SynthesisTechniques in coloproctology2015
Is robotic ventral mesh rectopexy better than laparoscopy in the treatment of rectal prolapse and obstructed defecation? A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Techniques in coloproctology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2025 Delphi consensus on robotic ventral mesh rectopexy.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Guideline
- Robotic vs. laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse and rectal intussusception: a systematic review.Techniques in coloproctology · 2019Pooled it
- Management of patients with rectal prolapse: the 2017 Dutch guidelines.Techniques in coloproctology · 2018Guideline
- Outcomes of minimally invasive approaches to rectopexy: laparoscopic versus robotic.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Improved operative efficiency with the da Vinci Xi: a comparative study of robotics and laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Comparative clinical outcomes of ventral rectopexy versus STARR in the management of obstructed defecation syndrome: a clinical review.Updates in surgery · 2025Review
- Is robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for pelvic floor disorders better than laparoscopic approach at the beginning of the experience? A retrospective single-center study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Article
- Robot-assisted general surgery is safe during the learning curve: a 5-year Australian experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Technical modifications for cost optimization in robot-assisted ventral mesh rectopexy: an initial experience.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Article
- Current diagnostic tools and treatment modalities for rectal prolapse.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Review
- Case series of mesh migration after rectopexy surgery for rectal prolapse.Journal of surgical case reports · 2022Article
- Laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy performed with ArtiSential®: a video vignette.Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Article
- Update on Robotic Rectal Prolapse Treatment.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Advantages of robotic surgery in the treatment of complex pelvic organs prolapse.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Long-term outcomes of robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for external rectal prolapse.Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
- Robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a few years until this becomes the gold standard.Techniques in coloproctology · 2019Article
- Ventral rectopexy with biological mesh: short-term functional results.International journal of colorectal disease · 2018Article
- Robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse: a single-institution experience.Techniques in coloproctology · 2017Article
- Outcome of a Modified Laparoscopic Suture Rectopexy for Rectal Prolapse with the Use of a Single or Double Suture: A Case Series of 15 Patients.The American journal of case reports · 2017Article
- Evaluation of sexual dysfunction in female patients presenting with faecal incontinence or defecation disorder.International journal of colorectal disease · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ventral mesh rectopexy is an approach in the treatment of internal and external rectal prolapse and rectocele. Our aim was to assess whether robotic surgery confers any significant advantages over laparoscopy, and the associated complication rate. Two reviewers performed a literature search using MEDLINE and PubMed databases for studies comparing robotic versus laparoscopic surgery. Five prospective, non-randomised studies were identified and included. A total of 244 patients (101 robotic and 143 laparoscopic) were included in the analysis. Operative time was shorter with laparoscopic surgery, mean weighted difference 27.94 [confidence interval (CI) 19.30-36.57; p < 0.00001]. The conversion rate was not significantly different between groups. There was a trend towards a reduction in length of inpatient stay and early post-operative complications in the robotic group; however, these did not reach statistical significance. Recurrence rates were similar between groups (odds ratio 0.91, CI 0.32-2.63; p = 0.87). Functional results were comparable between groups. Early studies show that robotic ventral rectopexy is a safe option compared to the laparoscopic approach, with overall comparable results. There appeared to be a trend towards a reduction in length of inpatient stay and post-operative complications. These perceived benefits may offset the longer operative times and outlay costs. Larger randomised controlled trials are needed to further evaluate clinical value and cost-effectiveness.
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.