Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic-assisted extended mesorectal excision: a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of perioperative and long-term outcomes

Background

Concurrent neoadjuvant chemo-radiation (nCRT) with total mesorectal excision (TME) alone sometimes fails to cure lateral lymph node metastasis (LLNM). Therefore, additional lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) can help in the treatment of these patients. This is what we refer to as extended total mesorectal excision (eTME). Such operations (TME alone or eTME) can be performed using conventional laparoscopic techniques and robotic-assisted techniques as well. Our meta-analysis aims to compare the results of robot-assisted (R-eTME) versus laparoscopic-assisted extended mesorectal excision (L-eTME) in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

Methodology

Databases searched using title and abstract included Medline (via PubMed), Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, up to February 20, 2024. All studies that documented robotic versus laparoscopic procedures for extended total mesorectal excision (R-eTME versus L-eTME) and reported more than two relevant outcomes, were included in the study.

Results

Our meta-analysis demonstrates four significant outcomes (operative time, urinary complications, overall recurrence, and admission days) between the laparoscopic and robotic groups. The robotic approach shows advantages over the laparoscopic approach in these outcomes except for the operative time (minute), which was longer in the robotic group compared to the laparoscopic group. The laparoscopic group is associated with a higher overall recurrence than the robotic group with an Odds Ratio of 2(95% CI, 1–4, p = 0.05).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis study showed that the R-eTME group had a lower recurrence rate compared to the L-eTME group. Additionally, hospital admission days increased significantly in the laparoscopic group. Other long-term outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. Short-term outcomes were similar, except for more urinary complications in the laparoscopic group. In conclusion, the study suggests that robotic surgery may offer advantages over laparoscopic surgery for eTME. Further research and analysis could provide further insight into the potential benefits of robotic surgery in this procedure, particularly when surgeon experience, center volume, and learning curve are taken into consideration.