SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2019
Completeness of total mesorectum excision of laparoscopic versus robotic surgery: a review with a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 8 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials with GRADE certainty rating.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic TME for rectal cancer: meta-analysis of pathological quality indicators.Techniques in coloproctology · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating functional recovery, complication risk, and oncologic quality.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical effectiveness of robotic versus laparoscopic and open surgery: an overview of systematic reviews.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Rectal Cancer: An Expedited Summary of the Clinical Evidence.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of colorectal disease · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Gender-Specific Cancer-Related Survival Analysis of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Adenocarcinoma: A Multicenter Study.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 2026Observational
- Article
- Robotic Gastrointestinal Surgery Compared to Conventional Approaches: An Umbrella Review of Clinical and Economic Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Racing toward the future of robot-assisted rectal cancer surgery: a comparative study of hinotori and da Vinci.Annals of coloproctology · 2025Article
- Comparing total mesorectal excision with partial mesorectal excision for proximal rectal cancer: evaluating postoperative and long-term oncological outcomes.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- [Robotic rectal surgery].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Fashioning esophagogastric anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a multicenter experience.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Modular Pelvic Exenteration for Advanced Rectal Cancer in Frozen Pelvis.The American journal of case reports · 2023Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy: a propensity score matched analysis from a bi-centric experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Cyanoacrylate in Colorectal Surgery: Is It Safe?Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Low Rectal Cancer: A Narrative Review and Description of the Technique.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Short-term outcomes of robotic vs. laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTME has revolutionized the surgical management of rectal cancer, and since the introduction of robotic TME (RTME), many reports have shown the feasibility and the safety of this approach. However, concerns persist regarding the advantages of robotic in surgery for the completeness of TME. The aim of this review is to compare robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (TME) in rectal cancer, focusing on the completeness of TME.
methodsA systematic search was performed in the electronic databases for all available studies comparing RTME versus conventional laparoscopic LTME with declared grade of mesorectum excision. Data regarding sample size, clinical and demographic characteristics, number of complete, nearly complete, and incomplete TME were extracted. Primary outcome was the number of complete TME in robotic and laparoscopic procedures. Secondary outcomes were the numbers of nearly complete and incomplete TME in robotic and laparoscopic rectal resections.
resultsTwelve articles were included in the final analysis. Complete TME was reported by all authors, involving 1510 procedures, showing a significant difference in favor of robotic surgery (OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.08-3.10, p = 0.03). Nearly complete and incomplete TME showed no significant difference between the procedures. Meta-regression analysis showed that none of patients' and tumors' characteristics significantly impacted on complete TME.
conclusionsOur results underline that the robotic approach to rectal resection is the better way to obtain a complete TME. However, it is mandatory that randomized clinical trials should be performed to assess definitively if robotic minimally invasive surgery is better than a laparoscopic resection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31056732What 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.