Abstract:Background Laparoscopic surgery is increasingly used for rectal cancer, but the long-term oncological outcomes for low rectal cancer have not been fully established. We aimed to evaluate the 3-year survival outcomes of laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery in the treatment of low rectal cancer. Methods This multicentre, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial was conducted at 22 tertiary hospitals in China. Individuals aged 18–75 years with histologically confirmed cT1–2N0, cT3–4aN0, or cT1–4aN1–2 rectal adenocarcinoma within 5 cm from the dentate line were eligible for inclusion. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) to undergo laparoscopic surgery or open surgery. Central randomisation was conducted using a web response system, and was stratified by clinical stage, age, sex, BMI, and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Investigators, patients and statisticians were not masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival, defined as the time from the date of surgery to the date of locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, or death from any cause, whichever occurred first. Non-inferiority was defined as a lower limit of one-sided 97·5% CI for group difference (laparoscopic surgery group minus open surgery group) of greater than –10%. The primary analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which excluded patients with distant metastasis discovered during surgery and those who did not undergo surgery or underwent local resection only. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01899547, and has been completed. Findings Between Nov 12, 2013, and June 6, 2018, 1070 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to treatment. 1039 patients (685 in the laparoscopic surgery group and 354 in the open surgery group; median age 57 years, IQR 50 to 64; 620 [60%] male and 419 [40%] women) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. 3-year disease-free survival was 81·4% (95% CI 78·2 to 84·1) in the laparoscopic surgery group and 79·8% (75·2 to 83·6) in the open surgery group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·92, 95% CI 0·69 to 1·23; p=0·56). The difference between groups was 1·60% (one-sided 97·5% CI –3·34 to ∞, p<0·0001 for non-inferiority). 3-year overall survival was 91·7% (95% CI 89·3 to 93·5) in the laparoscopic surgery group and 93·7% (90·6 to 95·8) in the open surgery group (HR 1·34, 95% CI 0·82 to 2·19; p=0·24). 3-year locoregional recurrence was 3·7% (95% CI 2·5 to 5·3) and 2·3% (1·1 to 4·3), respectively (HR 1·64, 95% CI 0·74 to 3·63; p=0·22). 5-year overall survival was 84·6% (95% CI 81·5 to 87·1) and 86·6% (82·5 to 89·8) in the open group (HR 1·16, 95% CI 0·82 to 1·64; p=0·41). Interpretation Laparoscopic surgery performed by experienced surgeons is non-inferior to open surgery for 3-year disease-free survival among patients with low rectal cancer. These results support the use of laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer. Funding The Key Clinical Specialty Discipline Construction Program of the National Health and Family Planning Commission of China; Minimally Invasive Medical Center Construction Program, Fujian Province, China; and Joint Funds for the Innovation of Science and Technology, Fujian Province, China.

Comparing the long‐term follow‐up anal function between robot‐assisted and laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer: A meta‐analysis and systematic review

Robotic versus laparoscopic Gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis

Robot-assisted Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The role of robotic-assisted surgery in the management of rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Robotic-assisted low anterior resection for rectal cancer shows similar clinical efficacy to laparoscopic surgery: A propensity score matched study

Comparison of efficacy and safety between robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for locally advanced mid-low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Robotic surgery versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a comparative study on surgical safety and functional outcomes

Laparoscopic-assisted Vs Open Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer: 5-Year Outcomes of the LASRE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Robotic-Assisted vs. Standard Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 19,731 Patients

Short-term outcomes of robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-analysis

Efficacy of robot-assisted vs. laparoscopy surgery in the treatment of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis

Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for middle and low rectal cancer (REAL): Short-term outcomes of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancers

Laparoscopy-assisted Versus Open Surgery for Low Rectal Cancer (LASRE): 3-Year Survival Outcomes of a Multicentre, Randomised, Controlled, Non-Inferiority Trial.

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Middle and Low Rectal Cancer (REAL): Primary Outcome of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial.

A Single-Center Study on the Comparison of Short-Term Efficacy of Robotic and Laparoscopic Radical Resection of Middle and Low Rectal Cancer with Da Vinci (Xi)

Analysis of bowel function, urogenital function, and long-term follow-up outcomes associated with robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-preserving surgical approaches to total mesorectal excision in low rectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Disease, Focusing on Rectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis

The urinary and sexual outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis