ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2017
Short-term surgical outcomes and patient quality of life between robotic and laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision for adenocarcinoma of the rectum.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality of life after robotic versus conventional minimally invasive cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic 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
- Multidimensional Quality of Life After Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.World journal of surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Meta-analysis on current status, efficacy, and safety of laparoscopic and robotic ventral mesh rectopexy for rectal prolapse treatment: can robotic surgery become the gold standard?International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Pooled 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
- Review
- RoboticWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2024Article
- Streamlining robotic-assisted abdominoperineal resection.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- Benefits of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in older adults compared with younger adults: a retrospective study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Structured training curricula for robotic colorectal surgery in China: does laparoscopic experience affect training effects?Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Advantages of robotic abdominoperineal resection compared with laparoscopic surgery: a single-center retrospective study.Surgery today · 2022Article
- A retrospective study of post-operative complications and cost analysis in robotic rectal resection versus laparoscopic rectal resection.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Extralevator abdominoperineal excision for advanced low rectal cancer: Where to go.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Review
- RoboticIn vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Some studies advocate a laparoscopic extralevator abdominoperineal excision (l-ELAPE) approach for low rectal cancer. The da Vinci™ robot (r-ELAPE) technique has potential to overcome some limitations of l-ELAPE, such as reduction of the learning curve and more precise tissue handling. It is unknown whether this approach results in improved surgical or quality of life outcomes compared with l-ELAPE. This study aimed to address this issue. Methods Consecutive patients having undergone either robotic or laparoscopic ELAPE for adenocarcinoma were studied. All operations were performed by two surgeons experienced in laparoscopic and recently introduced robotic surgery. Surgical outcomes were determined by postoperative histology and short-term complications. Quality of life was prospectively assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLC-CR30 and QLC-CR29 questionnaires. Results A total of 22 patients (11 r-ELAPE) with a median follow-up of 13 months (8 months robotic; 22 months laparoscopic) were studied. The groups were similarly matched for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, preoperative chemoradiotherapy and tumour height. All had R0 resection. There was no significant difference in short-term surgical outcomes between groups. There was no significant difference in mean global health scores between the two groups (74 ± 14 r-ELAPE vs. 73 ± 10 l-ELAPE). The r-ELAPE group had a lower mean impotence score compared with the I-ELAPE group (55.5 ± 40 vs. 72.2 ± 44), although this was not statistically significant. Conclusions The newly introduced r-ELAPE was non-inferior to l-ELAPE in either patient quality of life or surgical outcomes. Robotic surgery could be particularly beneficial in the technically challenging area of low rectal cancer surgery with a shorter learning curve than laparoscopy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.