CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04836741Updated Apr 8, 2021

Chinese Surgical Robot Clinical Study on Rectectomy for Rectal Cancer

An interventional study of Micro Hand S robot and Laparoscope in Rectal Cancer, sponsored by The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University. Completed at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-04-08.

Sponsored by The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 5 years 8 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jul 2015, registered Mar 2021).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
105
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Central South University in collaboration with Tianjin University developed the first domestically produced Chinese minimally invasive surgical (MIS) robot system which named "Micro Hand S" in 2013. This new MIS robot had been authorized to enter the clinical trial stage by the Ethics Committee of the Third Xiangya Hospital at Central South University. The Micro Hand S robot is safe and feasible in the preliminary study. However, compared with minimally invasive approaches (da Vici, laparoscope), the merits and demrits of rectectomy for rectal cancer are unclear. Therefore, the investigators conduct this retrospective study to focus on this concern.

02

Conditions studied

  • Rectal Cancer

Browse trials for

03

In context

Rectal Neoplasms

1,762 studies on the registry are indexed under Rectal Neoplasms; 518 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 105 is above the median of 65 across 1,298 interventional studies indexed under Rectal Neoplasms.

Browse Rectal Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University is the lead sponsor of 95 studies on the registry; 49 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • histologically confirmed rectal cancer; ASA score \< 3

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • palliative resections, combined resections, distant metastasis, a previous history of abdominal/or pelvic surgery
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
105 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Micro Hand S robot-assisted surgery

    This group is consisted of 40 cases performed using the Micro Hand S robot by one single surgeon for rectal cancer

    Device: Micro Hand S robot

  • Active comparator
    Laparoscopic surgery

    This group is consisted of 65 cases performed using the laparoscope by one single surgeon for rectal cancer

    Device: Laparoscope

Interventions

  • DeviceMicro Hand S robot

    The surgeries are performed with the Micro Hand S robot

  • DeviceLaparoscope

    The surgeries are performed with the laparoscope

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Type of surgical procedure

    It was defined as what type of procedure was pferformed, for example, low anterior, abdominal perineal resection

    Time frame: up to 1 week after operation

  2. Operative time (min)

    It was defined as the duration from skin incision to skin closure

    Time frame: up to 1 week after operation

  3. Conversion

    Conversion was defined as any change in strategy to open surgery

    Time frame: up to 1 week after operation

  4. Bloos loss (ml)

    It was defined as the amount of blood in the whole surgical time

    Time frame: up to 1 week after operation

  5. Protective ileostomy

    It was defined as ileostomy which diverted the feces to To ensure anastomotic healing

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  6. Hospital stay (day)

    It was defined as the length of hospital stay

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  7. Tumor size (cm)

    It was defined as the longitudinal diameter of the tumor

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  8. Retrieved lymph node

    It was defined as the number of all the lymph nodes for each patien

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  9. pTNM stage

    It was defined as the pathological stage of the tumor according the TNM classification

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  10. Length of distal ressction margin (cm)

    It was defined as the distance betwen the distal resection margin and the low margin of the tumor

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  11. Status of the surgical margin

    It was defined as whether the distal and circumferential resection margins was involved the tumor cell under microscope

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  12. Quality of specimen

    The quality of the speciman was graded according to the protocol proposed by Quirke

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  13. Postoperative complication

    It was defined as the adverse events after operation and the complications were classfied according to the Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification

    Time frame: up to 1 month after operation

  14. International Prostate Symptom Score

    It assessed the urination with 7 items

    Time frame: at least12 months after operation

  15. International Index of Erectile Function

    It assessed erectile function with 5 items

    Time frame: at least 12 months after operation

  16. Local recurrence

    It was defined as the tumor was again found in the pelvic cavity

    Time frame: at least 1 years after operation

  17. Disease free survival

    It was defined as the duration between the operation and date of the tumor recurrence

    Time frame: at least 1 years after operation

07

Study locations

1 site
  • The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University
    Changsha, Hunan 410013, China
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Wang Y, Wang G, Li Z, Ling H, Yi B, Zhu S. Comparison of the operative outcomes and learning curves between laparoscopic and "Micro Hand S" robot-assisted total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a retrospective study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2021 Jun 7;21(1):251. doi: 10.1186/s12876-021-01834-1. PubMed 34098897 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 8, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04836741
Lead sponsor
The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Apr 8, 2021
Start date
Jul 1, 2015
Primary completion
Nov 30, 2018
Completion
Dec 31, 2019
Last update
Apr 8, 2021

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion