Chinese Surgical Robot Clinical Study on Rectectomy for Rectal Cancer
Comparision of the Outcomes and Learning Curve of Rectectomy for Rectal Cancer Using Diverse Minimally Technologies: Surgical Robot "Micro Hand S", Laparoscope
1 other identifier
interventional
105
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Central South University in collaboration with Tianjin University developed the first domestically produced Chinese minimally invasive surgical (MIS) robot system which named "Micro Hand S" in 2013. This new MIS robot had been authorized to enter the clinical trial stage by the Ethics Committee of the Third Xiangya Hospital at Central South University. The Micro Hand S robot is safe and feasible in the preliminary study. However, compared with minimally invasive approaches (da Vici, laparoscope), the merits and demrits of rectectomy for rectal cancer are unclear. Therefore, the investigators conduct this retrospective study to focus on this concern.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Jul 2015
Longer than P75 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
July 1, 2015
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
November 30, 2018
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 31, 2019
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
March 29, 2021
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
April 8, 2021
CompletedApril 8, 2021
April 1, 2021
3.4 years
March 29, 2021
April 5, 2021
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (17)
Type of surgical procedure
It was defined as what type of procedure was pferformed, for example, low anterior, abdominal perineal resection
up to 1 week after operation
Operative time (min)
It was defined as the duration from skin incision to skin closure
up to 1 week after operation
Conversion
Conversion was defined as any change in strategy to open surgery
up to 1 week after operation
Bloos loss (ml)
It was defined as the amount of blood in the whole surgical time
up to 1 week after operation
Protective ileostomy
It was defined as ileostomy which diverted the feces to To ensure anastomotic healing
up to 1 month after operation
Hospital stay (day)
It was defined as the length of hospital stay
up to 1 month after operation
Tumor size (cm)
It was defined as the longitudinal diameter of the tumor
up to 1 month after operation
Retrieved lymph node
It was defined as the number of all the lymph nodes for each patien
up to 1 month after operation
pTNM stage
It was defined as the pathological stage of the tumor according the TNM classification
up to 1 month after operation
Length of distal ressction margin (cm)
It was defined as the distance betwen the distal resection margin and the low margin of the tumor
up to 1 month after operation
Status of the surgical margin
It was defined as whether the distal and circumferential resection margins was involved the tumor cell under microscope
up to 1 month after operation
Quality of specimen
The quality of the speciman was graded according to the protocol proposed by Quirke
up to 1 month after operation
Postoperative complication
It was defined as the adverse events after operation and the complications were classfied according to the Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification
up to 1 month after operation
International Prostate Symptom Score
It assessed the urination with 7 items
at least12 months after operation
International Index of Erectile Function
It assessed erectile function with 5 items
at least 12 months after operation
Local recurrence
It was defined as the tumor was again found in the pelvic cavity
at least 1 years after operation
Disease free survival
It was defined as the duration between the operation and date of the tumor recurrence
at least 1 years after operation
Study Arms (2)
Micro Hand S robot-assisted surgery
EXPERIMENTALThis group is consisted of 40 cases performed using the Micro Hand S robot by one single surgeon for rectal cancer
Laparoscopic surgery
ACTIVE COMPARATORThis group is consisted of 65 cases performed using the laparoscope by one single surgeon for rectal cancer
Interventions
The surgeries are performed with the Micro Hand S robot
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- histologically confirmed rectal cancer; ASA score \< 3
You may not qualify if:
- palliative resections, combined resections, distant metastasis, a previous history of abdominal/or pelvic surgery
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University
Changsha, Hunan, 410013, China
Related Publications (1)
Wang Y, Wang G, Li Z, Ling H, Yi B, Zhu S. Comparison of the operative outcomes and learning curves between laparoscopic and "Micro Hand S" robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a retrospective study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2021 Jun 7;21(1):251. doi: 10.1186/s12876-021-01834-1.
PMID: 34098897DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- NON RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
March 29, 2021
First Posted
April 8, 2021
Study Start
July 1, 2015
Primary Completion
November 30, 2018
Study Completion
December 31, 2019
Last Updated
April 8, 2021
Record last verified: 2021-04
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share