Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: single-center, retrospective, propensity score analyses

Although the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) for rectal cancer are well known, the long-term oncologic outcomes of RALS compared with those of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) are not clear.

This study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of RALS and CLS for rectal cancer using propensity score matching.

This retrospective study included 185 patients with stage I–III rectal cancer who underwent radical surgery at our institute between 2010 and 2019.

Propensity score analyses were performed with 3-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) as the primary endpoints.

After case matching, the 3-year OS and 3-year RFS rates were 86.5% and 77.9% in the CLS group and 98.4% and 88.5% in the RALS group, respectively.

Although there were no significant differences in OS ( p  = 0.195) or RFS ( p  = 0.518) between the groups, the RALS group had slightly better OS and RFS rates.

3-year cumulative (Cum) local recurrence (LR) and 3-year Cum distant metastasis (DM) were 9.7% and 8.7% in the CLS group and 4.5% and 10.8% in the RALS group, respectively.

There were no significant differences in Cum-LR ( p  = 0.225) or Cum-DM ( p  = 0.318) between the groups.

RALS is a reasonable surgical treatment option for patients with rectal cancer, with long-term outcomes similar to those of CLS in such patients.