Patient-reported outcomes in low anterior resection syndrome: a comparison of open and robotic surgery

PURPOSE: Despite recent advances in multimodal treatment strategies, radical tumor resection remains a cornerstone in the management of patients with rectal cancer. However, a substantial proportion of patients develop postoperative functional impairment known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Emerging evidence suggests that robotic-assisted surgery may offer superior functional outcomes compared to other approaches. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the incidence and severity of LARS after robotic and open surgery using a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). METHODS: This retrospective, single-center cohort study included patients with primary adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon or rectum who underwent open or robotic oncological resection between 2014 and 2024. Eligible participants completed a standardized, validated questionnaire to assess their individual LARS score. The LARS scores were subsequently correlated with selected clinicopathological characteristics. RESULTS: LARS questionnaires were analyzed in 184 patients. The incidence of major LARS was comparable between open and robotic surgery (39.1% vs. 39.2%), as was the rate of minor LARS (20% vs. 15%), with no statistically significant difference observed in multivariable ordinal regression (p = 0.451). Independent risk factors for LARS included neoadjuvant treatment, hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis, formation of a protective stoma, tumor location in the middle and lower rectum, and total mesorectal excision. CONCLUSION: LARS remains a significant clinical challenge, irrespective of the surgical approach. This PROM-based finding is particularly relevant for preoperative counseling and shared decision-making, as it suggests that open surgery is not inherently associated with worse functional outcomes in terms of LARS. Future research should aim to identify the biological, anatomical, and clinical determinants underlying the variable susceptibility to LARS.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Colorectal Disease
Published
2026-07-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-026-05194-8
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Patient-reported outcomes in low anterior resection syndrome: a comparison of open and robotic surgery

Marian Grade, Philipp Horvath, Johannes Moritz Riebeling, Thomas Asendorf et al.
International Journal of Colorectal Disease
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
article

Patient-reported outcomes in low anterior resection syndrome: a comparison of open and robotic surgery

Marian Grade, Philipp Horvath, Johannes Moritz Riebeling, Thomas Asendorf, Christoph Ammer-Herrmenau, Sophie Winter, Elisabeth Ammer, Michael Ghadimi
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: Despite recent advances in multimodal treatment strategies, radical tumor resection remains a cornerstone in the management of patients with rectal cancer. However, a substantial proportion of patients develop postoperative functional impairment known as low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Emerging evidence suggests that robotic-assisted surgery may offer superior functional outcomes compared to other approaches. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the incidence and severity of LARS after robotic and open surgery using a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). METHODS: This retrospective, single-center cohort study included patients with primary adenocarcinoma of the sigmoid colon or rectum who underwent open or robotic oncological resection between 2014 and 2024. Eligible participants completed a standardized, validated questionnaire to assess their individual LARS score. The LARS scores were subsequently correlated with selected clinicopathological characteristics. RESULTS: LARS questionnaires were analyzed in 184 patients. The incidence of major LARS was comparable between open and robotic surgery (39.1% vs. 39.2%), as was the rate of minor LARS (20% vs. 15%), with no statistically significant difference observed in multivariable ordinal regression (p = 0.451). Independent risk factors for LARS included neoadjuvant treatment, hand-sewn coloanal anastomosis, formation of a protective stoma, tumor location in the middle and lower rectum, and total mesorectal excision. CONCLUSION: LARS remains a significant clinical challenge, irrespective of the surgical approach. This PROM-based finding is particularly relevant for preoperative counseling and shared decision-making, as it suggests that open surgery is not inherently associated with worse functional outcomes in terms of LARS. Future research should aim to identify the biological, anatomical, and clinical determinants underlying the variable susceptibility to LARS.

International Journal of Colorectal DiseaseVol. 41(1)
Universitätsmedizin Göttingen (DE), University of Göttingen (DE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.