Trial reportDiseases of the colon and rectum2012
Reverse-hybrid robotic mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.
Trial report in Diseases of the colon and rectum, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of robotic-assisted colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic and open surgery: a systematic review.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2014Pooled it
- Colorectal cancer surgery: by Cambridge Medical Robotics Versius Surgical Robot System-a single-institution study. Our experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Comparison of the short-term efficacy of two types of robotic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.Techniques in coloproctology · 2022Article
- Comparison of outcome and cost between the open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgical treatments for colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis using nationwide hospital record database.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
- Implementation of robotic rectal surgery training programme: importance of standardisation and structured training.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2018Article
- Oncological Outcomes After Robotic Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer: Analysis of a Prospective Database.Annals of surgery · 2018Article
- Critical analysis of the literature investigating urogenital function preservation following robotic rectal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2016Article
- Robotic rectal surgery: State of the art.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2016Review
- Standardized single docking, four arms and fully robotic proctectomy for rectal cancer: the key points are the ports and arms placement.Journal of robotic surgery · 2016Article
- Robotic Surgery for Colon and Rectal Cancer.Current oncology reports · 2016Review
- Robotic left colon cancer resection: a dual docking technique that maximizes splenic flexure mobilization.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
- Robotic surgery for rectal cancer: current immediate clinical and oncological outcomes.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Article
- Robotic surgery for rectal cancer: A systematic review of current practice.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2014Article
- Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes.World journal of surgery · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe robotic system offers potential technical advantages over laparoscopy for total mesorectal excision with radical lymphadenectomy for rectal cancer. However, the requirement for fixed docking limits its utility when the working volume is large or patient repositioning is required. The purpose of this study was to evaluate short-term outcomes associated with a novel setup to perform total mesorectal excision and radical lymphadenectomy for rectal cancer by the use of a "reverse" hybrid robotic-laparoscopic approach.
methodsThis is a prospective consecutive cohort observational study of patients who underwent robotic rectal cancer resection from January 2009 to March 2011. During the study period, a technique of reverse-hybrid robotic-laparoscopic rectal resection with radical lymphadenectomy was developed. This technique involves reversal of the operative sequence with lymphovascular and rectal dissection to precede proximal colonic mobilization. This technique evolved from a conventional-hybrid resection with laparoscopic vascular control, colonic mobilization, and robotic pelvic dissection. Perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes were analyzed.
resultsThirty patients underwent reverse-hybrid resection. Median tumor location was 5 cm (interquartile range 3-9) from the anal verge. Median BMI was 27.6 (interquartile range 25.0-32.1 kg/m). Twenty (66.7%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. There were no conversions. Median blood loss was 100 mL (interquartile range 75-200). Total operation time was a median 369 (interquartile range 306-410) minutes. Median docking time was 6 (interquartile range 5-8) minutes, and console time was 98 (interquartile range 88-140) minutes. Resection was R0 in all patients; no patients had an incomplete mesorectal resection. Six patients (20%) underwent extended lymph node dissection or en bloc resection.
conclusionsReverse-hybrid robotic surgery for rectal cancer maximizes the therapeutic applicability of the robotic and conventional laparoscopic techniques for optimized application in minimally invasive rectal surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.