Operative and oncological outcomes after robotic rectal resection compared with laparoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Most studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic surgery, show little difference in clinical outcomes to justify the expense. We systematically reviewed and pooled evidence from studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic rectal resection.

Method: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica (EMBASE), and Cochrane databases were searched for studies between 1996 and 2021 comparing clinical outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic rectal surgeries involving total mesorectal excision. Outcome measures included operative times, conversions to open, complications, recurrence and survival rates.

Results: Fifty eligible studies compared outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic rectal resections; three were randomized trials. Pooled results showed significantly longer operating times for robotic surgery but lower conversion and complications rates, shorter lengths of stay in hospital, better rates of complete mesorectal resection and better three-year overall survival. However, the low number of randomized studies makes most data subject to bias.

Conclusion: Available evidence supports the safety and ongoing use of robotic rectal cancer surgery, while further high-quality evidence is sought to justify the expense.