Robotic transanal excision of rectal lesions: expert perspective and literature review

Transanal excision of benign lesions, moderately or well-differentiated rectal T1 adenocarcinomas is typically completed via transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) or laparoscopic transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS). Robotic platforms provide ergonomic comfort in an enclosed space, enhanced range of motion, and superior 3D visualization. This study sought to perform a literature review of robotic TAMIS (R-TAMIS) and provide expert commentary on the technique. A Pubmed literature search was performed. Study design, robot type, indication, techniques compared, surgical margins, conversion, complications, operative time, estimated blood loss, patient positioning, and defect closure were collected from included articles. Expert opinion on pre-operative planning, technical details, and possible pitfalls was provided, with an accompanying video. Twelve articles published between 2013 and 2022 were included. Five were case reports, three case series, two prospective cohort studies, one retrospective cohort study, and one Phase II trial. The Da Vinci Si (n = 3), Xi (n = 2), single port (n = 3) and flex robotic system (n = 2) were used. Five studies reported negative surgical margins, one reported positive margins, and six did not comment. Operating room time ranged from 45 to 552 min and EBL ranged from 0 to 100 mL. Patient positioning varied based on lesion location but included supine, prone, modified lithotomy, and prone jackknife positions. 11/12 studies reported defect closure, most commonly with V-Loc absorbable suture. We recommend pre-operative MRI abdomen/pelvis, digital rectal exam, and rigid proctoscopy; prone jackknife patient positioning to avoid collisions with robotic arms; and defect closure of full-thickness excisions with backhanded running V-Loc suture

Comparison of advanced techniques for local excision of rectal lesions: a case series.

BackgroundRobotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (R-TAMIS) is an appealing alternative to transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) and transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for benign and early malignant rectal lesions that are not amenable to traditional open transanal excision. However, no studies to our knowledge have directly compared the three techniques. This study sought to compare peri-operative and pathologic outcomes of the three approaches.MethodsThe records of 29 consecutive patients who underwent TEM, TAMIS, or R-TAMIS at a single academic center between 2016 and 2020 were reviewed. Intra-operative details, pathological diagnosis and margins, and post-operative outcomes were recorded. The three groups were compared using chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests.ResultsOverall, 16/29 patients were women and the median age was 57 (interquartile range (IQR): 28-81). Thirteen patients underwent TEM, six had TAMIS, and 10 had R-TAMIS. BMI was lower in the R-TAMIS patients (24.7; IQR 23.8-28.7), than in TEM (29.3; IQR 19.9-30.2), and TAMIS (30.4; IQR 26.6-32.9) patients. High grade dysplasia and/or invasive cancer was more common in TAMIS (80%) and R-TAMIS (66.7%) patients than in TEM patients (41.7%). The three groups did not differ significantly in tumor type or distance from the anal verge. No R-TAMIS patients had a positive surgical margin compared to 23.1% in the TEM group and 16.7% in the TAMIS group. Length of stay (median 1 day for TEM and R-TAMIS patients, 0 days for TAMIS patients) and 30-day readmission rates (7.7% of TEM, 0% of TAMIS, 10% of R-TAMIS patients) also did not differ among the groups. Median operative time was 110 min for TEM, 105 min for TAMIS, and 76 min for R-TAMIS patients.ConclusionsR-TAMIS may have several advantages over other advanced techniques for transanal excisions. R-TAMIS tended to be faster and to more often result in negative surgical margins compared to the two other techniques

Robotic repair of perineal hernias: a video vignette and review of the literature.

BackgroundPerineal hernias can be secondarily acquired following abdominoperineal resection of the rectum. While transabdominal minimally invasive techniques have traditionally used laparoscopy, there are few studies published on the robotic platform, which has been gaining popularity for other types of hernia repairs. We review the existing literature, share a video vignette, and provide practical tips for surgeons interested in adopting this approach.MethodsA literature search in Pubmed was performed to include all articles in English describing robotic repair of perineal hernias with identification of variables of interest related to repair. A case presentation with an accompanying video vignette and lessons learned from the experience are provided.ResultsSeven case reports (four containing video) published between 2019 and 2022 were included. Most articles (n = 5) utilized the Da Vinci Si or Xi, and most patients (n = 5) had undergone abdominoperineal resection with neoadjuvant chemotherapy to treat rectal cancer. Patients were positioned in Trendelenburg with rightward tilt (n = 2), modified lithotomy (n = 1), or a combination of the two (n = 1). All articles (n = 7) reported closing the defect and using mesh. Three articles describe placing five ports (one camera, three robotic, one assistant). There were no significant intraoperative or postoperative complications reported, and no recurrence noted at 3-27 months follow-up. Based on our experience, as shown in the video vignette, we recommend lithotomy positioning, using porous polypropylene mesh anchored to the periosteum of the sacrum and peritoneum overlying the bladder and side wall, and placing a drain above the mesh.ConclusionsA robotic transabdominal approach to perineal hernia repair is a viable alternate to laparoscopy based on low complication rates and lack of recurrence. Prospective and longer duration data are needed to compare the techniques