ArticleSurgical endoscopy2017
Comparison of short-term and oncologic outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic resection for mid- and distal rectal cancer.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 14 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
46 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Restorative resection in robot-assisted versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision: systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of surgical outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, and mortality.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic‑assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for mid-low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Evaluation of an established colorectal robotic programme at an NHS district general hospital: audit of outcomes and systematic review of published data.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic surgery in colorectal cancer resection: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Influence of steep Trendelenburg position on postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic-assisted transabdominal total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision: which approach offers optimal short-term outcomes for mid-to-low rectal adenocarcinoma?Techniques in coloproctology · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Impact of Surgical Approach on Surgical Resection Quality in Mid- and Low Rectal Cancer, A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Pooled it
- The impact of robotic colorectal surgery in obese patients: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Pooled it
- The prevalence of venous thromboembolism in rectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019Pooled 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
- Impact of obesity on the short-term outcomes of robotic surgery for rectal cancer: a Japanese multicenter study.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Low anterior resection syndrome after rectal cancer surgery: mechanisms, assessment, management, and the potential role of robotic surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Robot-Assisted Colorectal Cancer Surgery Mitigates Early Postoperative Immunosuppression and Angiogenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for middle or lower rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Comparison of short- and mid-term outcomes between the Senhance digital laparoscopic system and laparoscopic colectomy: a propensity score matching study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Robotic Surgery is Beneficial for Rectal Cancer Patients with Unfavorable Characteristic After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLaparoscopic rectal resection with total mesorectal excision is a technically challenging procedure, and there are limitations in conventional laparoscopy. A surgical robotic system may help to overcome some of the limitations. This study aimed to compare the short-term operative as well as oncologic outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic rectal resection.
methodsThis study was based on a prospectively collected database of patients with mid- to distal rectal cancer (up to 12 cm from the anal verge) undergoing either laparoscopic or robotic low anterior resection from January 2008 to June 2015. Data on patient demographics, intraoperative parameters and short-term outcomes were analyzed. Patient survival and recurrence were also compared.
resultsDuring the study period, 171 and 220 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic and robotic rectal resection, respectively. The median age was 65 years (range 23-96). The median tumor distance was 8 and 7 cm from the anal verge in the laparoscopic and robotic groups, respectively (p = 0.06). Significantly more male patients and more patients with comorbidities and preoperative radiation underwent robotic surgery. The median operating time for robotic resection was significantly longer, 260 versus 225 min (p < 0.001). Conversion rates of laparoscopic and robotic resection were 3.5 and 0.8 %, respectively (p = 0.308). The median hospital stay was 6 days in both groups (p = 0.29). There was no difference in the overall complication rate, but the incidence of urinary retention was significantly less in the robotic group (4.1 vs. 10.5 %, p = 0.024). With a median follow-up of 31 months, there was no difference in local recurrence, overall survival and disease-specific survival between the two groups.
conclusionsIn the treatment of mid- to low rectal cancer, robotic resection can achieve operative results and oncologic outcomes comparable to laparoscopic resection. The postoperative urinary retention rate is lower following robotic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27785627What 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.