Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29704203›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2018

Safety and efficacy of synchronous robotic surgery for colorectal cancer with liver metastases.

Rozana H Dwyer, Matthew J Scheidt, J Stephen Marshall, Steven S Tsoraides

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Simultaneous Robot Assisted Colon and Liver Resection for Metastatic Colon Cancer.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors.

Rozana H DwyerDepartment of Surgery, University of Illinois College of Medicine in Peoria, 624 NE Glen Oak Ave, Peoria, IL, 61603, USA. R.H.Asfour@gmail.com.
Matthew J ScheidtOrder of St. Francis Medical Center, Central Illinois Radiological Associates, 114 W. Stratford Drive Suite E, Peoria, IL, 61614, USA.
J Stephen MarshallDepartment of Surgery, University of Illinois College of Medicine in Peoria, 624 NE Glen Oak Ave, Peoria, IL, 61603, USA.
Steven S TsoraidesDepartment of Surgery, University of Illinois College of Medicine in Peoria, 624 NE Glen Oak Ave, Peoria, IL, 61603, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Timing of resection and treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) with liver metastases varies based on patient characteristics and center protocols. Concerns of increased morbidity and mortality (M&M) related to anesthetic time and blood loss have limited widespread adaptation of synchronous colorectal and liver resections. Furthermore, technical challenges have made minimally invasive synchronous resections less common. We present our series of synchronous robotic surgery for CRC with liver metastases. Retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients with stage IV CRC with liver metastases treated at a tertiary center from February 2013 to June 2014. Patients who underwent synchronous robotic surgery for CRC with liver metastasis(es) were included and selected by a multidisciplinary cancer committee. Data included patient demographics, disease stage, OR time, EBL, and complications. All resections were performed robotically by the same well-experienced surgeons. A radiologist was present for intraoperative ultrasound. Liver treatment was performed first in consideration of intraoperative bleeding risk. Sixty-six patients with Stage IV CRC were seen at the tertiary center during the study period. Six patients met inclusion criteria (2 male, 4 female). Mean age was 59.3 years and mean BMI was 23.46. Mean of 2.25 liver segments were resected and mean of 1.75 liver segments were ablated. Four patients underwent metastatectomy; three with concurrent microwave ablation. One patient had ablation without resection and another had no identifiable lesion on ultrasound. The colonic resections included 3 low anterior resections, 2 abdominal perineal resections (APR), and 1 right hemicolectomy. Mean operative time was 401 min (349-506 min) with mean EBL of 316 mL (150-1000 mL). No conversions to an open approach occurred. Median length of stay (LOS) was 4.5 days (3-10 days). Complications included delayed wound healing after an APR and a delayed rectal anastomotic failure after ileostomy reversal. There was no 30-day mortality. At a mean follow-up of 19 months, one death occurred at 26 months and the remaining patients had documented metastatic disease. Synchronous resection for metastatic CRC carries risks. We report our series of synchronous robotic surgery for CRC with liver metastases. The robotic approach contributed to low blood loss, appropriate LOS, and no 30-day mortality. Morbidity experienced was consistent with the procedures and not related to the robotic technique. This series supports the potential benefits of synchronous resection from a technical standpoint. Further data are required to determine treatment and survival benefits. Limitations include small number and retrospective review of data.

Indexed as

Ablation TechniquesColectomyColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHepatectomyHumansLaparoscopyLiver NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresColorectal surgeryOne-stage surgeryRobotic surgeryStage 4 colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases

Identifiers

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.