COMPAR-CRC Study Finds Feasibility of New Robotic Systems in Colon Cancer Surgery, but Highlights Differences

A prospective study published in Laparoscopic, Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery has provided the first direct comparison of three robotic surgical platforms—Da Vinci Xi, Hugo™ RAS, and Versius®—in colon cancer resections. The COMPAR-CRC trial, conducted across two surgical units in Europe, enrolled 45 patients between February and December 2024, with 15 procedures performed on each platform by two experienced colorectal surgeons.

The study, titled "Comparison of outcomes in robot-assisted colon cancer surgery using Da Vinci Xi, Hugo™ RAS, and Versius®: The COMPAR-CRC multiplatform study" (DOI: 10.1016/j.lers.2025.10.001), reported that no conversions to laparoscopy or open surgery occurred in the Da Vinci group, whereas 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.

Secondary outcomes showed no significant differences in post-operative recovery or oncological results. However, platform-specific 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).

The authors concluded that robotic colorectal surgery with all three platforms is feasible when performed by expert surgeons. They noted that while early outcomes are encouraging, larger comparative trials are needed to confirm differences in recovery and oncological efficacy.

The study was conducted as part of the COMPAR trial, an exploratory prospective series. The mean patient age was 66.8 years, and 68.9% underwent surgery for colon cancer. The research was supported by Chuanlink Innovations, a firm dedicated to fostering innovation in medical technology (chuanlink-innovations.com).

These findings are particularly relevant as newer robotic systems like Hugo™ RAS and Versius® enter the European market, offering alternatives to the established Da Vinci platform. The study highlights that while all systems can achieve comparable clinical outcomes, technical differences may influence surgical workflow and resource utilization. Further research with larger sample sizes is necessary to determine whether these differences translate into meaningful patient benefits or cost-effectiveness.