Objective:

To compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted hemicolectomy (RAH) versus laparoscopy-assisted hemicolectomy (LAH) for left-sided colon cancers, highlighting the clinical significance of the comparison.

Key Findings:

• 460 patients included (RAH: 205, LAH: 255) with no conversions to open surgery. RAH had a longer operative time (150.23 min) compared to LAH (125.85 min, p < 0.001), which may impact recovery. RAH incurred higher surgery costs ($6.33k vs. $2.88k, p < 0.001) and total hospital costs ($14.97k vs. $9.05k, p < 0.001), raising considerations for healthcare budgeting.

Interpretation:

Robot-assisted surgery offers advantages in surgical precision and visualization, but is associated with longer operative times and higher costs compared to laparoscopic surgery, which may affect patient selection and healthcare resources.

Limitations:

• Retrospective design may introduce selection bias and limit the generalizability of findings. Potential biases inherent in retrospective studies should be acknowledged.

Conclusion:

RAH may provide benefits in surgical outcomes for left-sided colon cancer, but the increased costs and operative time need to be considered in clinical decision-making, warranting further research to validate these findings.