Robotic vs. TaTME Rectal Surgery (ROTA STUDY) Matched Cohort Trial for Mid to Low Rectal Cancer Surgery Evaluation Trial in the Hands of an Experienced Surgeon

Ravish Jootun, Pedja Cuk, Mark Ellebæk, Per Vadgaard Andersen, Søren Salomon, Gunnar Baatrup, Issam Al-Najami, Jim Khan, Ravish Jootun, Pedja Cuk, Mark Ellebæk, Per Vadgaard Andersen, Søren Salomon, Gunnar Baatrup, Issam Al-Najami, Jim Khan

Abstract

Background: Recent novel surgical techniques for resection of low rectal cancer have been introduced and these approaches have the potential to overcome anatomical limitations like obesity, narrow male pelvis and bulky and low tumours. Two of these procedures are robotic low anterior resection (RLAR) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME).Both approaches have distinct advantages and limitations. There has been no head to head trial comparing RLAR and TaTME for patients with mid to low rectal cancer undergoing surgery by experienced surgeons. Previous studies looking at the oncological outcomes of either TaTME or robotic TME included many centres where the surgeons were on a learning curve and hence the true oncological outcomes and clinical benefits can not be measured accurately.

Method: The inclusion criteria include experienced surgeons defined as minimum of 60 prior procedures with RLAR or TaTME. Successful oncological and clinical outcomes are defined as circumferential resection margin (CRM) ≥1 mm with limited postoperative morbidity (absence of Clavien-Dindo grade III-IV complications within 30 days after surgery). Local and distal recurrence rates with DFS over 3 years will be measured as primary outcome.Data will be collected prospectively and entered in a dedicated database.

Discussion: The primary objective of this study is to conduct a multicentre prospective trial to investigate clinical outcomes, in particular disease free survival (DFS) in patients undergoing RLAR and TaTME. The additional goal is to investigate other efficacy measures, complications rates, health economic aspects and patient reported health related quality of life.This paper describes an important trial conducted in expert centres to establish the needed knowledge for a detailed comparison of outcomes for TaTME versus RLAR.This trial is the first comparative study, comparing TaTME and RLAR, seeking to establish foothold for tailor-made surgical treatment of low rectal cancer patients.

Trial registration: The trial is registered in clinicaltrials.gov September 2019. Clinicaltrials.gov id: NCT04200027.

Keywords: Rectal cancer; Robotic surgery; Total mesorectal excision; trans-anal surgery.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
ROTA Study flow.

References

    1. Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery–the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. England; 1982. Oct; 69(10): 613–6. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800691019
    1. Heald RJ, Ryall RD. Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Lancet (London, England). England; 1986. Jun; 1(8496): 1479–82. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91510-2
    1. van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, Furst A, Lacy AM, Hop WC, et al. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. England; 2013. Mar; 14(3): 210–8. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70016-0
    1. Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MHGM, de Lange-de Klerk ESM, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. United States; 2015. Apr; 372(14): 1324–32. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1414882
    1. Jeong S-Y, Park JW, Nam BH, Kim S, Kang S-B, Lim S-B, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-rectal or low-rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): survival outcomes of an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. England; 2014. Jun; 15(7): 767–74. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70205-0
    1. Kang S-B, Park JW, Jeong S-Y, Nam BH, Choi HS, Kim D-W, et al. Open versus laparoscopic surgery for mid or low rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (COREAN trial): short-term outcomes of an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. England; 2010. Jul; 11(7): 637–45. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70131-5
    1. Hompes R, Guy R, Jones O, Lindsey I, Mortensen N, Cunningham C. Transanal total mesorectal excision with a side-to-end stapled anastomosis – a video vignette. Vol. 16, Colorectal disease: the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. England; 2014; 567. DOI: 10.1111/codi.12660
    1. Sun Y, Xu H, Li Z, Han J, Song W, Wang J, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. England; 2016. Mar; 14: 61. DOI: 10.1186/s12957-016-0816-6
    1. Lee SH, Lim S, Kim JH, Lee KY. Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Treat Res. Korea (South); 2015. Oct; 89(4): 190–201. DOI: 10.4174/astr.2015.89.4.190
    1. Trastulli S, Farinella E, Cirocchi R, Cavaliere D, Avenia N, Sciannameo F, et al. Robotic resection compared with laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis. England; 2012. Apr; 14(4): e134–56. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2011.02907.x
    1. Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, et al. Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to Open Laparotomy Among Patients Undergoing Resection for Rectal Cancer: The ROLARR Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. United States; 2017. Oct; 318(16): 1569–80. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.7219
    1. Yang Y, Wang F, Zhang P, Shi C, Zou Y, Qin H, et al. Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease, focusing on rectal cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. United States; 2012. Nov; 19(12): 3727–36. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-012-2429-9
    1. Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, Wynn G, Austin R, Warusavitarne J, et al. Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: International Registry Results of the First 720 Cases. Ann Surg. United States; 2017. Jul; 266(1): 111–7. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001948
    1. Perez D, Melling N, Biebl M, Reeh M, Baukloh J-K, Miro J, et al. Robotic low anterior resection versus transanal total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer: A comparison of 115 cases. Eur J Surg Oncol. England; 2018. Feb; 44(2): 237–42. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.11.011
    1. Kwak JM, Kim SH. Current status of robotic colorectal surgery. J Robot Surg. England; 2011. Mar; 5(1): 65–72. DOI: 10.1007/s11701-010-0217-8
    1. Lee L, de Lacy B, Gomez Ruiz M, Liberman AS, Albert MR, Monson JRT, et al. A Multicenter Matched Comparison of Transanal and Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Mid and Low-rectal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. United States; 2018. Jun. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002862
    1. Penna M, Hompes R, Arnold S, Wynn G, Austin R, Warusavitarne J, et al. Incidence and Risk Factors for Anastomotic Failure in 1594 Patients Treated by Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Results From the International TaTME Registry. Ann Surg. United States; 2019 Apr; 269(4): 700–11. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002653
    1. Larsen SG, Pfeffer F, Korner H. Norwegian moratorium on transanal total mesorectal excision. Br J Surg. England; 2019. Aug; 106(9): 1120–1. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11287
    1. Knight CD, Griffen FD. An improved technique for low anterior resection of the rectum using the EEA stapler. Surgery. United States; 1980. Nov; 88(5): 710–4.
    1. Cohen Z, Myers E, Langer B, Taylor B, Railton RH, Jamieson C. Double stapling technique for low anterior resection. Dis Colon Rectum. United States; 1983. Apr; 26(4): 231–5. DOI: 10.1007/BF02562484

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다