancer Surgery)
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 5324 KiB  
Article
3D Printed Solutions for Spheroid Engineering and Cancer Research
by Tobias Butelmann, Yawei Gu, Aijun Li, Fabian Tribukait-Riemenschneider, Julius Hoffmann, Amin Molazem, Ellen Jaeger, Diana Pellegrini, Aurelien Forget and V. Prasad Shastri
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(15), 8188; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23158188 - 25 Jul 2022
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 3883
Abstract
In multicellular organisms, cells are organized in a 3-dimensional framework and this is essential for organogenesis and tissue morphogenesis. Systems to recapitulate 3D cell growth are therefore vital for understanding development and cancer biology. Cells organized in 3D environments can evolve certain phenotypic [...] Read more.
In multicellular organisms, cells are organized in a 3-dimensional framework and this is essential for organogenesis and tissue morphogenesis. Systems to recapitulate 3D cell growth are therefore vital for understanding development and cancer biology. Cells organized in 3D environments can evolve certain phenotypic traits valuable to physiologically relevant models that cannot be accessed in 2D culture. Cellular spheroids constitute an important aspect of in vitro tumor biology and they are usually prepared using the hanging drop method. Here a 3D printed approach is demonstrated to fabricate bespoke hanging drop devices for the culture of tumor cells. The design attributes of the hanging drop device take into account the need for high-throughput, high efficacy in spheroid formation, and automation. Specifically, in this study, custom-fit, modularized hanging drop devices comprising of inserts (Q-serts) were designed and fabricated using fused filament deposition (FFD). The utility of the Q-serts in the engineering of unicellular and multicellular spheroids-synthetic tumor microenvironment mimics (STEMs)—was established using human (cancer) cells. The culture of spheroids was automated using a pipetting robot and bioprinted using a custom bioink based on carboxylated agarose to simulate a tumor microenvironment (TME). The spheroids were characterized using light microscopy and histology. They showed good morphological and structural integrity and had high viability throughout the entire workflow. The systems and workflow presented here represent a user-focused 3D printing-driven spheroid culture platform which can be reliably reproduced in any research environment and scaled to- and on-demand. The standardization of spheroid preparation, handling, and culture should eliminate user-dependent variables, and have a positive impact on translational research to enable direct comparison of scientific findings. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Role of the Tumor Microenvironment in Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1375 KiB  
Article
The Multidisciplinary Approach of Rectal Cancer: The Experience of “COMRE Group” Model
by Stefano Scabini, Emanuele Romairone, Davide Pertile, Andrea Massobrio, Alessandra Aprile, Luca Tagliafico, Domenico Soriero, Luca Mastracci, Federica Grillo, Almalina Bacigalupo, Ciro Marrone, Maria Caterina Parodi, Marina Sartini, Maria Luisa Cristina, Roberto Murialdo, Gabriele Zoppoli and Alberto Ballestrero
Diagnostics 2022, 12(7), 1571; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12071571 - 28 Jun 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2200
Abstract
Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard to treat locally advanced rectal cancer. This monocentric retrospective study evaluates the results of laparotomic, laparoscopic and robotic surgery in “COMRE GROUP” (REctalCOMmittee). Methods: 327 selected stage I-II-III patients (pts) underwent TME between November [...] Read more.
Background: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the gold standard to treat locally advanced rectal cancer. This monocentric retrospective study evaluates the results of laparotomic, laparoscopic and robotic surgery in “COMRE GROUP” (REctalCOMmittee). Methods: 327 selected stage I-II-III patients (pts) underwent TME between November 2005 and April 2020 for low or middle rectal cancer; 91 pts underwent open, 200 laparoscopic and 36 robotic TME. Of these, we analyzed the anthropomorphic, intraoperative, anatomopathological parameters and outcome during the follow up. Results: The length of hospital stay was significantly different between robotic TME and the other two groups (8.47 ± 3.54 days robotic vs. 11.93 ± 5.71 laparotomic, p < 0.001; 8.47 ± 3.54 robotic vs. 11.10 ± 7.99 laparoscopic, p < 0.05). The mean number of harvested nodes was higher in the laparotomic group compared to the other two groups (19 ± 9 laparotomic vs. 15 ± 8 laparoscopic, p < 0.001; 19 ± 9 laparotomic vs. 15 ± 7 robotic, p < 0.05). Median follow-up was 52 months (range: 1–169). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the open TME group compared with the laparoscopic one (Chi2 = 13.36, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In the experience of the “COMRE” group, laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer is a better choice than laparotomy in a multidisciplinary context. Robotic TME has a significant difference in terms of hospital stay compared to the other two groups. Full article
(This article belongs to the Section Pathology and Molecular Diagnostics)
Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 1676 KiB  
Review
New Frontiers in Management of Early and Advanced Rectal Cancer
by Jordan R. Wlodarczyk and Sang W. Lee
Cancers 2022, 14(4), 938; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14040938 - 14 Feb 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 5657
Abstract
It is important to understand advances in treatment options for rectal cancer. We attempt to highlight advances in rectal cancer treatment in the form of a systematic review. Early-stage rectal cancer focuses on minimally invasive endoluminal surgery, with importance placed on patient selection [...] Read more.
It is important to understand advances in treatment options for rectal cancer. We attempt to highlight advances in rectal cancer treatment in the form of a systematic review. Early-stage rectal cancer focuses on minimally invasive endoluminal surgery, with importance placed on patient selection as the driving factor for improved outcomes. To achieve a complete pathologic response, various neoadjuvant chemoradiation regimens have been employed. Short-course radiation therapy, total neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and others provide unique advantages with select patient populations best suited for each. With a clinical complete response, a “watch and wait” non-operative surveillance has been introduced with preliminary equivalency to radical resection. Various modalities for total mesorectal excision, such as robotic or transanal, have advantages and can be utilized in select patient populations. Tumors demonstrating solid organ or peritoneal spread, traditionally defined as unresectable lesions conveying a terminal diagnosis, have recently undergone advances in hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy. Hepatic and pulmonary metastasectomy has demonstrated clear advantages in 5-year survival over standard chemotherapy. With the peritoneal spread of colorectal cancer, HIPEC with cytoreductive therapy has emerged as the preferred treatment. Understanding the various therapeutic interventions will pave the way for improved patient outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Current Management of Early and Advanced Rectal Cancer)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop