Robotic rectal surgery: State of the art

doi:10.4251/wjgo.v8.i11.757

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 8, Issue 11

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (8530)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Figures (1-1) series, Tables (1-8) series.

Item

Count

PDF

518

WORD

324

HTML

4758

Figures (1-1)

274

Tables (1-8)

451

Sum=6325

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

896

Download

1309

Sum=2205

Nov 15, 2016 (publication date) through Feb 7, 2025

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (29)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology

ISSN

1948-5204

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Review

World J Gastrointest Oncol. Nov 15, 2016; 8(11): 757-771
Published online Nov 15, 2016. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v8.i11.757

Table 7 Histopathological data

Ref.	Pts	Mesorectum	Harvested nodes	Quality of mesorectum (complete)	Proximal margin (mm)	Distal margin (mm)	Distal margin+ (%)	CRM (mm)	CRM + (%)	pTpN stage (%)
Ref.	Pts	Mesorectum	Harvested nodes	Quality of mesorectum (complete)	Proximal margin (mm)	Distal margin (mm)	Distal margin+ (%)	CRM (mm)	CRM + (%)	0	1	2	3	4
Park et al[8]	133	RME	16.34 (2-43)	-	111.7 (40-350)	27.5 (10-140)	0 (0)	-	9 (6.8)	0 (0)	49 (36.8)	36 (27.1)	48 (36.1)	0 (0)
Park et al[8]	84	LME	16.63 (2-49)	-	105.1 (40-340)	28.7 (10-90)	0 (0)	-	6 (7.1)	0 (0)	22 (26.2)	28 (33.3)	34 (40.5)	0 (0)
Levic et al[9]	56	RME	21 (7-83)¹	34	-	30 (5-80)	1 (0.56)	9 (0-60)¹	-	3 (5.4)	12 (21.4)	20 (35.7)	21 (37.5)	0 (0)
Levic et al[9]	36	LME	13 (3-33)¹	26	-	30 (5-75)	0 (0)	10 (1-43)¹	-	1 (2.8)	6 (16.7)	15 (41.7)	14 (38.8)	0 (0)
Yoo et al[10]	44	RME	13.93 (+ 9.27)	-	225.2 (+ 102.5)	13.3 (+ 9.7)	-	-	4 (9.1)	5 (11.4)	14 (31.8)	11 (25)	9 (20.5)	5 (11.4)
Yoo et al[10]	26	LME	21.42 (+ 15.71)	-	208.4 (+ 89.5)	16.7 (+ 30)	-	-	5 (19.2)	1 (3.8)	7 (26.9)	8 (30.8)	8 (30.8)	2 (7.7)
Koh et al[11]	19	RME	16 (4-24)¹	19	-	-	1 (5.2)	-	1 (5.2)	2(10.5)	3 (15.7)	4 (21)	9 (47.3)	1 (5.2)
Koh et al[11]	19	LME	14 (5-27)¹	19	-	-	0 (0)	-	0 (0)	0 (0)	5 (26.3)	4 (21)	9 (47.3)	1 (5.2)
Melich et al[12]	92	RME	17.2 (15-19.5)	-	-	-	1 (1.1)	-	3 (3.3)	-	-	-	-	-
Melich et al[12]	106	LME	16.3 (14.4-18.1)	-	-	-	0 (0)	-	3 (2.8)	-	-	-	-	-
Barnajian et al[13]	20	RME	14 (3-22)¹	16	-	20.5 (5-50)¹	-	10.5 (1-30)¹	-	0 (0)	6 (40)	4 (25)	10 (35)	0 (0)
	20	LME	11 (4-18)¹	19	-	21.5 (1-55)¹	-	4 (0-30)¹	-	0 (0)	7 (35)	3 (15)	10 (50)	0 (0)
	20	OME	12 (4-20)¹	19	-	20.5 (1-45)¹	-	8 (0-30)¹	-	0 (0)	8 (40)	3 (15)	9 (45)	0 (0)
Ielpo et al[14]	56	RME	10 (0-29)	-	-	-	-	-	2 (3.6)	0 (0)	14 (25)	21 (37.5)	21 (37.5)	0 (0)
Ielpo et al[14]	87	LME	9 (0-17)	-	-	-	-	-	2 (2.3)	0 (0)	19 (21.8)	38 (43.6)	30 (34.5)	0 (0)
Tam et al[15]	21	RME	19.7 (8-40)	-	-	460 (10-180)	0 (0)	-	0 (0)	2 (10)	5 (24)	4 (19)	9 (43)	1 (5)
Tam et al[15]	21	LME	14.8 (8-21)	-	-	510 (5-80)	1 (5)	-	1 (5%)	3 (14)	7 (33)	4 (19)	7 (33)	0 (0)
Ghezzi et al[16]	65	RME	20.1	-	-	27 (16-44)	-	-	0 (0)	10 (15.4)	5 (7.7)	17 (26.2)	27 (41.5)	6 (9.2)
Ghezzi et al[16]	109	OME	14.1	-	-	22 (15-30)	-	-	2 (1.8)	15 (13.8)	10 (9.2)	38 (34.9)	42 (38.5)	4 (3.7)
Kuo et al[17]	36	RME	14 (2-33)	-	-	22 (4-42)	0 (0)	6.7 (0-18)	4 (11.1)	7 (19.4)	4 (11.1)	11 (30.5)	14 (38.8)	0 (0)
Kuo et al[17]	28	LME	13.9 (3-31)	-	-	17.9 (1-60)	1 (3.6)	7 (0-16)	4 (14.2)	6 (21.4)	2 (7.1)	8 (28.6)	12 (42.8)	0 (0)
Park et al[18]	32	RME	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Park et al[18]	32	LME	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Saklani et al[19]	74	RME	11.6 (1-36)	-	128 (50-240)	17 (1-60)	-	-	3 (4)	18 (24.3)	16 (21.6)	22 (29.7)	18 (24.3)	0 (0)
Saklani et al[19]	64	LME	14.7 (1-27)	-	140 (55-280)	22 (2-70)	-	-	1 (1.6)	8 (12.5)	13 (20.3)	23 (35.9)	20 (31.3)	0 (0)
Fernandez et al[20]	13	RME	16	9	-	-	0 (0)	-	0 (0)		-	-	-	-
Fernandez et al[20]	59	LME	20	24	-	-	1 (2)	-	1 (2)		-	-	-	-
Erguner et al[21]	27	RME	16 (3-38)	19	120 (40-180)	40 (30-80)	0 (0)	4 (2-8)	-	0 (0)	15 (55.5)	11 (40.7)	1 (3.7)	0 (0)
Erguner et al[21]	37	LME	16 (3-31)	17	140 (45-230)	25 (5-50)	0 (0)	4 (1-10)	-	0 (0)	17 (46)	16 (43.2)	4 (10.8)	0 (0)
D’Annibale et al[22]	50	RME	16.5 (11-44)	-	-	30 (20-70)	-	-	0 (0)	-	-	-	-	-
D’Annibale et al[22]	50	LME	13.8 (4-29)	-	-	30 (10-60)	-	-	6 (12)	-	-	-	-	-
Kang et al[23]	165	RME	15 (+ 9.4)	-	120 (+ 49)	19 (+ 14)	0 (0)	-	7 (4.2)	4 (2.4)	56 (33.9)	51 (30.9)	54 (32.7)	0 (0)
	165	LME	15.6 (+ 9.1)	-	113 (+ 51)	20 (+ 17)	0 (0)	-	11 (6.7)	9 (5.4)	55 (33.1)	47 (28.5)	54 (32.7)	0 (0)
	165	OME	17.4 (+ 10.9)	-	114 (+ 55)	22 (+ 17)	0 (0)	-	17 (10.3)	14 (8.5)	55 (33.3)	41 (24.8)	55 (33.3)	0 (0)
Kim et al[25]	62	RME	16 (+ 10)	-	-	30 (+ 14)	-	-	2 (3.2)	4 (6.5)	17 (27.4)	16 (25.8)	24 (38.7)	0 (0)
Kim et al[25]	147	LME	16 (+ 9)	-	-	25 (+ 16)	-	-	4 (2.7)	6 (4.1)	55 (37.7)	35 (24)	46 (31.5)	4 (2.7)
Park et al[24]	40	RME	12.9 (+7.5)	-	198 (+ 69)	14 (+ 9)	0 (0)	6.2 (4.7)	3 (7.5)	0 (0)	19 (47.5)	9 (22.5)	11 (27.7)	1 (2.5)
Park et al[24]	40	LME	13.3 (+8.6)	-	213 (+ 139)	13 (+ 9)	0 (0)	6.9 (5.1)	2 (5)	0 (0)	13 (32.5)	15 (37.5)	11 (27.5)	1 (2.5)
Kim et al[26]	30	RME	-	29	-	27.9 (+ 10.2)	0 (0)	-	2 (6)	-	-	-	-	-
Kim et al[26]	39	LME	-	37	-	28.6 (+ 13.6)	0 (0)	-	1 (2.5)	-	-	-	-	-
Bertani et al[27]	52	RME	20.5 (5-43)¹	-	-	26 (1-70)	-	-	2 (4)	-	-	-	-	-
Bertani et al[27]	34	OME	16 (6-46)¹	-	-	26 (1-80)	-	-	2 (6)	-	-	-	-
Kwak et al[28]	59	RME	20 (12-27)¹	-	-	22 (15-30)	0 (0)	-	1 (1.7)	3 (5.1)	16 (27.1)	23 (39)	13 (22)	4 (6.8)
Kwak et al[28]	59	LME	21 (14-28)¹	-	-	20 (12-35)	0 (0)	-	0 (0)	3 (5.1)	16 (27.1)	23 (39)	12 (20.3)	5 (8.5)
Baek et al[29]	41	RME	13.1 (3.33)	-	-	36 (4-100)	0 (0)	-	1 (2.4)	7 (17.1)	12 (29.3)	4 (9.8)	15 (36.6)	3 (7.3)
Baek et al[29]	41	LME	16.2 (5-39)	-	-	38 (4-110)	0 (0)	-	2 (4.9)	3 (7.3)	15 (36.6)	3 (7.3)	19 (46.3)	1 (2.4)
Park et al[30]	52	RME	19.4 (+ 10.2)	-	165 (+ 60)	28 (+ 19)	0 (0)	7.9 (+ 4.5)	1 (1.9)	0 (0)	15 (28.8)	15 (28.8)	22 (42.3)	0 (0)
	123	LME	15.9 (+ 10.1)	-	169 (+ 84)	32 (+ 21)	0 (0)	8.2 (+ 5.8)	3 (2.4)	0 (0)	34 (27.6)	52 (42.3)	37 (30.1)	0 (0)
	88	OME	18.5 (+ 10.9)	-	124 (+ 66)	23 (+ 15)	0 (0)	8.5 (+ 5.7)	2 (2.3)	0 (0)	27 (30.7)	32 (36.4)	29 (33)	0 (0)
Patriti et al[31]	29	RME	10.3 (+ 4)	-	-	21 (+ 9)	-	-	-	0 (0)	11 (38)	9 (31)	7 (24.1)	2 (6.9)
Patriti et al[31]	37	LME	11.2 (+ 5)	-	-	45 (+ 72)	-	-	-	0 (0)	17 (46)	8 (21.6)	10 (27.2)	2 (5.4)
Baik et al[32]	18	RME	20 (6-49)	17	109 (75-200)	40 (10-55)	-		-	0 (0)	5 (27.8)	4 (22.2)	9 (50)	0 (0)
Baik et al[32]	18	LME	17.4 (9-42)	13	103 (55-85)	37 (15-60)	-	-	-	0 (0)	5 (27.8)	4 (22.2)	9 (50)	0 (0)
Pigazzi et al[33]	6	RME	14 (9-28)	-	-	38 (18-90)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Pigazzi et al[33]	6	LME	17 (9-39)	-	-	35 (22-50)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Parisi et al[34]	40	RME	19 (6-35)¹	32	118.5 (65-390)¹	40 (20-80)¹	0 (0)	-	-	2 (5)	10 (25)	9 (22.5)	19 (47.5)	0 (0)
Baek et al[35]	182	RME	14.8 (2-47)	-	-	22 (+ 14.3)	-	-	10 (5.5)	5 (2.7)	57 (31.3)	52 (28.5)	62 (34)	6 (3.3)
Shiomi et al[36]	113	RME	32 (11-112)¹	113	180 (65-376)	26 (5-100)	0 (0)	-	0 (0)	5 (4.4)	35 (31)	28 (24.7)	38 (33.6)	7 (6.2)
Kim et al[37]	200	RME	16.1	-	132.5	22	0 (0)	-	2 (1)	-	-	-	-	-
Stănciulea et al[38]	100	RME	14 (4-32)¹	-	-	30 (2-70)¹	-	-	-	5 (5)	24 (24)	43 (43)	21 (21)	7 (7)
Stănciulea et al[38]	77	RME	12.9 (3-45)	-	-	-	2 (2.6)	-	1 (1.2)	26 (34)	8 (10)	15 (19)	26 (34)	2 (3)
Sng et al[40]	197	RME	16 (1-80)¹	-	-	17 (0-8.3)¹	-	-	2 (2.5)	-	-	-	-	-
Du et al[41]	22	RME	14.3 (8-27)¹	19	-	26 (10-55)	-	-	-	0 (0)	1 (4.5)	9 (40.9)	12 (54.5)	0 (0)
Alimoglu et al[42]	7	RME	16 (14-21)	-	-	-	-	-	0 (0)	0 (0)	3 (42.8)	1 (14.2)	3 (42.8)	0 (0)
Akmal et al[43]	80	RME	14.2 (2-33)	-	-	32.5 (2-100)	-	1.8 (0-45)	-	15 (18.8)	20 (25)	12 (15)	27 (33.8)	5 (6.3)
Park et al[44]	30	RME	20 (14-25)¹	25	-	-	-	11 (5-20)	0 (0)	6 (20)	7 (23.3)	4 (13.3)	10 (33.3)	3 (10)
Kang et al[45]	389	RME	15.7 (+ 10)	-	11.7	2.15	-	-	14 (3.6)	24 (6.2)	122 (31.4)	103 (26.5)	140 (36)	0 (0)
deSouza et al[46]	44	RME	14 (5-45)	-	-	-	1 (2.7)	-	0 (0)	4 (9.1)	14 (31.8)	15 (34.1)	8 (18.2)	3 (6.8)
Pigazzi et al[47]	143	RME	14.1 (1-39)	-	-	29 (0-100)	-	19 (1-45)	1 (0.7)	18 (12.6)	36 (25.2)	36 (25.2)	53 (37)	0 (0)
Choi et al[48]	50	RME	20.6 (6-48)	-	-	19 (5-45)	0 (0)	-	1 (2)	0 (0)	10 (20)	19 (38)	19 (38)	2 (4)
Ng et al[49]	8	RME	15 (2-26)¹	-	-	-	-	-	0 (0)	0 (0)	3 (37.5)	2 (25)	2 (25)	0
Hellan et al[50]	39	RME	13 (7-28)¹	-	-	26.5 (4-75)¹	0 (0)	-	0 (0)	8 (20.5)	13 (33.3)	4 (10.3)	13 (33.3)	1 (2.6)

¹Median. RME: Robotic mesorectal excision; LME: Laparoscopic mesorectal excision; OME: Open mesorectal excision.

Citation: Staderini F, Foppa C, Minuzzo A, Badii B, Qirici E, Trallori G, Mallardi B, Lami G, Macrì G, Bonanomi A, Bagnoli S, Perigli G, Cianchi F. Robotic rectal surgery: State of the art. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2016; 8(11): 757-771
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v8/i11/757.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v8.i11.757