Outcomes of restorative proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a matched-cohort analysis of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery

Abstract Background Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) remains the gold standard for restorative proctocolectomy, yet its technical complexity has limited widespread minimally invasive adoption. Robotic surgery was introduced to overcome the ergonomic and visualization challenges of laparoscopy, but comparative evidence among open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted IPAA in tertiary care remains scarce. Methods A matched-cohort analysis was performed on adult patients undergoing proctectomy with IPAA for ulcerative and indeterminate colitis (January 2005–September 2025) at a tertiary referral center. Patients were stratified by surgical approach: open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted. The robot-assisted cohort included only cases performed with the modular Hugo™ RAS platform. Primary endpoints were total operative time and 30-day postoperative surgical complications. Multivariable regression, propensity score matching, and G-computation were applied to adjust for confounders such as age, BMI, ASA class, disease duration, and biologic exposure. Results Among 764 patients, 573 underwent open, 145 laparoscopic, and 46 robot-assisted IPAA. Adjusted analyses demonstrated no significant differences in 30-day surgical complications between robot-assisted and laparoscopic (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.63–3.90) or open (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.57–3.44) approaches. Both minimally invasive techniques yielded faster bowel function recovery (− 1.2 days vs open, p < 0.001) and reduced hospital stay (− 4.1 days for robot-assisted, − 4.7 days for laparoscopic; p < 0.05). Operative time was longer in minimally invasive groups but similar between robot-assisted and laparoscopic cases. Conclusion In expert centers, open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted completion IPAA demonstrate preliminary safety, feasibility, and short-term equivalence. Minimally invasive approaches enhance postoperative recovery, and modern robotic platforms achieve procedural efficiency comparable to laparoscopy, although larger multicenter cohorts are needed to confirm equivalence for rare postoperative outcomes.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Surgical Endoscopy
Published
2026-08-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-026-13300-8
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

Outcomes of restorative proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a matched-cohort analysis of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery

Tommaso Violante, Matteo Rottoli, Stefano Cardelli, Marco Novelli et al.
Surgical Endoscopy
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
article

Outcomes of restorative proctectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis: a matched-cohort analysis of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery

Tommaso Violante, Matteo Rottoli, Stefano Cardelli, Marco Novelli, Giacomo Calini, Gilberto Poggioli, Argentina Tiano, Angela Romano
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) remains the gold standard for restorative proctocolectomy, yet its technical complexity has limited widespread minimally invasive adoption. Robotic surgery was introduced to overcome the ergonomic and visualization challenges of laparoscopy, but comparative evidence among open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted IPAA in tertiary care remains scarce. Methods A matched-cohort analysis was performed on adult patients undergoing proctectomy with IPAA for ulcerative and indeterminate colitis (January 2005–September 2025) at a tertiary referral center. Patients were stratified by surgical approach: open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted. The robot-assisted cohort included only cases performed with the modular Hugo™ RAS platform. Primary endpoints were total operative time and 30-day postoperative surgical complications. Multivariable regression, propensity score matching, and G-computation were applied to adjust for confounders such as age, BMI, ASA class, disease duration, and biologic exposure. Results Among 764 patients, 573 underwent open, 145 laparoscopic, and 46 robot-assisted IPAA. Adjusted analyses demonstrated no significant differences in 30-day surgical complications between robot-assisted and laparoscopic (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.63–3.90) or open (OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.57–3.44) approaches. Both minimally invasive techniques yielded faster bowel function recovery (− 1.2 days vs open, p < 0.001) and reduced hospital stay (− 4.1 days for robot-assisted, − 4.7 days for laparoscopic; p < 0.05). Operative time was longer in minimally invasive groups but similar between robot-assisted and laparoscopic cases. Conclusion In expert centers, open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted completion IPAA demonstrate preliminary safety, feasibility, and short-term equivalence. Minimally invasive approaches enhance postoperative recovery, and modern robotic platforms achieve procedural efficiency comparable to laparoscopy, although larger multicenter cohorts are needed to confirm equivalence for rare postoperative outcomes.

Surgical Endoscopy
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
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.