Perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopy-assisted hemicolectomy for left-sided colon cancers: a retrospective study

The objective of this study is to evaluate the perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted hemicolectomy (RAH) versus laparoscopy-assisted hemicolectomy (LAH) for left-sided colon cancers. Patients who underwent RAH and LAH from January 2012 to December 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Follow-up consultations were conducted to evaluate the long-term outcomes of these procedures. A total of 460 patients were included (RAH, n = 205; LAH, n = 255). There was no difference in patient characteristics between the two groups. Compared with the LAH group, the RAH group showed longer operative time (150.23 +/- 43.77 min vs. 125.85 +/- 38.67 min, p < 0.001) and higher surgery cost (6.33 +/- 1.50 vs. 2.88 +/- 0.72 thousand $, p < 0.001) and total hospital cost (14.97 +/- 3.05 vs. 9.05 +/- 2.31 thousand $, p < 0.001). No significant differences in tumor pathology, TNM staging, and perioperative outcomes were observed. There were no obvious differences in the 3-year and 5-year overall survival (OS) or 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival. Cox multivariate analyses showed that age, body mass index, and intravascular cancer embolus were independent risk factors for OS. Moreover, the robotic approach was not an independent risk factor for prognosis of left-sided colon cancers. RAH is an appropriate operation method for left-sided colon cancer, with perioperative and long-term outcomes comparable to those of laparoscopy. Meanwhile, RHA has longer operative time and higher cost.

Automated summary

The study compared robot-assisted hemicolectomy (RAH) and laparoscopy-assisted hemicolectomy (LAH) for left-sided colon cancers. RAH had longer operative time and higher costs, but showed comparable perioperative and long-term outcomes to LAH.