A prospective study published in Laparoscopic, Endoscopic and Robotic Surgery has compared the performance of three robotic surgical platforms—Da Vinci Xi, Hugo™ RAS, and Versius®—in colon cancer surgery. The COMPAR-CRC multiplatform study, conducted by researchers in Europe, provides some of the first direct clinical evidence comparing these systems in colorectal procedures.
The exploratory 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.
Results showed notable differences in conversion rates: no conversions to laparoscopy or open surgery 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. The study also found that Versius® cases required more frequent use of laparoscopic energy devices (p < 0.001), and Hugo™ RAS was associated with longer total operating room time (p = 0.022) and longer incision length (p = 0.005).
Despite these differences, no significant disparities emerged in post-operative recovery or oncological outcomes. The researchers concluded that robotic colorectal surgery with all three platforms is feasible when performed by expert surgeons, but they emphasized the need for larger comparative trials to confirm differences in recovery and oncological efficacy.
The findings are particularly relevant as the adoption of robotic surgery expands beyond the established Da Vinci system. Hugo™ RAS and Versius® are newer CE-marked platforms entering the European market, offering potential alternatives for hospitals and surgeons. However, this study suggests that the Da Vinci system may have advantages in terms of fewer conversions and less reliance on additional laparoscopic tools, which could translate into more efficient procedures.
The full study is available online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lers.2025.10.001.
