Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2021; 34(05): 297-301
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1729863
Review Article

Robotic Surgery for Complicated Diverticular Disease

Fadwa Ali
1   Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA
,
Elizabeth Raskin
1   Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Diverticular disease is common, and increasing in prevalence worldwide. The treatment for acute and chronic diverticular disease has a huge clinical and economic burden. Surgery is standard for complicated diverticulitis, and there are several benefits to using robotic surgery in these cases. Complicated diverticular disease can result in fistula, fibrosis, and deranged anatomy, which present technical challenges to the surgeon. Understanding and anticipating these anatomical challenges is key to successful surgery. While fears of conversion in complicated cases may stop surgeons from using traditional laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery is especially promising for enhancing dexterity, visualization, and facilitating completely minimally invasive surgery in these complicated cases. In this chapter, we review end-to-end technical strategies of robotic colorectal surgery for complicated diverticular disease, including cases with colovesicular, colovaginal, and colocutaneous fistulae.



Publication History

Article published online:
03 September 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 
  • References

  • 1 Etzioni DA, Mack TM, Beart Jr RW, Kaiser AM. Diverticulitis in the United States: 1998-2005: changing patterns of disease and treatment. Ann Surg 2009; 249 (02) 210-217
  • 2 Anderson J, Luchtefeld M, Dujovny N, Hoedema R, Kim D, Butcher J. A comparison of laparoscopic, hand-assist and open sigmoid resection in the treatment of diverticular disease. Am J Surg 2007; 193 (03) 400-403 , discussion 403
  • 3 Masoomi H, Buchberg B, Nguyen B, Tung V, Stamos MJ, Mills S. Outcomes of laparoscopic versus open colectomy in elective surgery for diverticulitis. World J Surg 2011; 35 (09) 2143-2148
  • 4 Ahad S, Figueredo EJ. Laparoscopic colectomy. MedGenMed 2007; 9 (02) 37
  • 5 Klarenbeek BR, Veenhof AA, Bergamaschi R. et al. Laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticulitis decreases major morbidity rates: a randomized control trial: short-term results of the Sigma Trial. Ann Surg 2009; 249 (01) 39-44
  • 6 Schwandner O, Farke S, Bruch HP. Laparoscopic colectomy for diverticulitis is not associated with increased morbidity when compared with non-diverticular disease. Int J Colorectal Dis 2005; 20 (02) 165-172
  • 7 Lee SW, Yoo J, Dujovny N, Sonoda T, Milsom JW. Laparoscopic vs. hand-assisted laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum 2006; 49 (04) 464-469
  • 8 Köckerling F, Schneider C, Reymond MA. et al; Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery Study Group. Laparoscopic resection of sigmoid diverticulitis. Results of a multicenter study. Surg Endosc 1999; 13 (06) 567-571
  • 9 Obias V. Robotic Colon and Rectal Surgery: Principles and Practice. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017
  • 10 Park EJ, Baik SH. Robotic surgery for colon and rectal cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 2016; 18 (01) 5
  • 11 Halabi WJ, Kang CY, Jafari MD. et al. Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes. World J Surg 2013; 37 (12) 2782-2790
  • 12 Feinberg AE, Elnahas A, Bashir S, Cleghorn MC, Quereshy FA. Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic colorectal resections with respect to 30-day perioperative morbidity. Can J Surg 2016; 59 (04) 262-267
  • 13 Raskin ER, Keller DS, Gorrepati ML, Akiel-Fu S, Mehendale S, Cleary RK. Propensity-matched analysis of sigmoidectomies for diverticular disease. JSLS 2019; 23 (01) e73
  • 14 Berger MB, Khandwala N, Fenner DE, Burney RE. Colovaginal fistulas: presentation, evaluation, and management. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg 2016; 22 (05) 355-358