Abstract
Purpose
Robotic colorectal surgery continues to rise in popularity, but there remains little evidence on the stress response following the procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inflammatory response to robotic colorectal surgery and compare it with the response generated by open colorectal surgery.
Methods
This was a prospective nonrandomized comparative study involving 61 patients with colorectal cancer. The evaluation of inflammatory response to either robotic or open colorectal surgery was expressed as changes in interleukin-1β, interleukin-1 receptor antagonist, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-α, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin during the first three postoperative days.
Results
Of the 61 patients, 33 underwent robotic colorectal surgery while 28 had open colorectal surgery. Groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, BMI, cancer stage, and type of resection. The relative increase of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist at 8 h postoperative, compared to baseline, was higher in the open group (P = 0.006). The decrease of interleukin-1 receptor antagonist on postoperative days 1 and 3, compared to the maximum at 8 h, was more pronounced in the open group than in the robotic group (P = 0.008, P = 0.006, respectively), and the relative increase of interleukin-6 at 8 h after incision was higher in the open group (P = 0.007). The relative increase of procalcitonin on postoperative days 1 and 3 was higher in the open group than the robotic group (P < 0.001, P = 0.004, respectively).
Conclusions
This study shows that when compared with open colorectal surgery, robotic colorectal surgery results in a less pronounced inflammatory response and more pronounced anti-inflammatory action.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The act of surgery initiates a significant physiologic stress reaction in the patient. This involves the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines which triggers a cascade of reactions, resulting in an acute phase response known as systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) [1, 2]. In patients with no complications, the pro-inflammatory action is quickly balanced by a compensatory anti-inflammatory response (CARS). The magnitude of SIRS is proportional to the extent of the surgical procedure, and surgical techniques that limit tissue manipulation and destruction can reduce the SIRS and its attendant complications.
Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer and the fourth leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide [3]. Curative treatment of colorectal cancer relies predominantly upon surgical resection. In Western countries, close to half of elective colorectal resections performed today are done laparoscopically [4]. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer is safe and associated with improved short-term outcomes [5, 6]. There is also evidence of an oncologic benefit that goes beyond decreased pain and a quicker recovery [7].
In recent years, robotic colorectal surgery (RCS) has gained momentum in the USA with nearly 10 % of minimally invasive rectal cancer resections now performed robotically [8]. Interestingly, however, there continues to be a lack of evidence on the stress response following RCS.
In this study, the authors evaluate the inflammatory response to robotic colorectal surgery and compare it to the response generated by open colorectal surgery (OCS).
Materials and methods
This study was designed as a prospective, comparative nonrandomized study. Between March 2013 and June 2015, 61 unselected patients with colorectal cancer were enrolled. Exclusion criteria included age <18 years, ASA >3, emergency surgery, patients with gross metastatic disease, locally advanced cancers not amenable to curative resection, and patients with tumors requiring en bloc multi-visceral resection. Patients with synchronous other cancers, severe cardiovascular or respiratory disease, severe mental disorders, or immunological diseases requiring systemic administration of corticosteroids were also excluded.
After discussing the advantages and disadvantages of each surgical approach with the operating surgeon, the patients chose either the robotic or standard open technique. The study received approval from the local ethics committee, and informed consent was given by all participating patients. The da Vinci SI surgical console (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA) was used for all robotic procedures.
A standard clinical pathway was applied to all patients in this study. All patients received perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis. In the first three postoperative days, parenteral opioids were used for pain control. These were gradually replaced with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Oral liquids were permitted on postoperative day 1, and patients advanced to a liquid then solid diet by postoperative days 2 and 3, when tolerated. Nasogastric tubes were not inserted, and surgical closed drains were removed on postoperative day 1 or 2. Criteria for discharge included tolerance of soft diet and no apparent complaints or complications.
Patient demographics, co-morbidities, perioperative outcomes, postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo scale, and pathology results were recorded prospectively in the database. Levels of interleukin-1β (IL-1β), interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT) were measured prior to surgery, 8 h following incision, and on postoperative days 1 and 3.
Analytical methods
Blood was drawn by venipuncture, allowed to clot for 30 min, and then centrifuged (15 min, 720×g). The serum was collected, divided, and kept frozen at −80 °C until examination. Levels of IL-1β, IL-1ra, IL-6, and TNF-α were measured in duplicates by means of a flow cytometry-based method that utilized magnetic microspheres conjugated with monoclonal antibodies, using the Bio-Plex 200 platform with HRF (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) and incorporating Luminex xMAP® technology, Bio-Plex Pro™ Human Cytokine, Chemokine, and Growth Factor Magnetic Bead-Based Assays according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Standard curves were drawn using 5-PL logistic regression, and the data was analyzed using Bio-Plex Manager 6.0 software.
Procalcitonin was measured using the Vidas BRAHMS PCT automated test (bioMérieux, Marcy-l’Etoile, France) with the enzyme-linked fluorescent assay (ELFA) technique. For the purpose of statistical analysis, values below the limit of detection (0.05 ng/ml) were replaced with a value of 0.025 ng/ml. C-reactive protein was measured using the Multigent CRP Vario immunoturbidimetric test with the Architect 4100 Ci analyzer (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL).
Statistical analysis
The normality of distribution was tested using χ 2 test with Lilliefors significance correction and the homogeneity of variations using Levene’s test. Log-transformation was used when appropriate. Data were presented as median or mean with 95 % confidence interval and analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis H test and Mann-Whitney U test or one-way ANOVA and t test for independent samples, with Welch correction if appropriate. Repeated measures ANOVA (two-factor design) test was used to compare postsurgical dynamics in the levels of inflammatory and anti-inflammatory mediators. Estimates of sphericity were applied, including the Greenhouse-Geisser correction and Huynh-Feldt correction, corrected by Lecoultre. Two-way ANOVA was used to co-exam the effect of surgical approach and tumor location. Frequency analysis was conducted using χ 2 test or Fisher’s exact test. Partial Pearson’s correlation coefficients were also calculated in order to assess the net association between cytokines and compare using z-statistics. All calculated probabilities were two tailed, and P values ≤0.05 were considered statistically significant. The statistical analysis was conducted using MedCalc Statistical Software version 16.8 (MedCalc Software bvba, Ostend, Belgium; https://www.medcalc.org; 2016).
In order to better assess the dynamics in cytokine levels, as well as account for potential differences in the baseline levels between groups or the inter-assay variability of tests, relative changes were also calculated. They were expressed either as fold increase/decrease in cytokine level between points in time or as percent increase/decrease if the differences were less pronounced.
Results
Demographics and perioperative outcomes
Between March 2013 and June 2015, 61 patients were recruited. Of these, 33 qualified for, and chose, RCS. The remaining 28 patients underwent OCS. Two patients were transferred from the robotic to the open group due to intraoperative conversions. The reasons for conversion included abdominal adhesions, difficult pelvic anatomy, and iatrogenic injury of the spleen.
Demographic data for patients in the two groups were comparable (Table 1). There were no differences found between the groups in terms of tumor location or stage of cancer. The mean length of surgery was significantly increased in the RCS group (P < 0.001). Major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo III–V) were rare and observed only in the OCS group (P = 0.113). All complications were related to anastomotic leakage and required surgical re-intervention. There was no mortality. The adequacy of oncologic resection, expressed by the number of harvested lymph nodes, was similar in both groups (RCS = 13 [12–14.8] vs. OCS = 15 [13.6–17]) (P = 0.154).
IL-1β
There were significant differences among measurements taken at various points, as well as differences between the RCS and OCS groups overall (Fig. 1a). The trend analysis of perioperative dynamics of IL-1β revealed it to be linear (P = 0.017) in the RCS group but cubic in the OCS group (P = 0.060). There was a significant difference between cytokine levels preoperatively and at 8 h post incision. In the OCS group, an analysis of relative changes in the cytokine levels showed that IL-1β decreased by 10 % from 8 h post incision to 24 h post incision. In the RCS group, however, cytokine levels increased by 18 % (P = 0.073) during the same time frame.
To avoid potential bias due to higher number of rectal cancers in OCS group, cytokine dynamics was re-evaluated in subgroups stratified by tumor location (right sided, left sided, and rectal tumors). Additionally, the effects of different surgery types were co-examined along with tumor location as a covariate by means of two-way ANOVA.
In case of IL-1β, additional analysis in subgroups did not show any significant differences with respect to surgical approach (Supplementary Figs. 1a–3a).
IL-1ra
There were significant differences in the cytokine levels and the dynamics of IL-1ra during various points in the perioperative period and also by type of surgical approach (Fig. 1b). In particular, the IL-1ra significantly increased in response to surgery and decreased on postoperative days 1 and 3 in both groups. However, there was a relative increase at 8 h compared to the preoperative cytokine levels which was significantly higher in the OCS group than in the RCS group (2.8-fold [2.1–3.7] vs. 1.6-fold [1.2–2.1]) (P = 0.006). In addition, the decrease at 24 h, when compared to the maximum at 8 h, was more pronounced in the OCS group, where it decreased by half, while in the RCS group, it decreased by 21 % (P = 0.008). Similarly, the drop at 72 h, compared to 8 h, was higher in the OCS group (65 %) than in the RCS group (21 %) (P = 0.006).
The analysis conducted in subgroups stratified by tumor location revealed similar trends in perioperative dynamics of IL-1ra (Supplementary Figs. 1b–3b) to the trend observed in combined cohort (Fig. 1b). Regardless of tumor location, relative increase at 8 h was higher in the open than robotic group, significantly in right (2.9- vs. 1.5-fold, P = 0.027) and left (2.3- vs. 1.1-fold, P = 0.021) colonic cancers and insignificantly in rectal cancers (3- vs. 2-fold, P = 0.259). Also, two-way ANOVA confirmed that not tumor location (P = 0.148) but the surgical approach (P = 0.005) was responsible for relative increase in IL-1ra at 8 h post incision.
IL-6
As depicted in Fig. 1c, perioperative levels of IL-6 changed significantly with time as well as between the groups. The effect of time was impacted by the surgical approach. In both groups, patients responded to surgery with a significant increase in IL-6. After maximum elevation at 8 h post incision, IL-6 began to drop. After 72 h, however, it was still significantly higher than preoperative cytokine levels. Additionally, patients who underwent RCS experienced 2.7 times lower increase in IL-6 at 8 h post incision than those who underwent OCS (9-fold [5.1–16] vs. 24.2-fold [15.6–37.5]) (P = 0.007). Finally, the drop observed after 24 h was significant in the OCS group but not in the RCS group.
Similar trends were observed in patients stratified by tumor location (Supplementary Figs. 1c–3c). Relative increase at 8 h was higher in OCS than RCS group, significantly so in rectal cancers (35.9- vs. 8.9-fold, P = 0.05) and insignificantly in left (15.4- vs. 7.2-fold, P = 0.077) and right colonic (29.3- vs. 7.7-fold, P = 0.160) cancers. Two-way ANOVA confirmed that not tumor location (P = 0.591) but the surgical approach (P = 0.015) was responsible for observed increase in IL-6 at 8 h.
TNF-α
As with other measurements, there were significant differences observed in the TNF-α levels among various points in time as well as differences between the groups. Additionally, the dynamics of TNF-α changed with time and were dependent on type of surgical approach (Fig. 1d). Trend analysis of TNF-α perioperative dynamics showed it to be linear (P = 0.026) in the RCS group and cubic in the OCS group (P = 0.012). Analysis of relative changes in cytokine levels showed significant differences between both groups at baseline and an increase at 8 h post incision that was higher in the OCS group 127 % (110–147 %) than in the RCS group 105 % (89–125 %) (P = 0.088). On postoperative days 1 and 3, however, cytokine levels steadily increased in the RCS group while they decreased in the OCS group. When compared to cytokine levels at 8 h, 24-h post incision TNF-α levels constituted 86 % (76–96 %) of cytokine levels in the OCS group but 109 % (90–133 %) in the RCS group (P = 0.034). Even more pronounced was the difference between TNF-α at 8 and 72 h, with a drop to 81 % (69–96 %) in the OCS group and an increase to 114 % (93–139 %) of cytokine levels in the RCS group (P = 0.009).
Also in subgroups based on tumor location, the perioperative dynamics in TNFα were rather linear after RCS and cubic after OCS (Supplementary Figs. 1d–3d). Relative increase at 8 h tended to be more pronounced after open than robotic surgery, 122 vs. 90 %, P = 0.160 in left and 144 vs. 109 %, P = 0.189 in right colonic cancers and 146 vs. 118 %, P = 0.320 in rectal cancers. Compared to cytokine levels at 8 h, TNFα at 72 h decreased after OCS and increased after RCS, significantly in rectal (79.6 vs. 115 %, P = 0.042) and left colonic cancers (83 vs. 132 %, P = 0.012) and insignificantly in right colonic cancers (93 vs. 129 %, P = 0.461). In two-way ANOVA, not tumor location (P = 0.762) but the surgical approach (P = 0.012) significantly affected the difference between TNFα at 72 and 8 h.
Cytokine correlation pattern
At each point in time, relative changes in IL-1β and TNF-α were coordinated, regardless of the surgical approach, although the correlation seemed to be stronger in the RCS group (Table 2). Changes in the anti-inflammatory IL-1ra were positively correlated with the changes in IL-6 in the RCS group, while IL-1ra correlated rather with TNF-α in the OCS group.
CRP
The levels of CRP varied by time and tended to differ between the two groups (Fig. 1e). Trend analysis revealed both groups to be linear or cubic, with equal probability (P < 0.0001). There appeared to be significantly lower CRP levels at 24 h post incision in the RCS group as compared to the OCS group. In the analysis of relative changes, however, taking into account the CRP differences at baseline, there were no significant differences in dynamics of CRP during the perioperative period between the RCS and OCS groups.
No significant approach-related differences in hsCRP dynamics were found when tumor location was considered (Supplementary Figs. 1e–3e) except for significantly lower levels observed at 24 h after robotic surgery in patients with rectal tumors (Supplementary Fig. 3e). However, following adjustment with differences in baseline hsCRP, the observation lost statistical significance.
PCT
There were significant differences between measurements of PCT at various times as well as differences between the two groups. The dynamics of PCT changes with time were dependent upon the surgical approach (Fig. 1f). The relative increase of PCT at 8 h post incision was 3.6-fold in the OCS group and tended to be more pronounced than in the RCS group (2-fold) (P = 0.103). Likewise, the relative increase of PCT at 24 h was 62.1-fold in the OCS group and 11.7-fold in the RCS group, when compared to baseline levels (P < 0.001). Finally, at 72 h post incision, PCT adjusted to baseline levels was significantly more elevated in the OCS group (24.2-fold) than in the RCS group (6.6-fold) (P = 0.004).
The perioperative dynamics of PCT was similar when analyzed in subgroups stratified by tumor location with significantly higher PCT levels at 24 h after open surgery than robotic surgery in right and left colonic and rectal cancers (Supplementary Figs. 1f–3f). Also, relative increase at 24 h was significantly more pronounced in open surgery than robotic group regardless tumor location, 38.9- vs. 8.8-fold, P = 0.044 and 46- vs. 8.4-fold, P = 0.038 in right and left colonic cancers, respectively, and 113- vs. 27-fold, P = 0.041 in rectal cancers. In two-way ANOVA, both the surgical approach (P = 0.001) and tumor location (P = 0.010) affected relative increase at 24 h.
Discussion
Surgery, whether open, laparoscopic, or robotic, is a controlled trauma initiating a sequence of inflammatory, neuroendocrine, and metabolic changes. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has been found to diminish the inflammatory response and blunt the immunosuppression [9, 10]. Still, while laparoscopy undoubtedly reduces the length of skin incision, the methods of tissue manipulation, division, and repair have remained somewhat crude. Conversely, the ability to enter the body through small openings, carefully divide and repair tissue, and reduce the risk of bleeding has been considerably enhanced with the advent of the surgical robot. It is therefore expected that robotic surgery should result in even less surgical stress.
Until now, only Shibata and colleagues have studied stress response following RCS [11]. In their pioneering report, the authors compared human leukocyte antigen D-related (HLA-DR) and CRP levels. They concluded a stress response following the robotic and laparoscopic procedures to be comparable but lower than in the open procedures. Of importance, groups in their study were small and heterogeneous.
Surgical incision evokes an immediate release of numerous mediators at the local and systemic levels. The first cytokines released in the area of injury are IL-1β and TNF-α. In turn, they trigger an acute-phase cascade with a secretion of numerous pro-inflammatory mediators. Both cytokines are released immediately after the first stimuli and have a half-life of 20 and 6 min, respectively. Taking this into consideration in the current study, the first postoperative measurements at 8 h post incision likely missed the initial peak of those cytokines.
The next key mediator released in the cascade of acute response is IL-6 [12, 13], which has been shown to be strongly associated with the magnitude of operative injury. In previous reports on stress response following laparoscopic and open approaches, IL-6 was one of the most commonly measured parameters. Published results were inconsistent, however, with some authors noting concentrations of IL-6 to be higher following OCS and others finding no differences [7, 14–19] Additionally, IL-6 had not previously been examined in association with RCS. The current study is the first report demonstrating a lower increase of IL-6 among patients undergoing the robotic procedure and implying lessened SIRS following RCS. This trend is further confirmed by analysis of the PCT levels, another marker known for its correlation with the severity of SIRS [20, 21].
In the course of uneventful recovery, SIRS is quickly balanced by a compensatory anti-inflammatory response. Conversely, imbalanced pro-inflammatory action escalates SIRS and provokes multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome. One of the indicators expressing the extent of CARS is IL-1ra, which joins IL-1 receptor, blocks its downstream signaling, and limits IL-1-driven inflammation. Until now, only Schwenk et al. used IL-1ra to test CARS and found no differences following laparoscopic and open procedures [22]. In the current study, an elevation of IL-1ra was observed in both groups, although the profile of response seemed to be more favorable in the RCS group. Initially, the IL-1ra increase was less pronounced in RCS patients at 8 h post incision, but it remained elevated until postoperative day 3. In the OCS group, a rapid drop followed the initial higher cytokine peak, which implies faster termination of CARS. Interestingly, a strong correlation between IL-6 and IL-1ra was observed at every point in time following RCS, while the correlation between IL-6 and IL-1ra after OCS was less evident. Presuming that IL-6 and IL-1ra depict the extent of SIRS and CARS, respectively, this discovery indicates a poorer balance between the pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory responses in the OCS group.
The last decade has seen a significant amount of research around the impact of laparoscopic colorectal surgery and open colorectal surgery on the immune system. Surgery remains a mainstay of therapy for colorectal cancer; however, it also results in a transient immunosuppression with weakened tumor resistance [23]. Experimental animal studies have suggested better preservation of immunity following laparoscopic colorectal surgery, demonstrating that laparotomy compared with laparoscopy is associated with increased tumor establishment and growth [24, 25]. Unfortunately, human data supporting this hypothesis is sparse [10, 26].
In light of all of this, the results in the current study show a postoperative increase of TNF-α in the RCS group and are worth noting. Until now, only two studies analyzed TNF-α following laparoscopic and open procedures [27, 28]. In both papers, the authors considered TNF-α as purely a mediator of acute phase response and found its concentrations to be at the same level or higher, following the open surgery as compared to the laparoscopic procedure. The findings in the current study do not sync up with those findings. Instead, minute but significant differences between the RCS and OCS groups were observed, with a stable postoperative increase of TNF-α in the RCS group. It is also important to remember that TNF-α is truly a multi-functional cytokine. Thus, apart from being a classic, early mediator of inflammation, it acts on immune cells and holds strong anti-tumor activity [29]. The anti-neoplastic property of TNF-α has been documented against a wide range of tumor types and led to its use in the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas and metastatic melanomas [30, 31]. It would be of benefit to patients if the postoperative elevation of TNF-α in the RCS group echoed its strong anti-tumor activity encountered in a window of blunted host defense.
This study is one of the first reports addressing the issue of stress response following RACS and comparing it with traditional, open counterpart. Several drawbacks are present, however, including an obvious lack of randomization. Nevertheless, the analyzed groups were well balanced with respect to demographics, cancer stage, and the extent of surgery. Although tumor locations were comparable in the two groups, the number of rectal cancers in OCS group was higher. Rectal cancers are likely to require more extensive interventions leading to greater trauma, as exemplified herein by significantly more pronounced elevation of PCT in rectal cancers. Therefore, to avoid the potential bias in favor of robotic surgery, the impact of surgical approach was confirmed in the analysis in which differences in tumor location were accounted for by means of two-way ANOVA. Moreover, the data was re-analyzed in subgroups based on tumor location. All trends differentiating OCS and RCS in terms of perioperative dynamics of inflammatory mediators found in the whole cohort were also observed after patients’ stratification. However, as the statistical power of the analysis in subgroups was reduced due to substantially lower number of evaluated patients, not all of them reached statistical significance.
Another shortcoming that might be considered is discrepancy in the experience of surgeons with regard to the analyzed surgical techniques. Participating surgeons had much more experience with the conventional, open approach than with the robotic technique, which may have influenced results in favor of OCS.
In conclusion, this report shows that robotic surgery results in less pronounced inflammatory response and stronger anti-inflammatory action. In addition, subtle but significant differences in postoperative fluctuations of TNF-α were observed between the two groups, which may indicate better preservation of immune function following a robotic procedure. Certainly, the results strengthen the hypothesis that the robotic approach results in less overall disturbances of the body hemostasis, although the clinical relevance of these observations is unknown. Whether the observed changes can affect postoperative outcomes, and ideally patient survival, remains to be studied.
References
Marik PE, Flemmer M (2012) The immune response to surgery and trauma: implications for treatment. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 73:801–808
Dinarello CA, Novick D, Kim S et al (2013) Interleukin-18 and IL-18 binding protein. Front Immunol 4:289
Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F et al (2008) Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 127:2893–2917
Kolfschoten NE, van Leersum NJ, Gooiker GA et al (2013) Successful and safe introduction of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in Dutch hospitals. Ann Surg 257(5):916–921
The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group (2004) A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 350:2050–2059
Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al (2005) Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 365:1718–1726
Delgado S, Lacy AM, Filella X et al (2001) Acute phase response in laparoscopic and open colectomy in colon cancer: randomized study. Dis Colon rectum 44:638–646
Bhama AR, Obias V, Welch KB et al (2016) A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery outcomes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database. Surg Endosc 30(4):1576–1584
Sammour T, Kahokehr A, Chan S et al (2010) The humoral response after laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis. J Surg Res 164(1):28–37
Liu C, Liu J, Zhang S (2011) Laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery for immune function in patients with colorectal cancer. Int J Color Dis 26(11):1375–1385
Shibata J, Ishihara S, Tada N et al (2015) Surgical stress response after colorectal resection: a comparison of robotic, laparoscopic, and open surgery. Tech Coloproctol 19(5):275–280
Waldner MJ, Foersch S, Neurath MF (2012) Interleukin-6—a key regulator of colorectal cancer development. Int J Biol Sci 8(9):1248–1253
Brøchner AC, Toft P (2009) Pathophysiology of the systemic inflammatory response after major accidental trauma. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 17:43
Hewitt PM, Ip SM, Kwowk SPY et al (1998) Laparoscopic-assisted vs. open surgery for colorectal cancer: comparative study of immune effects. Dis Colon rectum 41(7):901–909
Hasegawa H, Kabeshima Y, Watanabe M et al (2003) Randomized controlled trial of laparoscopic versus open colectomy for advanced colorectal cancer. Surg Endosc 17(4):636–640
Dunker MS, Ten Hove T, Bemelman WA et al (2003) Interleukin-6, C- reactive protein, and expression of human leukocyte antigen-DR on peripheral blood mononuclear cells in patients after laparoscopic vs. conventional bowel resection: a randomized study. Dis Colon rectum 46(9):1238–1244
Ordemann J, Jacobi CA, Schwenk W et al (2001) Cellular and humoral inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional colorectal resections: results of a prospective randomized trial. Surg Endosc 15(6):600–608
Stage JG, Schulze S, Moller P et al (1997) Prospective randomized study of laparoscopic versus open colonic resection for adenocarcinoma. Br J Surg 84(3):391–396
Wu FP, Sietses C, von Blomberg BM et al (2003) Systemic and peritoneal inflammatory response after laparoscopic or conventional colon resection in cancer patients: a prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon rectum 46(2):147–155
Hensel M, Volk T, Docke WD et al (1998) Hyperprocalcitonemia in patients with noninfectious SIRS and pulmonary dysfunction associated with cardiopulmonary bypass. Anesthesiology 89(1):93–104
Meisner M, Tschaikowsky K, Hutzler A et al (1998) Postoperative plasma concentrations of procalcitonin after different types of surgery. Intensive Care Med 24(7):680–684
Schwenk W, Jacobi C, Mansmann U et al (2000) Inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional colorectal resections—results of a prospective randomized trial. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 385(1):2–9
Whelan RL, Franklin M, Holubar SD et al (2003) Postoperative cell mediated immune response is better preserved after laparoscopic vs open colorectal resection in humans. Surg Endosc 17(6):972–978
Allendorf JD, Bessler M, Horvath KD et al (1998) Increased tumor establishment and growth after open vs laparoscopic bowel resection in mice. Surg Endosc 12:1035–1038
Lee SW, Gleason N, Blanco I et al (2002) Higher colon cancer tumor proliferative index and lower tumor cell death rate in mice undergoing laparotomy versus insufflation. Surg Endosc 16(1):36–39
Veenhof AA, Vlug MS, van der Pas MH et al (2012) Surgical stress response and postoperative immune function after laparoscopy or open surgery with fast track or standard perioperative care: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 255(2):216–221
Ordemann J, Jacobi CA, Schwenk W et al (2001) Cellular and humoral inflammatory response after laparoscopic and conventional colorectal resections. Surg Endosc 15(6):600–608
Leung KL, Lai PB, Ho RL et al (2000) Systemic cytokine response after laparoscopic-assisted resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 231(4):506–511
van Horssen R, Ten Hagen TL, Eggermont AM (2006) TNF-alpha in cancer treatment: molecular insights, antitumor effects, and clinical utility. Oncologist 11(4):397–408
Salmon SE, Young L, Scuderi P et al (1987) Antineoplastic effects of tumor necrosis factor alone and in combination with gamma-interferon on tumor biopsies in clonogenic assay. J Clin Oncol 1987 5(11):1816–1821
Roberts NJ, Zhou S, Diaz LA Jr et al (2011) Systemic use of tumor necrosis factor alpha as an anticancer agent. Oncotarget 2(10):739–751
Acknowledgments
This study was part of the project entitled “Wrovasc—Integrated Cardiovascular Centre,” cofinanced by the European Regional Development Fund, as part of the Innovative Economy Operational Program, 2007–2013. It took place at Regional Specialist Hospital, Research and Development Centre in Wroclaw, Poland.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Additional information
Author Marek Zawadzki and author Malgorzata Krzystek-Korpacka contributed equally to the presented work
Electronic supplementary material
Supplementary Figure 1
(DOCX 127 kb)
Supplementary Figure 2
(DOCX 128 kb)
Supplementary Figure 3
(DOCX 125 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zawadzki, M., Krzystek-Korpacka, M., Gamian, A. et al. Comparison of inflammatory responses following robotic and open colorectal surgery: a prospective study. Int J Colorectal Dis 32, 399–407 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2697-0
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-016-2697-0