Background/Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the perioperative and oncologic outcomes of patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) performed using laparoscopy or using the Medtronic Hugo™ Robotic-Assisted Surgery (RAS) system.Methods:This is a retrospective comparative single-center study of consecutive minimally invasive surgeries for CRC performed by two colorectal surgeons with extensive laparoscopic experience at the beginning of their robotic expertise. Patients were not selected for the surgical approach, but waiting lists and operating room availability determined whether the patients were in the robotic group or the laparoscopic group. The primary outcome was to compare 30-day postoperative complications according to the Clavien–Dindo classification and the Complication Comprehensive Index (CCI). The secondary outcomes included operating times, conversion rates, intraoperative complications, length of hospital stays (LOS), readmission rates, and short-term oncologic outcomes, such as the R0 resection, the number of lymph nodes harvested, the total mesorectal excision (TME) quality, and the circumferential resection margin (CRM).Results:Of the 109 patients, 52 underwent robotic and 57 laparoscopic CRC surgery. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were similar in the two groups. There was no significant difference between the robotic and the laparoscopic groups regarding postoperative complications, the Clavien–Dindo classification, and the CCI. They also had similar operating times, conversion rates, intraoperative complications, LOSs, readmission rates, and short-term oncologic outcomes (the lymph nodes harvested, the R0 resection, TME quality, and CRM status).Conclusions:This study reports the largest cohort of CRC surgery performed using the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS system and is the first comparative study with laparoscopy. The perioperative and oncologic outcomes were similar, demonstrating that the Medtronic Hugo™ RAS system is safe and feasible for CRC as compared to laparoscopic surgery, even at the beginning of the robotic experience.
背景/目的：本研究旨在比较接受腹腔镜手术与美敦力Hugo™机器人辅助手术系统治疗结直肠癌患者的围手术期及肿瘤学结局。方法：本研究为回顾性单中心比较研究，纳入由两位在机器人手术初期阶段已具备丰富腹腔镜经验的结直肠外科医师连续施行的结直肠癌微创手术病例。手术方式非选择性分配，患者根据等待名单和手术室可用性被纳入机器人组或腹腔镜组。主要结局指标为基于Clavien-Dindo分级和综合并发症指数的30天术后并发症比较。次要结局指标包括手术时间、中转开腹率、术中并发症、住院时长、再入院率以及短期肿瘤学结局（如R0切除率、淋巴结清扫数目、全直肠系膜切除质量和环周切缘状态）。结果：在109例患者中，52例接受机器人手术，57例接受腹腔镜手术。两组患者人口统计学和临床特征相似。在术后并发症、Clavien-Dindo分级及综合并发症指数方面，机器人组与腹腔镜组无显著差异。两组在手术时间、中转开腹率、术中并发症、住院时长、再入院率及短期肿瘤学结局（淋巴结获取数量、R0切除率、全直肠系膜切除质量和环周切缘状态）方面亦无显著差异。结论：本研究报道了目前最大规模使用美敦力Hugo™机器人辅助手术系统治疗结直肠癌的病例系列，也是首个与腹腔镜手术的对比研究。围手术期及肿瘤学结局相似，表明即使在机器人手术经验初期阶段，美敦力Hugo™机器人辅助手术系统治疗结直肠癌相较于腹腔镜手术仍具有安全性和可行性。
肿瘤(癌症)患者之家