• 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 / The current status of TaTME-ISR and Robot-LAR for rectal cancer in comparison with Lap-ISR and Lap-LAR

The current status of TaTME-ISR and Robot-LAR for rectal cancer in comparison with Lap-ISR and Lap-LAR

Takuya Miura, Yoshiyuki Sakamoto, Hajime Morohashi, Hayato Nagase, Tatsuya Yoshida, Kentaro Sato, Yutaro Hara, Kenichi Hakamada. Hirosaki university

Background/Aim: Laparoscopic-Intersphincteric resection (ISR) and Low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer is widely accepted, but the usefulness and problems of TaTME and Robot remained unclear. By comparing with Lap, we will examine the current status of TaTME-ISR and Robot-LAR.

Methods: We compared 13 patients of Lap-ISR+diverting stoma (DS) with 15 patients of TaTME-ISR+DS and 19 patients of Lap-LAR+DS with 7 patients of robot-LAR+DS retrospectively. In our hospital, TaTME was only introduced to ISR. LLND cases were excluded in the comparison between Robot and Lap, because Robot-lateral lymph node dissection (LLND) was only performed in one patient. The patients who underwent a partial resection of adjacent organs, pelvic exenteration, and simultaneous resection other than pelvic organs were excluded.

Results:

1. Lap vs TaTME-ISR. In the characteristics, distance from tumor margin to anal verge was statistically longer in TaTME (3cm/5cm) but gender (male, 69%/82%), BMI (22.8/22.4), preoperative chemotherapy (23%/46%), tumor diameter (3cm/4cm), T3 (15%/21%), lymph node metastasis (7%/6%) and lateral lymph node dissection (61%/46%) were not obviously different. Postoperative complications in Lap were 15% of anastomotic leakage (Grade A 1, B 1), 15% of intracorporeal SSI, 15% of stoma related complications and 7% of urinary retention (Grade 2). TaTME had 20% of anastomotic leakage (GradeA 1, B 2), 53% of intracorporeal SSI, 46% of stoma related complications and 6% of urinary retention (Grade 1). The definitive stoma was created in 7% after Lap-ISR and 33% after TaTME.

2. Lap-LAR vs Robot-LAR. In the characteristics, Lap group had more advanced tumor such as size (15mm/35mm), T3 (52%/14%), and lymph node metastasis (42%/0%). Gender (male, 100%/100%), BMI (22.5/24.0), preoperative chemotherapy (5%/0%), and distance from tumor margin to anal verge (9cm/7cm) were not obviously different. Operative time was longer in Robot (260min/404min) but blood loss was not different (15ml/20ml). Postoperative complications in Lap-LAR were 31% of anastomotic leakage (Grade A 1, B 3, C 2), 21% of stoma related complications and 5% of urinary retention (Grade 2). Robot-LAR had 0% of anastomotic leakage, 28% of stoma related complications and 14% of urinary retention (Grade 1).

Conclusions: Compared to Lap-ISR, TaTME-ISR in the early stage of introduction had many intracorporeal SSI, stoma-related complications and definitive stoma. Robot-LAR can reduce anastomotic insufficiency as compared with Lap-LAR.


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 92346

Program Number: P290

Presentation Session: Poster Session (Non CME)

Presentation Type: Poster

View this 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