International Session（Symposium）7(JSGS・JSGE・JGES・JSH)
Sat. November 7th   15:00 - 17:00   Room 4: Portopia Hotel South Wing Portopia Hall
IS-S7-3_S
 Comparison of survival outcomes between open, laparoscopic and robotic surgery for rectal cancer
Kazushige Kawai1, Hiroaki Nozawa1, Soichiro Ishihara1
1Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Tokyo
Background: Although several studies have compared the oncological outcome between open and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer, the difference between that of robotic surgery and open or laparoscopic surgery has not fully investigated.
Methods: The medical records of 462 consecutive patients (Open surgery n=228, Laparoscopic surgery n=143, Robotic surgery n=91) with rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery between 2004 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The DFS, OS and local recurrence rate of each group stratified by stage were compared.
Results: The proportion of stage III was 30.7%, 26.3% and 44.0% in Open, Laparoscopic and Robotic group, respectively (P=0.028), showing that robotic surgery was preferred in advanced cases. All of the 5-year DFS, OS, and local recurrence rate showed no difference between groups in all of stage I, II, III, suggesting the oncological equivalency of laparoscopic and robotic surgery to open surgery. The 5-year DFS in stage III was 60.6%, 61.5%, and 53.8% in Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic group (p=0.714), and the 5-year OS in stage III was 71.7%, 90.8%, and 84.7% (p=0.214). The local recurrence rate in stage III was 10.6%, 16.3%, and 13.8%, showing also no difference between groups (p=0.640).
Conclusion: Robotic surgery for rectal cancer should be equivalent to open surgery in terms of survival. Considering minimal invasiveness and the ability to facilitate the surgical procedure, robotic surgery should be promising.
Index Term 1: robotic surgery
Index Term 2: rectal cancer
Page Top