Randomized Trial on Robotic Assisted Resection for Rectal Cancer

• tumor status [ Time Frame: One year ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  recurrence and survival
• Quality of life [ Time Frame: one year ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  Questionnaire

Hypothesis: the bladder and sexual functions can be better preserved in patients with robotic assisted rectal surgery

This is a randomized trial comparing the bladder and sexual function of patients who undergo laparoscopic and robotic assisted rectal resection for rectal cancer.

This is a randomized trial comparing the bladder and sexual function of patients who undergo laparoscopic and robotic assisted rectal resection for rectal cancer

The primary objective of this study is to compare the bladder and sexual functions of patients who undergo laparoscopic and robotic assisted resection for rectal cancer through a randomized controlled trial.

The secondary outcome measures include

1. The operative outcome in terms of the complication rate, hospital stay and reoperation of the two groups;
2. The quality of life of the patients and the cost of the two groups
3. The quality of the resected specimens
4. The local recurrence rates at two years after the surgery

• Rectal Cancer
• Adenocarcinoma

• Procedure: robotic assisted rectal resection
  robotic assisted rectal resection
• Procedure: laparoscopic rectal resection
  laparoscopic rectal resection

• Experimental: robotic
  robotic assisted rectal resection
  Intervention: Procedure: robotic assisted rectal resection
• Active Comparator: laparoscopic
  laparoscopic rectal resection
  Intervention: Procedure: laparoscopic rectal resection

Inclusion Criteria:

1. Histologically proven new case of rectal cancer with the lower border within 15 cm from anal verge
2. Age >18 years
3. Informed consent obtained
4. American Society of Anesthesiologist class 1-3
5. No contraindication to laparoscopic surgery
6. Acceptable operating risk

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Locally advanced fixed tumor with the need for exenterative surgery
2. Severe cardiac or pulmonary comorbidity rendering pneumoperitoneum hazardous
3. Multiple previous operations with the anticipation of dense peritoneal adhesions
4. No informed consent