Role of robotic approach in ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA): A systematic review of the literature

• Published in: Journal of robotic surgery Vol. 17; no. 3; pp. 941 - 947
• Main Authors: Khawaja, Zeeshan, Jamal, Zohaib, Zafar, Nowera, Adnan, Naqqash, Haider, Muhammad Ijlal, Zafar, Ahmad, Siddiqi, Najaf Nawaz
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Springer London 01.06.2023; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Anastomosis, Surgical - methods; Colonic Pouches - adverse effects; Feasibility; Hospitals; Humans; Inflammatory bowel disease; Laparoscopy; Literature reviews; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Minimally Invasive Surgery; Original Article; Ostomy; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Postoperative Complications - etiology; Proctocolectomy, Restorative - adverse effects; Proctocolectomy, Restorative - methods; Retrospective Studies; Robotic surgery; Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods; Sepsis; Surgeons; Surgery; Surgical anastomosis; Systematic review; Treatment Outcome; Urology; Wrist; Robotic surgery; Ileal pouch–anal anastomoses; Restorative proctocolectomy; Familial adenomatous polyposis; Ulcerative colitis
• ISSN: 1863-2491; 1863-2483; 1863-2491
• DOI: 10.1007/s11701-022-01490-x

Restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA) has become standard surgical treatment of choice in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) in which the medical management fails. Despite the wide use of laparoscopic method, the enhanced and innovative features that come with the robotic platform, such as endo-wrist technology, 3D visualization, surgeon-controlled camera and motion scaling, make it an appealing choice. This study aims to investigate the feasibility and safety of robotic approach for proctectomy or proctocolectomy with IPAA as compared to conventional laparoscopic approach. A systematic review was completed for studies done between 2010 and 2022 comparing the robotic approach with the laparoscopic approach. Nine studies were found to be feasible to be included in this review. In terms of the outcomes, although the mean operating time was slightly higher than the laparoscopic approach, the other outcomes, such as mean blood loss, return of the bowel movement, mean hospital stay, and conversion to open, were found to be significantly lower in the robotic approach as compared to both laparoscopic and conventional open techniques. Despite the overall increased rate of complications combined from all the studies, the rate of significant complications such as anastomotic leaks requiring readmission and return to theater was also found to be substantially less. This study concludes that although robotic approach is in its initial stages for pelvic surgeries, it can be safely employed due to improved dexterity and visibility.