[The benefit of the da Vinci robotic system in abdominal oncosurgery - our preliminary results]

The robotization of minimally invasive treatment in surgery has been evident since the beginning of the third Millennium. The authors present their current evaluation of the benefits of the da Vinci robotic system in the treatment of abdominal malignancy.

The authors summarize published studies in the Medline and Pubmed databases that compare robotic, laparoscopic and open approaches in the treatment of abdominal malignancy. Epidemiological data, intraoperative blood loss, complications and oncological outcomes are monitored in a group of 30 patients with carcinoma of rectum.

The results measured in the evaluated parameters (open conversion, perioperative and non - surgery complications, intraoperative blood loss, histological findings, lethality) are similar in the published studies, i.e. without significant differences in both groups subject to the robotic and laparoscopic treatment. The operative time in the group of robotic surgery has been is slightly longer (a non-significant difference) in most of published studies. 30 patients underwent the robotic assisted treatment of the carcinoma of the rectum (14 men and 16 women, average age of 60 years (33-80). Neoadjuvant treatment was indicated in 50% of the patients. Average blood loss was 260 ml, transfusion was administered in one case. Conversion to laparotomic treatment was performed twice, four patients had post-operative complications, no patient has died. We have not found any relapse of oncological disease in the observed set to this date.

The Da Vinci robotic system is a safe manipulator in the treatment of abdominal malignancy (including HPB surgery). Randomized clinical trials (RCT) have confirmed (short-term clinical and oncological) results comparable to the laparoscopic or open approach treatment. The benefits of robotic surgery for patients in abdominal surgery (long-term results, sufficient number of patients and high-grade EBM) are yet to be evaluated, however. It is necessary to implement more randomized clinical trials going forward. Our preliminary results are similar to the results reached in other, published studies.