Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Colon Cancer: Efficacy, Safety, and Outcomes—A Focus on Studies from 2020–2024.

Simple Summary: In this research, we explored the latest advancements in minimally invasive surgery for colon cancer, by comparing laparoscopic surgery to the robotic approach. Our goal was to determine which method has better outcomes in terms of length of surgery, hospital stay, the likelihood of conversion, rate of complications, anastomotic leaks, and the effectiveness of tumor removal by evaluating the number of lymphatic nodes harvested. The findings could help surgeons and patients make more informed decisions related to the surgical options, considering the benefits of each technique. This summary aims to give a straightforward overview of the importance of this research and how it could impact the surgical approach. Background: Minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of colon cancer has significantly advanced over the years. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the operative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of colon cancer, focusing on operative time, hospital stay, conversion rates, anastomotic leak rates, and total number lymph node harvested. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic search across four databases up to January 2024, registering our protocol with PROSPERO (CRD42024513326). We included studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic surgeries for colon cancer, assessing operative time, hospital length of stay, and other perioperative outcomes. Risk of bias was evaluated using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist. Statistical analysis utilized a mix of fixed and random-effects models based on heterogeneity. Results: A total of 21 studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 50,771 patients, with 21.75% undergoing robotic surgery and 78.25% laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery was associated with longer operative times (SMD = −1.27, p < 0.00001) but shorter hospital stays (MD = 0.42, p = 0.003) compared to laparoscopic surgery. Conversion rates were significantly higher in laparoscopic procedures (OR = 2.02, p < 0.00001). No significant differences were found in anastomotic leak rates. A higher number of lymph nodes was harvested by robotic approach (MD = −0.65, p = 0.04). Publication bias was addressed through funnel plot analysis and Egger's test, indicating the presence of asymmetry (p = 0.006). Conclusions: The choice of surgical method should be individualized, considering factors such as surgeon expertise, medical facilities, and patient-specific considerations. Future research should aim to elucidate long-term outcomes to further guide the clinical decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]