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