Postoperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Surgery in a Multi-Cancer Cohort: A Retrospective Cohort Study
- 1Department of Research, Keimyung University Dongsan Medical Center, 1035 Dalgubeol-daero, Dalseo-gu, Daegu 42601, Republic of Korea
- 2Department of Digital Health, Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences and Technology (SAIHST), Sungkyunkwan University, 115 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul 06355, Republic of Korea
- 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Keimyung University School of Medicine, 1095 Dalgubeol-daero, Dalseo-gu, Daegu 42601, Republic of Korea
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Evidence on robotic surgery is largely procedure-specific and depends on the comparator. We examined associations with postoperative outcomes, prioritizing colorectal and uterine cancer and distinguishing laparoscopic from open comparators. Methods: This retrospective cohort included 2139 patients undergoing elective surgery for colorectal, uterine, prostate, or renal cancer at a tertiary referral center in 2019–2023. The primary analysis included 1232 colorectal or uterine cancer patients undergoing robotic (n = 462) or laparoscopic (n = 770) surgery. Generalized linear models adjusted for age, sex, cancer type, and T category/FIGO stage group; operative time and staffing were added in sensitivity analysis. Absolute differences were estimated by G-computation. The four-cancer pooled analysis was secondary. Results: Robotic surgery was associated with a shorter hospital stay (length-of-stay ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.73–0.83; adjusted difference 2.34 days), which persisted with operative-time/staffing and calendar-year adjustment. Rehospitalization within 30 days after surgery was higher overall (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.82; 95% CI 1.34–2.47), but differed by cancer: aOR 2.50 (95% CI 1.77–3.53) for colorectal and 0.38 (95% CI 0.16–0.90) for uterine cancer (interaction p < 0.001). Estimates for 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and surgical site infection were imprecise. Conclusions: Rehospitalization differed in direction between these cancers, indicating that cancer type and comparator selection materially affect inference. These associations do not establish a platform-specific benefit or transferable bed-day savings.
Related
- Longitudinal Functional Outcomes After Transoral Robotic Surgery Versus Transoral Videolaryngoscopic Surgery for Oropharyngeal Cancer: A Retrospective Single‐Center Study
- Postoperative hemorrhage and perioperative outcomes in single-port versus multi-port transoral robotic surgery for upper airway disease.
- Lean dual-portal versus conventional multi-portal robotic-assisted thoracic surgery for anatomical lung resection: a retrospective comparative cohort study of a sustainable approach harmonizing clinical efficiency, environmental protection, and next-generation education.
- Comparative outcomes of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery versus conventional minilaparotomy-assisted specimen extraction in colorectal cancer: A single-center retrospective study.
- Postoperative C-Reactive Protein as a Marker of the Early Inflammatory Response in Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Minimally Invasive Surgery for Endometrial Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis
BibTeX
@article{cho2026postoperative,
title = {{Postoperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Surgery in a Multi-Cancer Cohort: A Retrospective Cohort Study}},
author = {Jaehyeong Cho and Hyoshuk Kim and Chi-Heum Cho},
journal = {Journal of Clinical Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/jcm15207846},
url = {https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/20/7846},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Postoperative Outcomes of Robotic Versus Conventional Surgery in a Multi-Cancer Cohort: A Retrospective Cohort Study
AU - Jaehyeong Cho
AU - Hyoshuk Kim
AU - Chi-Heum Cho
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/12
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
DO - 10.3390/jcm15207846
UR - https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/15/20/7846
AB - Background/Objectives: Evidence on robotic surgery is largely procedure-specific and depends on the comparator. We examined associations with postoperative outcomes, prioritizing colorectal and uterine cancer and distinguishing laparoscopic from open comparators. Methods: This retrospective cohort included 2139 patients undergoing elective surgery for colorectal, uterine, prostate, or renal cancer at a tertiary referral center in 2019–2023. The primary analysis included 1232 colorectal or uterine cancer patients undergoing robotic (n = 462) or laparoscopic (n = 770) surgery. Generalized linear models adjusted for age, sex, cancer type, and T category/FIGO stage group; operative time and staffing were added in sensitivity analysis. Absolute differences were estimated by G-computation. The four-cancer pooled analysis was secondary. Results: Robotic surgery was associated with a shorter hospital stay (length-of-stay ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.73–0.83; adjusted difference 2.34 days), which persisted with operative-time/staffing and calendar-year adjustment. Rehospitalization within 30 days after surgery was higher overall (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.82; 95% CI 1.34–2.47), but differed by cancer: aOR 2.50 (95% CI 1.77–3.53) for colorectal and 0.38 (95% CI 0.16–0.90) for uterine cancer (interaction p < 0.001). Estimates for 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and surgical site infection were imprecise. Conclusions: Rehospitalization differed in direction between these cancers, indicating that cancer type and comparator selection materially affect inference. These associations do not establish a platform-specific benefit or transferable bed-day savings.
SN - 2077-0383
ER -