ReviewSurgery today2019
Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence.
Review in Surgery today, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 5 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer: An Expedited Summary of the Clinical Evidence.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2024Pooled it
- Short-term and long-term efficacy in robot-assisted treatment for mid and low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for gastric cancer: an overview of systematic reviews with quality assessment of current evidence.Updates in surgery · 2020Pooled it
- Feasibility of robotic-assisted surgery in advanced rectal cancer: a multicentre prospective phase II study (VITRUVIANO trial).BJS open · 2024Trial
- Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery Compared to Conventional Approaches: An Umbrella Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Open, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of short- and long-term outcomes among laparoscopic, robotic-assisted, and transanal total mesorectal excision procedures in patients with rectal cancer: a propensity score-matching analysis.Techniques in coloproctology · 2025Article
- 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
- Advantages of robotic abdominoperineal resection compared with laparoscopic surgery: a single-center retrospective study.Surgery today · 2022Article
- Options for Low Rectal Cancer: Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2021Review
- Current status of robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with laparoscopic gastrectomy.Updates in surgery · 2021Review
- 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
- Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Operative Technique and Review of the Literature.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2020Review
- RoboticIn vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe clinical benefits of robotic surgery for patients with rectal cancer have been reported and many systematic reviews have been published. However, they have investigated a variety of outcomes and differ remarkably in quality. In this overview, we summarize the findings of these reviews and evaluate their quality.
methodsThe PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were comprehensively searched to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses that compared robotic and laparoscopic surgery. We assessed the quality of the reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool.
resultsThe literature search identified 17 eligible reviews, all of which reported that the incidence of conversion to open surgery was lower for robotic surgery than for laparoscopic surgery. Most of the reviews reported no difference in the other outcomes between robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery. However, the quality of the reviews was judged to be low or critically low.
conclusionsCritically low quality evidence suggests that robotic surgery for rectal cancer decreases the likelihood of conversion to open surgery, but other clinical benefits remain unclear. High-quality systematic reviews in which selection of high-quality studies is combined with adequate methodology are needed to clarify the true efficacy of robotic surgery for rectal cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30635740What 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.