Robotic-assisted colon resection has become increasingly popular since the introduction of the Da Vinci system, but new platforms like Hugo™ RAS and Versius® are entering the European market. A recent study published in Laparoscopic, Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery (DOI: 10.1016/j.lers.2025.10.001) provides the first prospective comparison of these three robotic systems in colon cancer surgery.
The COMPAR-CRC multiplatform study enrolled 45 consecutive adult patients undergoing robotic colon resection between February and December 2024. Two experienced colorectal surgeons performed all procedures across two surgical units, with each robotic platform used in 15 cases. The mean patient age was 66.8 years, and 68.9% underwent surgery for colon cancer.
Primary outcomes included conversion to laparoscopy or open surgery and intra-operative complications. No conversions occurred in the Da Vinci group, while two conversions were recorded with Hugo™ RAS and three with Versius®. One intra-operative instrument malfunction occurred with Hugo™ RAS, and one surgical complication was reported in each group. Post-operative recovery and oncological outcomes showed no significant differences among the platforms.
However, notable technical differences emerged. Versius® cases required more frequent use of laparoscopic energy devices (p < 0.001). Hugo™ RAS was associated with longer total operating room time (p = 0.022) and longer incision length (p = 0.005). These findings suggest that while all three systems are feasible for expert surgeons, each has distinct operational characteristics that may influence surgical workflow and resource utilization.
The study's exploratory nature and small sample size limit definitive conclusions, but the results indicate that early outcomes are encouraging. Larger comparative trials are needed to confirm differences in recovery and oncological efficacy, as well as to assess long-term outcomes. For hospitals considering adopting new robotic platforms, these data provide initial insights into potential trade-offs between platforms.
The findings are published in Laparoscopic, Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery, a journal dedicated to advancing minimally invasive surgery. The research was conducted as part of the COMPAR trial and was supported by Chuanlink Innovations, a firm focused on fostering innovation in medical technology (related link: http://chuanlink-innovations.com).
