Skip to main content

Table 3 Postoperative functional comparisons between robotic and transanal or laparoscopic approach

From: Robotic surgery contributes to the preservation of bowel and urinary function after total mesorectal excision: comparisons with transanal and conventional laparoscopic surgery

Variables

Robot

taTME

P value*

Laparoscopy

P value**

N = 33

N = 8

N = 11

Wexner score†

10 (0–20)

12 (4–17)

0.13

11 (6–19)

0.16

Wexner ≥ 10, n (%)

17 (51.5)

6 (75.0)

0.42

7 (63.6)

0.72

LARS score†

35 (11–41)

38 (33–42)

0.22

35 (31–41)

0.08

Major LARS, n (%)

26 (78.8)

8 (100)

0.31

11 (100)

0.16

mFIQL score†

38.0 (0–85.7)

53.5 (10–100)

0.13

40.4 (2.38–100)

0.43

mFIQL ≥ 50, n (%)

10 (30.3)

5 (62.5)

0.11

5 (45.5)

0.46

IPSS†

3 (0–23)

3 (1–16)

0.35

8 (0–29)

0.09

Severe IPSS, n (%)

2 (6.1)

0 (0)

1.00

4 (36.4)

0.02

  1. taTME transanal total mesorectal excision, LARS low anterior resection syndrome, mFIQL modified fecal incontinence quality of life, IPSS international prostate symptom score
  2. †Median (Range)
  3. *Robotic vs Transanal; **Robotic vs Laparoscopic