Robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus traditional robotic-assisted surgery (NOTR) for patients with colorectal cancer: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Rui Luo, Fangfang Zheng, Haobo Zhang, Weiquan Zhu, Penghui He, Dongning Liu, Rui Luo, Fangfang Zheng, Haobo Zhang, Weiquan Zhu, Penghui He, Dongning Liu

Abstract

Background: Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery for colorectal cancer has been introduced in order to reduce the abdominal incision, demonstrating major development potential in minimally invasive surgery. We are conducting this randomized controlled trial to assess whether robotic NOSES is non-inferior to traditional robotic-assisted surgery for patients with colorectal cancer in terms of primary and secondary outcomes.

Method/design: Accordingly, a prospective, open-label, randomized controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, and non-inferiority trial will be conducted to discuss the safety and efficacy of robotic natural orifice extraction surgery compared to traditional robotic-assisted surgery. Here, 550 estimated participants will be enrolled to have 80% power to detect differences with a one-sided significance level of 0.025 in consideration of the non-inferiority margin of 10%. The primary outcome is the incidence of surgical complications, which will be classified using the Clavien-Dindo system.

Discussion: This trial is expected to reveal whether robotic NOSES is non-inferior to traditional robotic-assisted surgery, which is of great significance in regard to the development of robotic NOSES for patients with colorectal cancer in the minimally invasive era. Furthermore, robotic NOSES is expected to exhibit superiority to traditional robotic-assisted surgery in terms of both primary and secondary outcomes.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04230772 . Registered on January 15, 2020.

Keywords: Colorectal cancer; Natural orifice extraction surgery; Randomized controlled trial; Robotic surgery.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Schedule of assessment. CD3 cluster of differentiation 3, CD4 cluster of differentiation 4, CD8 cluster of differentiation 8

References

    1. Zhou S, Wang X, Zhao C, Zhou H, Pei W, Liang J, Zhou Z, Wang Zhou S, Wang X, Zhao C, Zhou H, Pei W, Liang J, Zhou Z, Wang X. Can transanal natural orifice specimen extraction after laparoscopic anterior resection for colorectal cancer reduce the inflammatory response? J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;35(6):1016–1022. doi: 10.1111/jgh.14919.
    1. Saurabh B, Chang S-C, Ke T-W, Huang Y-C, Kato T, Wang H-M, Tzu-Liang Chen W, Fingerhut A. Natural orifice specimen extraction with single stapling colorectal anastomosis for laparoscopic anterior resection: feasibility, outcomes, and technical considerations. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60(1):43–50. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000739.
    1. Liu R, Zhang C-D, Fan Y-C, Pei J-P, Zhang C, Dai D-Q. Safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic NOSE surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal diseases: a meta-analysis. Front Oncol. 2019;9:597. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00597.
    1. Ngu J, Wong ASY. Transanal natural orifice specimen extraction in colorectal surgery: bacteriological and oncological concerns. ANZ J Surg. 2016;86(4):299–302. doi: 10.1111/ans.13383.
    1. Kim JY, Kim N-K, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH. A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(8):2485–2493. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2262-1.
    1. Karagul S, Kayaalp C, Sumer F, Ertugrul I, Kirmizi S, Tardu A, Yagci M. Success rate of natural orifice specimen extraction after laparoscopic colorectal resections. Tech Coloproctol. 2017;21(4):295–300. doi: 10.1007/s10151-017-1611-2.
    1. Franklin ME, Liang S, Russek K. Integration of transanal specimen extraction into laparoscopic anterior resection with total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a consecutive series of 179 patients. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(1):127–132. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2440-z.
    1. Guend H, Widmar M, Patel S, Nash GM, Paty PB, Guillem JG, Temple LK, Garcia-Aguilar J, Weiser MR. Developing a robotic colorectal cancer surgery program: understanding institutional and individual learning curves. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(7):2820–2828. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5292-0.
    1. Nishikawa T, Nozawa H, Kawai K, Sasaki K, Otani K, Tanaka T, Hata K, Watanabe T. Short-and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive versus open multivisceral resection for locally advanced colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum. 2019;62(1):40–46. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000001255.
    1. De Andrade JP, Warner SG, Fong Y. Treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: innovations in surgical techniques. J Surg Oncol. 2019;119(5):653–659. doi: 10.1002/jso.25418.
    1. Park JS, Choi G-S, Kim HJ, Park SY, Jun SH. Natural orifice specimen extraction versus conventional laparoscopically assisted right hemicolectomy. Br J Surg. 2011;98(5):710–715. doi: 10.1002/bjs.7419.
    1. Vasudevan V, Reusche R, Wallace H, Kaza S. Clinical outcomes and cost–benefit analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(12):5490–5493. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-4910-1.
    1. Guan X, Liu Z, Longo A, Cai J-C, Tzu-Liang Chen W, Chen L-C, Chun H-K, Manuel da Costa Pereira J, Efetov S, Escalante R. International consensus on natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterol Rep. 2019;7(1):24–31. doi: 10.1093/gastro/goy055.
    1. Franklin ME, Liang S, Russek K. Natural orifice specimen extraction in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: transanal and transvaginal approaches. Tech Coloproctol. 2013;17(1):63–67. doi: 10.1007/s10151-012-0938-y.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren