A Comparative Study of Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal...

Conventional laparoscopic surgery is the treatment of choice for many abdominal procedures. To further reduce surgical trauma, new minimal invasive procedures such as single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) have emerged. The aim of this study was to compare the early results of SPLS versus RALS in the treatment of rectal cancer.

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients who had undergone SPLS (n = 36) or RALS (n = 56) in the period between 2010 and 2012. Operative and short-term oncological outcomes were compared.

The RALS group had fewer patients with low rectal cancer and more patients with mid-rectal tumors (P = .017) and also a higher rate of intraoperative complications (14.3% vs 0%, P = .021). The rate of postoperative complications did not differ (P = .62). There were no differences in circumferential resection margins, distal resection margins, or completeness of the mesorectal fascia. The RALS group had a larger number of median harvested lymph nodes (27 vs 13, P = .001). The SPLS group had fewer late complications (P = .025). There were no locoregional recurrences in either of the groups. There was no difference in median follow-up time between groups (P = .58).

Both SPLS and RALS may have a role in rectal surgery. The short-term oncological outcomes were similar, although RALS harvested more lymph nodes than the SPLS procedure. However, SPLS seems to be safer with regard to intraoperative and late postoperative complications.