Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29987562›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Does obesity impact postoperative outcomes following robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer?

E Duchalais, N Machairas, S R Kelley, R G Landmann, A Merchea, D T Colibaseanu, K L Mathis, E J Dozois, D W Larson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Robotic vs. laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery in high BMI patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

E DuchalaisDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3654-2963
N MachairasDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
S R KelleyDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
R G LandmannDivision of Colon & Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
A MercheaDivision of Colon & Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
D T ColibaseanuDivision of Colon & Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Road, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
K L MathisDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
E J DozoisDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA.
D W LarsonDivision of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA. larson.david2@mayo.edu.
Mayo Clinic · USMayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionObesity has been identified as a risk factor for both conversion and severe postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal resection. Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is proposed to overcome some of the technical limitations associated with laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. The aim of our study was to determine if obesity remains a risk factor for severe morbidity in patients undergoing robotic-assisted rectal resection. PATIENTS: This study was a retrospective review of a prospective database. A total of 183 patients undergoing restorative RAS for rectal cancer between 2007 and 2016 were divided into 2 groups: control (BMI < 30 kg/m

resultsControl and obese groups had similar clinicopathologic characteristics. Severe complications were observed in 9 (7%) and 4 (7%) patients, respectively (p > 0.99). Obesity did not impact conversion, anastomotic leak rate, length of stay, or readmission but was significantly associated with increased postoperative morbidity (29 vs. 45%; p = 0.04) and especially more postoperative ileus (11 vs. 26%; p = 0.01). Obesity and male gender were the two independent risk factors for postoperative overall morbidity (OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.02-3.94; p = 0.04 and OR 2.23; 95% CI 1.10-4.76; p = 0.03, respectively).

conclusion‎Obesity did not impact severe morbidity or conversion rate following RAS for rectal cancer but remained a risk factor for overall morbidity and especially postoperative ileus.

Indexed as

Risk AssessmentColectomyFemaleHumansIncidenceLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedMorbidityObesityPostoperative ComplicationsRectal NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsRobotic Surgical ProceduresUnited StatesObesityPostoperative ileusPostoperative morbidityRectal cancerRectal resectionRobotic-assisted surgery

Identifiers

PMID29987562
OpenAlexW2879970539

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.