Observational studyInternational journal of colorectal disease2017
Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a comparative study of clinical outcomes and costs.
Observational study in International journal of colorectal disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 6 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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer: meta-analysis of pathological quality indicators.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Pooled it
- The perioperative results of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer in obese patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled 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
- Expanding the role of robotic surgery: Non-inferiority of robot-assisted radical cystectomy in overweight patients with bladder cancer.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Robotics versus open surgery: the impact on cytokine release and patient outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- The rise of robotic colorectal surgery: better for patients and better for surgeons.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Rectal cancer surgery: does low volume imply worse outcome-a single surgeon experience.Irish journal of medical science · 2023Article
- Robotic and laparoscopic sphincter-saving resections have similar peri-operative, oncological and functional outcomes in female patients with rectal cancer.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- An Overview of Robotic Colorectal Surgery Adoption and Training in Brazil.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Musculoskeletal injuries in cross-speciality surgeons: a survey of UK-based doctors.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy outcomes in colon adenocarcinoma in the elderly population: a propensity-score matched analysis of the National Cancer Database.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Article
- Comparison of the learning curve of robotZhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2023Article
- A Cost Overview of Minimally Invasive Total Mesorectal Excision in Rectal Cancer Patients: A Population-based Cohort in Experienced Centres.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2023Article
- Review
- The impact of robotic technology on the learning curve for robot-assisted gastrectomy in the initial clinical application stage.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- The Role of Robotic Visceral Surgery in Patients with Adhesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- Outcomes of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: an observational single hospital study of 300 cases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe costs involved in performing robotic surgery present a critical issue which has not been well addressed yet. The aims of this study are to compare the clinical outcomes and cost differences of robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer and to conduct a literature review of the cost analysis.
methodsThis is an observational, comparative study whereby data were abstracted from a retrospective database of patients who underwent laparoscopic and robotic rectal resection from October 2010 to March 2017, at Sanchinarro University Hospital, Madrid. An independent company performed the financial analysis, and fixed costs were excluded.
resultsA total of 86 robotic and 112 laparoscopic rectal resections were included. The mean operative time was significantly lower in the laparoscopic approach (336 versus 283 min; p = 0.001). The main pre-operative data, overall morbidity, hospital stay and oncological outcomes were similar in both groups, except for the readmission rate (robotic: 5.8%, laparoscopic: 11.6%; p = 0.001). The mean operative costs were higher for robotic surgery (4285.16 versus 3506.11€; p = 0.04); however, the mean overall costs were similar (7279.31€ for robotic and 6879.8€ for the laparoscopic approach; p = 0.44). We found four studies reporting costs, three comparing robotic versus laparoscopy costs, with all of them reporting a higher overall cost for the robotic rectal resection.
conclusionRobotic rectal resection has similar clinical outcomes to that of the conventional laparoscopic approach. Despite the higher operative costs of robotic rectal resection, overall mean costs were similar in our series.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28791457What 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.