Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27358517›Full record

ReviewThe Indian journal of surgery2016

A Review of the Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Surgery Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer.

Fatima G Wilder, Atuhani Burnett, Joseph Oliver, Michael F Demyen, Ravi J Chokshi

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Indian journal of surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. The Current Role of Robotics in Colorectal Surgery.Current gastroenterology reports · 2019
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fatima G WilderDepartment of Surgery, Rutgers-New Jersey Medical School, 185 South Orange Avenue, Newark, NJ 07101 USA.
Atuhani BurnettDepartment of Surgery, Rutgers-New Jersey Medical School, 185 South Orange Avenue, Newark, NJ 07101 USA.
Joseph OliverDepartment of Surgery, Rutgers-New Jersey Medical School, 185 South Orange Avenue, Newark, NJ 07101 USA.
Michael F DemyenDepartment of Medicine, Rutgers-New Jersey Medical School, 90 Bergen St, DOC 2100, Newark, NJ 07103 USA.
Ravi J ChokshiRutgers-New Jersey Medical School, University Hospital Cancer Center, 205 South Orange Avenue, G-1228, Newark, NJ 07103 USA.
Rutgers New Jersey Medical SchoolRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of this review was to compare long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer. A literature search was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Medline (2002-2014). Search terms: laparoscopic, robotic, rectal, colon, surgery, oncologic, and outcomes. Studies comparing overall and disease free survival of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were included. Meta-analysis was performed using OpenMeta[Analyst] for Windows 8. Five studies were identified reporting on overall survival, disease free survival, lymph node extraction, and distal and circumferential resection margin. Three hundred and seventeen patients underwent robotic resection and 368 underwent laparoscopic resection, with similar demographics. Operative times were longer with robotic resections, with no difference in estimated blood loss (EBL) or length of stay. The disease stage was distributed similarly in both groups. Similar numbers underwent neo-adjuvant therapy. Laparoscopic resection was associated with 3.2 mm larger distal resection margins (p = 0.04) and 2.2 more lymph nodes removed (p = 0.001), but with equivalent circumferential resection margin status. Disease-free and overall survival was equivalent. Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer offer comparable overall and disease free survival. Laparoscopic surgery offered a slight advantage in operative time, distal margin, and lymph node yield. Larger, prospective trials are needed to confirm the equivalence of these approaches.

Indexed as

Oncologic outcomesRobotic colorectal surgery

Identifiers

PMID27358517
PMCPMC4907910
OpenAlexW4250277165

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.