Background. The optimal radical surgical approach for rectal neuroendocrine tumor (NET) is unknown. Methods. This study evaluated the short- and long-term outcomes of 27 patients who underwent robotic radical surgery for rectal NET between 2011 and 2019. Results. The median distance from the lower border of the tumor to the anal verge was 5.0 cm. The median tumor size was 9.5 mm. Six patients (22%) had lymph node metastasis. The incidences of postoperative complications of grade II and grade III or more according to the Clavien–Dindo classification were 11% and 0%, respectively. All patients underwent sphincter-preserving surgery, and no patients required conversion to open surgery. The median follow-up time was 48.9 months, and both the 3-year overall survival and relapse-free survival rates were 100%. Conclusions. Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic surgery for rectal NET tumor were favorable. Robotic surgery may be a useful surgical approach for rectal NET.
de MestierLBrixiHGinculRPonchonTCadiotG. Updating the management of patients with rectal neuroendocrine tumors. Endoscopy.2013;45:1039-1046.
2.
DasariAShenCHalperinD, et al.Trends in the incidence, prevalence, and survival outcomes in patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the United States. JAMA Oncol.2017;3:1335-1342.
3.
McConnellYJ. Surgical management of rectal carcinoids: Trends and outcomes from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database (1988 to 2012). Am J Surg.2016;211:877-885.
4.
KonishiTWatanabeTKishimotoJ, et al.Prognosis and risk factors of metastasis in colorectal carcinoids: results of a nationwide registry over 15 years. Gut.2007;56:863-868.
5.
DayalSBattersbyNCecilT. Evolution of surgical treatment for rectal cancer: A review. J Gastrointest Surg.2017;21:1166-1173.
6.
TakatsuYFukunagaYNagasakiT, et al.Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic total mesenteric excision for neuroendocrine tumors of the rectum. Dis Colon Rectum.2017;60:284-289.
7.
WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board, WHO Classification of Tumours. Digestive System Tumours. 5th ed. Lyon, France: IARC; 2019.
Japan NeuroEndocrine Tumor Society. Guidelines for Pancreatic/Gastrointestinal Neuroendocrine Neoplasm. 2nd ed. Tokyo, Japan: Kanehara; 2019.
10.
ShiomiAKinugasaYYamaguchiTTomiokaHKagawaH. Robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery: Short-term outcomes for 113 consecutive patients. Int J Colorectal Dis.2014;29:1105-1111.
11.
KinugasaYMurakamiGSuzukiDSugiharaK. Histological identification of fascial structures posterolateral to the rectum. Br J Surg.2007;94:620-626.
12.
KinugasaYMurakamiGUchimotoKTakenakaAYajimaTSugiharaK. Operating behind Denonvilliers’ fascia for reliable preservation of urogenital autonomic nerves in total mesorectal excision: A histologic study using cadaveric specimens, including a surgical experiment using fresh cadaveric models. Dis Colon Rectum.2006;49:1024-1032.
13.
ClavienPABarkunJde OliveiraML, et al.The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: Five-year experience. Ann Surg.2009;250:187-196.
14.
EzekianBAdamMATurnerMC, et al.Local excision results in comparable survival to radical resection for early-stage rectal carcinoid. J Surg Res.2018;230:28-33.
15.
ShiomiAKinugasaYYamaguchiTKagawaHYamakawaY. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for lower rectal cancer: The impact of visceral obesity on surgical outcomes. Int J Colorectal Dis.2016;31:1701-1710.
16.
YamaguchiTKinugasaYShiomiATomiokaHKagawaH. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open lateral lymph node dissection for advanced lower rectal cancer. Surg Endosc.2016;30:721-728.
17.
KimJBaekSJKangDW, et al.Robotic resection is a good prognostic factor in rectal cancer compared with laparoscopic resection: Long-term survival analysis using propensity score matching. Dis Colon Rectum.2017;60:266-273.
18.
YamaguchiTKinugasaYShiomiA, et al.Oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open lateral lymph node dissection for locally advanced low rectal cancer. Surg Endosc.2018;32:4498-4505.
19.
KowalewskiKFSeifertLAliS, et al.Functional outcomes after laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted rectal resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc.2021;35:81-95.
20.
CrippaJGrassFDozoisEJ, et al.Robotic surgery for rectal cancer provides advantageous outcomes over laparoscopic approach: Results from a large retrospective cohort[published ahead of print February 14, 2020]. Ann Surg. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003805.
21.
YamaokaYKagawaHShiomiA, et al.Robotic-assisted surgery may be a useful approach to protect urinary function in the modern era of diverse surgical approaches for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2021;35:1317-1323.
22.
JayneDPigazziAMarshallH, 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.2017;318:1569-1580.
23.
TsangESMcConnellYJSchaefferDF, et al.Prognostic factors for locoregional recurrence in neuroendocrine tumors of the rectum. Dis Colon Rectum.2018;61:187-192.
24.
UshigomeHFukunagaYNagasakiT, et al.Difficulty of predicting lymph node metastasis on CT in patients with rectal neuroendocrine tumors. PLoS One.2019;14:e0211675. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211675.
25.
FieldsACSaadatLVScullyRE, et al.Local excision versus radical resection for 1- to 2-cm neuroendocrine tumors of the rectum: A national cancer database analysis. Dis Colon Rectum.2019;62:417-421.
