ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013
No differences in short-term morbidity and mortality after robot-assisted laparoscopic versus laparoscopic resection for colonic cancer: a case-control study of 263 patients.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 9 of them syntheses 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of short-term outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for patients ≥ 65 years of age: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic right colectomy and laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Pooled it
- Influence of steep Trendelenburg position on postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Short-term outcomes in robot-assisted compared to laparoscopic colon cancer resections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Pooled it
- Robotic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.World journal of surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colonic disease: a meta-analysis of postoperative variables.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Pooled it
- Robotic versus Laparoscopic Approach in Colonic Resections for Cancer and Benign Diseases: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- 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
- Robotic versus laparoscopic colorectal surgery.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsPooled it
- A Narrative Review on the Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Colorectal Cancer Management.Cureus · 2025Review
- Perceptions of theatre team members to robotic assisted surgery and the aid of technology in colorectal surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Dynamics of Peripheral Blood Immune Cells during the Perioperative Period after Digestive System Resections: A Systematic Analysis of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Robotic multiquadrant colorectal procedures: A single-center experience and a systematic review of the literature.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for stage I-III colon cancer: oncologic and long-term survival outcomes.Surgical endoscopy · 2018Article
- Comparison of perioperative and short-term outcomes between robotic and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colonic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2016Article
- How Has the Robot Contributed to Colon Cancer Surgery?Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2015Review
- Laparoscopic approach to gastrointestinal malignancies: toward the future with caution.World journal of gastroenterology · 2014Review
- No differences in short-term morbidity and mortality after robot-assisted laparoscopic versus laparoscopic resection for colonic cancer: a case-control study of 263 patients.Surgical endoscopy · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobot-assisted laparoscopy has been reported to be a safe and feasible alternative to traditional laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare short-term results in patients with colonic cancer who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic colonic resection (RC) or laparoscopic colonic resection (LC).
methodsThe study was a retrospective case control study of all patients with colonic cancer who underwent RC from March 2010 to March 2012 or LC from January 2009 to December 2011 at a tertiary-care university hospital. Data were retrieved from the national chart database and patient journals. Biochemical markers [C-reactive protein (CRP), hemoglobin, white blood cell count, and thrombocyte count] were recorded before surgery and for the first 3 days after surgery.
resultsA total of 101 patients underwent RC and 162 patients underwent LC. There were no significant differences in the rate of conversion to open surgery, number of permanent enterostomies, number of intraoperative complications, level of postoperative cellular stress response, number of postoperative complications, length of postoperative hospital stay, or 30-day mortality between the two groups. There was a significantly longer setup time for RC (77.1 vs. 69.7 min, P = 0.000), but surgical time was significantly shorter for RC (165.8 vs. 183.4 min, P = 0.006) and there was no difference in the overall procedure time (254.0 vs. 243.6 min, P = 0.086).
conclusionWe found RC to be a safe and feasible alternative to LC for colonic cancer. We found that for RC surgical time was shorter and overall procedure time was comparable to that for LC; however, these results should be confirmed in future randomized clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23389069What 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.