Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27599703›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2016

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for lower rectal cancer: the impact of visceral obesity on surgical outcomes.

Akio Shiomi, Yusuke Kinugasa, Tomohiro Yamaguchi, Hiroyasu Kagawa, Yushi Yamakawa

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 13 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

56 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Robotic vs. laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery in high BMI patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Akio ShiomiDivisions of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan. a.shiomi@scchr.jp.
Yusuke KinugasaDivisions of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan.
Tomohiro YamaguchiDivisions of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan.
Hiroyasu KagawaDivisions of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan.
Yushi YamakawaDivisions of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital, 1007 Shimonagakubo, Nagaizumi-cho, Sunto-gun, Shizuoka, 411-8777, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the advantages of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) for lower rectal cancer and for visceral obesity cases, which have been regarded as challenging situations in rectal cancer surgery, comparing their surgical outcomes with those of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS).

methodsPatients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer were included in this retrospective study. Surgical outcomes including perioperative, postoperative, and pathological data were compared between the RALS and CLS groups. Patients were stratified into obese and non-obese groups according to visceral fat area (VFA). Obesity was defined by VFA ≥130 cm(2).

resultsTwo hundred thirty-six patients were enrolled, including 127 cases in the RALS group and 109 cases in the CLA group. A total of 82 (34.7 %) cases were categorized as VFA obese, including 52 cases in the RALS and 30 cases in the CLS groups. RALS for lower rectal cancer was associated with less blood loss (p = 0.007), a lower overall complication rate (9.4 % in RALS vs 23.9 % in CLS, p = 0.003), and shorter postoperative stay (p < 0.01) than CLS, with similar operative time and pathological results. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the RALS group with VFA obesity; blood loss was significantly less and the postoperative stay was shorter in the RALS group with visceral obesity.

conclusionsThe present study demonstrated that RALS has some advantages in terms of surgical outcomes over CLS in challenging situations of rectal cancer surgery, such as lower rectal cancer cases and visceral obesity cases.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRoboticsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedObesity, AbdominalPostoperative CareRectal NeoplasmsTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopic surgeryRectal cancerRobotic surgeryShort-term outcomesVisceral obesity

Identifiers

PMID27599703

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.