Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29242972›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of colorectal disease2018

Perioperative pain after robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal resection.

Rikke Tolstrup, Jonas Amstrup Funder, Liselotte Lundbech, Niels Thomassen, Lene Hjerrild Iversen

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of colorectal disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Rikke TolstrupDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital Tage-Hansens gade, C, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark.
Jonas Amstrup FunderDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital Tage-Hansens gade, C, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark. funder@clin.au.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3091-1190
Liselotte LundbechDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital Tage-Hansens gade, C, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark.
Niels ThomassenDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital Tage-Hansens gade, C, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark.
Lene Hjerrild IversenDepartment of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital Tage-Hansens gade, C, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark.
Aarhus University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn order to improve the surgical treatment of rectal cancer, robot-assisted laparoscopy has been introduced. The robot has gained widespread use; however, the scientific basis for treatment of rectal cancer is still unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether robot-assisted laparoscopic rectal resection cause less perioperative pain than standard laparoscopic resection measured by the numerical rating scale (NRS score) as well as morphine consumption.

methodsFifty-one patients were randomized to either laparoscopic or robot-assisted rectal resection at the Department of Surgery at Aarhus University Hospital in Denmark. The intra-operative analgetic consumption was recorded prospectively and registered in patient records. Likewise all postoperative medicine administration including analgesia was recorded prospectively at the hospital medical charts. All morphine analogues were converted into equivalent oral morphine by a converter. Postoperative pain where measured by numeric rating scale (NRS) every hour at the postoperative care unit and three times a day at the ward.

resultsOpioid consumption during operation was significantly lower during robotic-assisted surgery than during laparoscopic surgery (p=0.0001). However, there were no differences in opioid consumption or NRS in the period of recovery. We found no differences in length of surgery between the two groups; however, ten patients from the laparoscopic group underwent conversion to open surgery compared to one from the robotic group (p=0.005). No significant difference between groups with respect to complications where found.

conclusionsIn the present study, we found that patients who underwent rectal cancer resection by robotic technique needed less analgetics during surgery than patients operated laparoscopically. We did, however, not find any difference in postoperative pain score or morphine consumption postoperatively between the robotic and laparoscopic group.

Indexed as

AgedDigestive System Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedMorphinePostoperative PainRectal NeoplasmsRectumRobotic Surgical ProceduresMorphineLaparoscopyPainPostoperative painRectal cancerRobotRobot-assisted laparoscopy

Identifiers

PMID29242972
OpenAlexW2775159795

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.