Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 21, 2026

Robotics in Surgery: A Modular Robotic Platform Driven Gastric Wedge Resection
Published on: February 7, 2025
Comparing pathologic outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic Surgery in rectal cancer resection: a propensity
M Benjamin Hopkins1, Timothy M Geiger1, Alva J Bethurum1
1Section of Colon & Rectal Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, 1161 21st Ave South, Room D5248 MCN, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA.
Background:
Margin negative resection of rectal cancer with minimally invasive techniques remains technically challenging. Robotic surgery has potential advantages over traditional laparoscopy. We hypothesize that the difference in the rate of negative margin status will be < 6% between laparoscopic and robotic approach.
Methods:
The National Cancer Database (2010-2014) was queried for adults with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation and curative resection to conduct an observational retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database. Patients were grouped by either robotic (ROB) or laparoscopic (LAP) approach in an intent-to-treat analysis. Primary outcome was negative margin status, defined as a composite of circumferential resection margin and distal margin. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), readmission, 90-day mortality, and overall survival.
Results:
7616 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent minimally invasive resection were identified. 2472 (32%) underwent attempted robotic approach. The overall conversion rate was 13% and was increased in the laparoscopic group [LAP: 15% vs. ROB: 8%; OR 0.47; 95% CI (0.39, 0.57)]. Differences in margin negative resection rate were within the prespecified range of practical equivalence (LAP: 93% vs.: ROB 94%; 95% CI (0.69, 1.06); [Formula: see text] = 1). For secondary outcomes, there was no difference in 30-day readmission [LAP: 9% vs.: ROB 8%; 95% CI (0.84, 1.24)] and 90-day mortality [LAP: 1% vs.: ROB 1%; 95% CI (0.38, 1.24)]. While the median LOS was 5 days in both groups, the mean LOS was 0.6 (95% CI: 0.24, 0.89) days shorter in the robotic group.
Conclusion:
This robust analysis supports either robotic or laparoscopic approach for resection of locally advanced rectal cancer from a margin perspective. Both have similar readmission and 5-year overall survival rates. Patients undergoing robotic surgery have a 0.6-day decrease in LOS and decreased conversion rate.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Adjusting a Traverse
Assessing Body Temperature - Rectal
Follow these steps for rectal temperature assessment:
Step 1: Perform hand hygiene and don clean gloves to prevent cross-infection.
Step 2: Position the patient in a side-lying position to better visualize the rectal...
Predicting Reaction Outcomes
Cancer Survival Analysis

