Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26648792›Full record

ReviewClinics in colon and rectal surgery2015

How Has the Robot Contributed to Colon Cancer Surgery?

Ozgen Isik, Emre Gorgun

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinics in colon and rectal surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer and Cost-Effectiveness.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2019
    Review
  10. Robotic-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a European perspective.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2019
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Do Robotic Surgical Systems Improve Profit Margins? A Cross-Sectional Analysis of California Hospitals.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2017
    Article
  14. Future of Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2016
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ozgen IsikDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.
Emre GorgunDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Digestive Disease Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Ohio.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic surgery is an emerging field in colorectal surgery and may overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, such as rigid instrumentation, poor ergonomics, and assistant-dependent camera movements and retraction. In addition, robotic-assisted colectomy appears to offer comparable outcomes to laparoscopic colectomy with limited long-term outcomes data. Prolonged operating time, increased costs and learning curve are the major drawbacks of robotic colectomy for colon cancer. Although new robotic platforms promise improved ingenuity through developing technology, the role of the robot in colon cancer surgery is still unclear.

Indexed as

colectomycolon cancerrobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID26648792
PMCPMC4655113

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.