• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Safety and Feasibility of Robotic Abdomino -perineal Excision of the Rectum.

Safety and Feasibility of Robotic Abdomino -perineal Excision of the Rectum.

Vamsi R Velchuru, FRCS, Slawomir J Marecik, MD, Marek Zawadzki, MD, Albalawi Saeed, MD, John J Park, MD, Leela M Prasad, MD. University of Illinois, Chicago, USA, Advocate Lutheran General Hospital, Park Ridge, USA

 

Introduction – Aim of the study was to establish safety, feasibility and efficacy of robotic Abdomino-perineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer and recurrent anal cancer. Standard APR can be associated with higher rates of radial margin positivity and intra-operative perforations (IOP). This can lead to poor oncological outcomes and increasing local recurrence rates. In spite of the advances with surgical and stapling techniques, low rectal tumor with involvement of the sphincter is a definite indication for Abdomino-perineal resection. Newer techniques such as Extralevator APR have been developed to reduce CRM positivity and IOP’s.
Methods – A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of 24 consecutive cases of robotic APR for rectal adenocarcinoma and recurrent anal cancers was performed. Study period was from April 2007 to August 2011. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes and complications were evaluated. Independent t test was used for continuous variables such as length of stay, age, estimated blood loss, OR time, etc. Pearson Chi square test and Fischer exact test was used for categorical variables such CRM positivity, lymph node status and postoperative complications. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS for windows, version 19.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).
Results – Twenty two patients had a robot assisted APR for rectal adenocarcinoma and two for recurrent anal cancer. Average age was 65.5 years, with fourteen being male. Average BMI was 27.3 (range, 17.6-38.1), with one third being >30. Twenty two patients had pre-operative chemo radiotherapy. In the adenocarcinoma group, 91% (n-20) were locally advanced tumors (T3/T4). Average estimated blood loss was 262 cc (range, 50-650cc), with one patient needing blood transfusion in the post-operative period. The total OR time was 340 min, with total mesorectal excision time of 120 min. One patient was converted to open TME for a bulky tumor and very narrow pelvis. There were no robot associated intra-operative complications. Average hospital stay was 7.8 days (range 3-36 days). Six patients developed perineal wound infections. One patient died due to aspiration pneumonia in the post-operative period. Subset analysis, showed increased OR time and TME time along with higher estimated blood loss in males compared to females. This was not statistically significant. Circumferential resection margin was positive (<1mm) in two patients (9%) in the carcinoma group. Mean lymph node harvest was 12 (range, 1-27).
Conclusions – Robotic APR is safe and feasible with promising short term results. It may be beneficial for the narrow male pelvis however larger randomized studies are needed for definitive conclusion.
 


Session Number: Poster – Poster Presentations
Program Number: P590
View Poster

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search