Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 18, 2025

Surgical Robot-Assisted Transanal Specimen Extraction Radical Sigmoidectomy Without an Auxiliary Abdominal Incision
Published on: June 13, 2025
No beneficial effect on survival but a decrease in postoperative complications in patients with rectal cancer
Xiong Lei1,2, Lingling Yang3, Zhixiang Huang4,5
1Department of General Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006, Jiangxi, China. leixionglinty@126.com.
Background:
Robotic surgery has been taken as a new modality to surpass the technical limitations of conventional surgery. Here we aim to compare the oncologic outcomes of patients with rectal cancer receiving robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery.
Methods:
Data from patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between March 2011 and December 2018 were obtained for outcome assessment at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. All patients were separated into two groups: a robot group (patients receiving robotic surgery, n = 314) and a laparoscopy group (patients receiving laparoscopic surgery, n = 220). The primary endpoint was survival outcomes. The secondary endpoints were the general conditions of the operation, postoperative complications and pathological characteristics.
Results:
The 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) at years 1, 3 and 5 were 96.6%, 88.7%, and 87.7% vs. 96.7%, 88.1%, and 78.4%, and 98.6%, 80.2-, and 73.5% vs. 96.2-, 87.2-, and 81.1% in the robot and laparoscopy groups, respectively (P > 0.05). In the multivariable-adjusted analysis, robotic surgery was not an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS (P = 0.925 and 0.451, respectively). With respect to the general conditions of the operation, patients in the robot group had significantly shorter operation times (163.5 ± 40.9 vs. 190.5 ± 51.9 min), shorter times to 1st gas passing [2(1) vs. 3(1)d] and shorter hospital stay days [7(2) vs. 8(3)d] compared to those in the laparoscopy group (P < 0.01, respectively). After the operation, the incidence of short- and long-term complications in the robot group was significantly lower than that in the laparoscopy group (15.9% vs. 32.3%; P < 0.001), especially for urinary retention (1.9% vs. 7.3%; 0.6% vs. 4.1%, P < 0.05, respectively). With regard to pathological characteristics, TNM stages II and III were more frequently observed in the robot group than in the laparoscopy group (94.3% vs. 83.2%, P < 0.001). No significant difference were observed in lymph nodes retrieved, lymphovascular invasion and circumferential resection margin involvement between the two groups (P > 0.05, respectively).
Conclusions:
This monocentre retrospective comparative cohort study revealed short-term advantages of robot-assisted rectal cancer resection but similar survival compared to conventional laparoscopy.
Insights
Robotic rectal cancer surgery offers shorter recovery and fewer complications than laparoscopy, with similar long-term survival outcomes. This study compared oncologic results between robotic and laparoscopic approaches.
Area of Science:
- Surgical Oncology
- Minimally Invasive Surgery
- Rectal Cancer Treatment
Background:
- Robotic surgery aims to overcome limitations of conventional surgical techniques.
- Rectal cancer treatment traditionally involves open or laparoscopic surgery.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare oncologic outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.
- To evaluate survival rates, operative conditions, complications, and pathological characteristics.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective cohort study of 314 patients (robot group) and 220 patients (laparoscopy group) with rectal cancer.
- Data collected between March 2011 and December 2018.
- Primary endpoint: survival outcomes; Secondary endpoints: operative conditions, complications, pathological features.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between groups (P > 0.05).
- Robotic surgery group showed shorter operation times, faster return of bowel function, and shorter hospital stays (P < 0.01).
- Lower incidence of short- and long-term complications in the robotic group (15.9% vs. 32.3%, P < 0.001), particularly urinary retention.
Conclusions:
- Robot-assisted rectal cancer resection demonstrates short-term benefits, including reduced complications and faster recovery.
- Survival outcomes for robotic surgery are comparable to conventional laparoscopy for rectal cancer.
- Robotic surgery is a viable alternative for rectal cancer treatment, offering improved short-term patient recovery.

