Evaluating robotic and laparoscopic approaches for left and right colon carcinoma: a retrospective propensity...

Colorectal cancer causes a substantial amount of cancer-related illness and death around the world. However, minimally invasive surgeries, like laparoscopic and robotic-assisted operations, have transformed how we treat colon cancer. Though both techniques offer benefits, their effectiveness compared to each other is still a point of contention, especially when it comes to tumors in the left or right colon. This is a retrospective cohort analysis aimed at comparing the perioperative and short-term efficacy of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for left and right colon cancer. To ensure fairness in comparison, we employed propensity score matching. We conducted a study looking back at patient records to compare how well laparoscopic surgery (a minimally invasive technique) and robotic surgery work for left and right colon cancer, both during and shortly after the operation. To make sure our comparison was fair, we used a method called propensity score matching. Our study included 626 patients who were treated at the same hospital between July 2017 and July 2023. We carefully matched patients based on things like their age, BMI, and any pre-existing health conditions to account for potential differences We specifically examined several outcomes, including the duration of surgeries, the amount of blood lost during the operation, any complications that occurred afterward, and quick recovery markers such as the time to the first bowel movement and the length of hospital stay. Our findings indicated that robotic surgery generally took longer than laparoscopic procedures. However, a notable benefit was less blood loss during robotic operations. Patients who underwent robotic surgery also reached recovery milestones faster, such as their first gas and stool passage. Considering the various factors, we observed that both surgical approaches led to similar recovery times in the hospital and comparable numbers of complications. And perhaps most importantly for patients, we saw no real difference in the oncological results. This means that whether it was robotic or laparoscopic surgery, the surgeons were equally successful in getting clear surgical margins and retrieving a sufficient lymph nodes to check for cancer spread. Robotic surgery offers benefits like less blood loss and faster recovery, but both robotic and laparoscopic methods show similar oncological outcomes and complication rates. The choice should depend on the patient's needs and the surgeon's expertise.