Robotic-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: An Analysis of Clinical and Financial Outcomes from a Tertiary Referral Center

Abstract

Background: The popularity of robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer is increasing, but its superiority over the laparoscopic approach regarding safety, efficacy, and costs has not been well established. Methods: A retrospective single-center study was conducted comparing consecutively performed robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgeries for rectal cancer between 1 January 2016 and 31 September 2021. In total, 125 adult patients with sporadic rectal adenocarcinoma (distal extent ≤ 15 cm from the anal verge) underwent surgery where 66 were operated on robotically and 59 laparoscopically. Results: Severe postoperative complications occurred less frequently with robotic-assisted compared with laparoscopic surgery, as indicated by Clavien–Dindo classification grades 3b–5 (13.6% vs. 30.5%, p = 0.029). Multiple logistic regression analyses after backward selection revealed that robotic-assisted surgery was associated with a lower rate of total (Clavien–Dindo grades 1–5) (OR = 0.355; 95% CI 0.156–0.808; p = 0.014) and severe postoperative complications (Clavien–Dindo grades 3b–5) (OR = 0.243; 95% CI 0.088–0.643; p = 0.005). Total inpatient costs (median EUR 17.663 [IQR EUR 10.151] vs. median EUR 14.089 [IQR EUR 12.629]; p = 0.018) and surgery costs (median EUR 10.156 [IQR EUR 3.551] vs. median EUR 7.468 [IQR EUR 4.074]; p p = 0.004). Conclusions: In our study, robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer resulted in less severe and fewer total postoperative complications. Still, it was associated with higher surgery and inpatient costs. With increasing experience, the operative time may be reduced, and the postoperative recovery may be further accelerated, leading to reduced surgery and total inpatient costs.

Keywords

• colorectal surgery
• inpatient costs
• laparoscopic surgery
• surgery costs
• rectal cancer
• robotic-assisted surgery