ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2018
Robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer results in a significantly higher quality of TME specimen compared to the laparoscopic approach-report of a single-center experience.
Article 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 31 papers, 4 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer: meta-analysis of pathological quality indicators.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Completeness of total mesorectum excision of laparoscopic versus robotic surgery: a review with a meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2019Pooled it
- Development and validation of nomogram about conversion from temporary to permanent stoma in rectal cancer based on machine learning and traditional model-does robotic surgery have competitive advantages?Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Kurt-Semm-Center of minimally invasive and robot-assisted surgery: Over 10 years of an interdisciplinary and interprofessional project in clinical application, research and training.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Comparison of clinical outcomes and quality of life for robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with mid-low rectal cancer: a multicenter cohort study with inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Optimal surgical approach for cT3/T4 rectal cancer post-neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: robotic surgery versus TaTME guided by superior pelvic diaphragm localization.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Effect of Total Mesorectal Excision (TME) quality on 3-year overall survival in low rectal cancer based on the LASRE trial.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A novel technique for low-rectal cancer: Pushing the anus in laparoscopic radical resection.Medicine · 2025Observational
- Simultaneous integrated boost to lateral pelvic lymph nodes during chemoradiotherapy in high-risk rectal cancer.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a predictive model for anastomotic complications with mid-low rectal cancer based on propensity score matching analysis-Does robotic surgery have an advantage?Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Impact of robotic total mesorectal excision upon pathology metrics in overweight males with low rectal cancer: a pooled analysis of 836 cases.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of robotic and laparoscopic surgery for mid and low rectal cancer in patients with varied body mass indexes: evaluating of short-term outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Propensity matched analysis of robotic and laparoscopic operations for mid-low rectal cancer: short-term comparison of anal function and oncological outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Cross-sectional area of psoas muscle as a predictive marker of anastomotic failure in male rectal cancer patients: Japanese single institutional retrospective observational study.Annals of coloproctology · 2022Article
- C-Reactive Protein as Predictor for Infectious Complications after Robotic and Open Esophagectomies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Robotic-assisted pulmonary lobectomy with lung cancer in a patient with situs inversus totalis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2022Article
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimRobotic surgery allows for a better visualization and more precise dissection especially in the narrow male pelvis and mid and lower third of the rectum. However, superiority to laparoscopic TME has yet to be proven. We therefore analyzed short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic low anterior rectal resection for rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom 2011 to 2016, 44 robotic (RTME) and 41 laparoscopic (LTME) low anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision were performed at a single institution. Specimen quality was assessed and reported by an independent pathologist following international guidelines.
resultsThe groups did not differ significantly regarding gender, age, ASA stage, BMI, and distance of the lower tumor margin from the anal verge. More patients in the RTME group underwent preoperative chemoradiation (43.2 vs. 19.5%, p = 0.019). The quality of the TME specimen was significantly better in the RTME group (complete/nearly complete/incomplete for RTME 97/0/3% and for LTME 78/17/5%, p = 0.03). The conversion rate tended to be lower in the RTME group (7 vs. 17%, p = 0.143). There was no difference in CRM positivity between the groups.
conclusionRobotic surgery is safe and can improve the quality of TME for rectal cancer compared to laparoscopy. Any effect on long-term survival remains to be established.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29971488What 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.