Table 3. Studies investigating the effect of new surgical techniques among the patients who underwent colorectal surgery with an enhanced recovery after surgery protocol

Author Year Study design Technique No. of patients Population LOS Complications Other notes
Migliore et al. [16] 2021 Retrospective cohort Lap. vs. Robot 170 vs. 46 Right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis +ERAS OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.79−1.10, P=0.74 No difference No difference in conversion, readmission, 30-day morbidity, and major morbidity. Operative time was longer in robotic surgery (P<0.001)
Asklid et al. [17] 2022 Retrospective cohort (the Swedish part of the international ERAS Interactive Audit System) Open vs. Lap. vs. Robot 3,125 (1,429 vs. 869 vs. 827) Rectal tumor resection +ERAS Robotic was the shortest (median 9 vs. 7 vs. 6 days) No difference (40.9% vs. 31.2% vs. 35.9%) Similar preoperative and intraoperative compliance to the ERAS protocol
Hung et al. [18] 2023 Retrospective cohort Lap. vs. Robot 155 (31 cases/quintile) Colorectal resection +ERAS For ≤5 days, robotic surgery: OR 5.029, 95% CI 1.321−19.421, P=0.018 The more recent the period, the higher the rate of robotic surgery, the higher median compliance rate of ERAS protocol, and the shorter LOS.
Kim et al. [19] 2019 Retrospective cohort Lap./ERAS vs. SILS/Cv. Lap./Cv. 91 vs. 83 vs. 96 Colon cancer ERAS was a significant factor (in multiple regression analysis, P<0.001) No difference among the groups No difference in reoperation and readmission among the groups
LOS, length of hospital stay; Lap., laparoscopic surgery; ERAS, enhanced recovery after surgery; SILS, single incision laparoscopic surgery; Cv., conventional perioperative treatment.