ReviewAnnals of gastroenterological surgery2018
Robotic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: Current state and future perspective.
Review in Annals of gastroenterological surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- The urinary and sexual outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surgery today · 2024Pooled it
- Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Laparoscopic vs. Robotic Approaches-A Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Robot Assisted Low Anterior Resection for Obese Rectal Cancer Patients: A Single-center Analysis of Short-term Outcomes.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2026Article
- Development of a predictive score for prolonged pelvic operation time in robot-assisted low anterior resection: a single-center, retrospective study in Japan.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Short- and long-term outcomes of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for middle or lower rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2025Article
- Smart Force Sensing in Robot Surgery Utilising the Back Electromotive Force.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the advantage of surgeons certified by the endoscopic surgical skill qualification system participating in laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2024Article
- Effects of a force feedback function in a surgical robot on the suturing procedure.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Article
- Essential updates 2020/2021: Advancing precision medicine for comprehensive rectal cancer treatment.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2023Review
- Current issues and future considerations for the wider implementation of robotic-assisted surgery: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Robot-assisted techniques in vascular and endovascular surgery.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2022Review
- Short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted surgery for rectal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Article
- Outcomes of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: an observational single hospital study of 300 cases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Observational
- Article
- Current status of robotic surgery in colorectal residency training programs.Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Do specific operative approaches and insurance status impact timely access to colorectal cancer care?Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- Surgical technique for mesorectal division during robot-assisted laparoscopic tumor-specific mesorectal excision (TSME) for rectal cancer using da Vinci Si surgical system: the simple switching technique (SST).Updates in surgery · 2021Article
- Comparison of the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery, open surgery, and transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: An overview of systematic reviews.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2020Review
- Teaching robotic rectal cancer surgery at your workplace: does the presence of visiting surgeons in the operating room have a detrimental effect on outcomes?Surgical endoscopy · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interest in minimally invasive surgery has increased in recent decades. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) was introduced as the latest advance in minimally invasive surgery. RALS has the potential to provide better clinical outcomes in rectal cancer surgery, allowing for precise dissection in the narrow pelvic space. In addition, RALS represents an important advancement in surgical education with respect to use of the dual-console robotic surgery system. Because the public health insurance systems in Japan have covered the cost of RALS for rectal cancer since April 2018, RALS has been attracting increasingly more attention. Although no overall robust evidence has yet shown that RALS is superior to laparoscopic or open surgery, the current evidence supports the notion that technically demanding subgroups (patients with obesity, male patients, and patients treated by extended procedures) may benefit from RALS. Technological innovation is a constantly evolving field. Several companies have been developing new robotic systems that incorporate new technology. This competition among companies in the development of such systems is anticipated to lead to further improvements in patient outcomes as well as drive down the cost of RALS, which is one main concern of this new technique.
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.