METHODS: Patients with rectal cancer who underwent sphincter-preserving surgery were retrospectively investigated using a robotic platform after neoadjuvant treatment at our hospital. Based on pretreatment stoma creation, patients were divided into the NS (those without a stoma) and S groups (patients with a stoma). Baseline characteristics, types of neoadjuvant treatment, short-term surgical outcomes, postoperative anorectal manometric data, and survival were compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The NS and S groups comprised 65 and 9 patients, respectively. Conversion to laparotomy was required in three patients in the NS group. The S group required a longer console time than the NS group (median: 367 vs. 253 min, respectively, p = 0.038); however, no difference was observed in the total operative time (p = 0.15) and blood loss (p = 0.70). Postoperative complication rates, anorectal function, and oncological outcomes were similar between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Although console time was longer in patients with a stoma, robotic surgery could be performed safely like in those without a stoma after neoadjuvant treatment.
方法:在我院接受新辅助治疗后,使用机器人平台对接受保括约肌手术的直肠癌患者进行回顾性调查。基于预处理造口的创建,患者分为NS组(无造口组)和S组(有造口组).基线特征,新辅助治疗的类型,短期手术结果,术后肛门直肠测压数据,比较各组之间的生存率。
结果:NS组和S组包括65和9名患者,分别。NS组的三名患者需要转换为剖腹手术。S组比NS组需要更长的控制台时间(中位数:367vs.253分钟,分别,p=0.038);然而,总手术时间(p=0.15)和失血量(p=0.70)无差异.术后并发症发生率,肛门直肠功能,两组之间的肿瘤结局相似.
结论:尽管造口患者的控制台时间较长,机器人手术可以像新辅助治疗后没有造口的人一样安全地进行.