Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28567574›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2017

Differences in Effectiveness and Use of Robotic Surgery in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Colectomy.

M Schootman, S Hendren, T Loux, K Ratnapradipa, J M Eberth, N O Davidson

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

M SchootmanDepartment of Epidemiology, College for Public Health and Social Justice, Saint Louis University, 3545 Lafayette Avenue, Saint Louis, MO, 63104, USA. schootm@slu.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-1162-8824
S HendrenDepartment of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
T LouxDepartment of Biostatistics, College for Public Health and Social Justice, Saint Louis University, 3545 Lafayette Avenue, Saint Louis, MO, 63104, USA.
K RatnapradipaDepartment of Epidemiology, College for Public Health and Social Justice, Saint Louis University, 3545 Lafayette Avenue, Saint Louis, MO, 63104, USA.
J M EberthDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.
N O DavidsonAlvin J. Siteman Cancer Center at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
Saint Louis University · USBarnes-Jewish Hospital · USJewish Hospital · USUniversity of Michigan · USUniversity of South Carolina · US

Funding

Washington University DDRCC Supplemental Equipment RequestP30DK052574 · NIDDK · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Nicholas O. Davidson · 2000 to 2026
$30.8M
ENTEROHEPATIC LIPID FLUX AND APOPROTEIN BIOSYNTHESISR01HL038180 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI DAVIDSON, NICHOLAS O. · 1986 to 2018
$3.8M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL038180NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK052574
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe compared patient outcomes of robot-assisted surgery (RAS) and laparoscopic colectomy without robotic assistance for colon cancer or nonmalignant polyps, comparing all patients, obese versus nonobese patients, and male versus female patients.

methodsWe used the 2013-2015 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data to examine a composite outcome score comprised of mortality, readmission, reoperation, wound infection, bleeding transfusion, and prolonged postoperative ileus. We used propensity scores to assess potential heterogeneous treatment effects of RAS by patient obesity and sex.

resultsIn all, 17.1% of the 10,844 of patients received RAS. Males were slightly more likely to receive RAS. Obese patients were equally likely to receive RAS as nonobese patients. In comparison to nonRAS, RAS was associated with a 3.1% higher adverse composite outcome score. Mortality, reoperations, wound infections, sepsis, pulmonary embolisms, deep vein thrombosis, myocardial infarction, blood transfusions, and average length of hospitalization were similar in both groups. Conversion to open surgery was 10.1% lower in RAS versus nonRAS patients, but RAS patients were in the operating room an average of 52.4 min longer. We found no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) by obesity status and gender.

conclusionsWorse patient outcomes and no differential improvement by sex or obesity suggest more cautious adoption of RAS.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overColectomyColonic NeoplasmsColonic PolypsComparative Effectiveness ResearchDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedObesityPractice Patterns, Physicians'Propensity ScoreComparative effectiveness researchMESH: colon cancerMortalityRobotic surgical procedures

Identifiers

PMID28567574
PMCPMC5576564
OpenAlexW2620187351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.